The Rag Blog

This quote from John Bowman should serve to remind us all that the same forces which spied on us and harassed us in the ’60’s are still in power and would still like to see us all in Hell. Mariann Wizard

The same people who tried to kill me in 1973 are the same people who are here today, trying to destroy me. I mean it literally. I mean there were people from the forces of the San Francisco Police Department who participated in harassment, torture and my interrogation in 1973 … none of these people have ever been brought to trial. None of these people have ever been charged with anything. None of these people have ever been questioned about that. — John Bowman, former Black Panther

In 2005 several former members of the Black Panther were held in contempt and jailed for refusing to testify before a San Francisco Grand Jury investigating a police shooting that took place in 1971. The government alleged that Black radical groups were involved in the 34-year old case in which two men armed with shotguns attacked the Ingleside Police Station resulting in the death of a police sergeant and the injuring of a civilian clerk.

In 1973, thirteen alleged “Black militants” were arrested in New Orleans, purportedly in connection with the San Francisco events. Some of them were tortured for several days by law enforcement authorities, in striking similarity to the horrors visited upon detainees in Guantánamo and Abu Ghraib.

In 1975, a Federal Court in San Francisco threw out all of the evidence obtained in New Orleans.

The two lead San Francisco Police Department investigators from over 30 years ago, along with FBI agents, have re-opened the case. Rather than submit to proceedings they felt were abusive of the law and the Constitution, five men chose to stand in contempt of court and were sent to jail. They were released when the Grand Jury term expired, but have been told by prosecutors that “it isn’t over yet.”

For more information contact:
Committee for Defense of Human Rights (CDHR)
PO Box 90221
Pasadena, CA 91109

Or you can click here to find out much more information about the group and to order the DVD of “Legacy of Torture: The War Against The Black Liberation Movement.”

Although many, many people have heard of and seen “Fahrenheit 911,” few have noticed this hour-long piece about the Bush family. Kick back with all your favourite movie watching snacks and learn everything you always wanted to know about the nastiness that is family Bush.

Here’s what is posted on Google about it: This hour long documentary follows the award-winning reporter-sleuth Greg Palast on the trail of the Bush family, from Florida election finagling, to the Saudi connection, to the Bush team’s spiking the FBI investigation of the bin Laden family and the secret State Department plans for post-war Iraq.

These are the hard-hitting reports that have been seen in films like Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11, broadcast internationally on BBC Newsnight television, and are found in Palast’s international bestselling book The Best Democracy Money Can Buy.

Bush Family Fortunes (2003)

The eyes of Texas were upon 60s radicals
11/18/2006 3:51 PM
By: News 8 Austin Staff

Thorne Dreyer
The 1960s were a turbulent time in America. Protests against authority and the Vietnam War spilled over onto college campuses, including the University of Texas.

Some newly discovered documents shed light on the surveillance efforts of campus police during that time. UT police chief Allen Hamilton kept detailed records of underground movements. The documents were discovered upon his death last year.

Thorne Dreyer wrote an article for the Texas Observer called “The Spies of Texas.” [See our post of two days ago, which links to the Observer article.]

News 8 Austin’s Todd Boatwright spoke with Dreyer about his article.

Q: You’ve written a very interesting article in the Texas Observer. Take us back to what that is and how you discovered these files.

A: First off, I was involved back in the 60s. I was an underground newspaper editor, and I’m in these files. What happened was, these are the files of former UT police chief Allen Hamilton. When he died, his son found these boxes in his office and sold them to Half Price Books. Most of [the files] were about Charles Whitman [the 1966 UT Tower sniper.] Half Price Books realized it was something special and donated them to the library. But they gave us access to them first because they thought [the files] should be made public. So I wrote a story for the Texas Observer and now we’ve got all these files online.

Read a snip of the interview or see a video of the entire interview here.

Falling In Line on Israel
by Stephen Zunes

The election of a Democratic majority in the House and Senate is unlikely to result in any serious challenge to the Bush administration’s support for Israeli attacks against the civilian populations of its Arab neighbors and the Israeli government’s ongoing violations of international humanitarian law.

The principal Democratic Party spokesmen on foreign policy will likely be Tom Lantos in the House of Representatives and Joe Biden in the Senate, both of whom have been longstanding and outspoken supporters of a series of right-wing Israeli governments and opponents of the Israeli peace movement. And, despite claims—even within the progressive press—that future House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is a “consistent supporter of human rights,” such humanitarian concerns have never applied to Arabs, since she is a staunch defender of right-wing Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and his predecessor Ariel Sharon.

For example, when President George W. Bush defended Israel’s assaults on Lebanon’s civilian infrastructure this summer and defied the international community by initially blocking United Nations efforts to impose a cease-fire, the Democrats rushed to pass a resolution commending him for “fully supporting Israel .” The resolution, co-authored by Rep. Lantos, claimed that Israel’s actions were legitimate self-defense under the UN Charter and challenged the credibility of reputable human rights groups. Although groups like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch documented widespread attacks by Israeli forces against civilians in areas far from any Hezbollah military activity, the resolution praised “Israel’s longstanding commitment to minimizing civilian loss and welcom[ed] Israel’s continued efforts to prevent civilian casualties.” All but 15 of the House’s 201 Democrats voted in support.

Similarly, the Democrats echoed President Bush’s support for Israel’s 2002 offensive in the West Bank in another resolution co-authored by Lantos. In response to Amnesty International’s observation that the massive assault appeared to be aimed at the Palestinian population as a whole, all but two dozen Democrats went on record supporting the devastating Israeli offensive and claiming that it was “aimed solely at the terrorist infrastructure.”

Read the rest here.

Charlie ain’t gonna get what he thinks he will from doing this. And I have a difficult time with the argument that politicians won’t favour war if they think their children will have to fight. When we own up to the fact that it’s about the money, we may see some realism in Washington. Richard Jehn

Congressman Rangel Will Seek to Reinstate Draft
By JOHN HEILPRIN, AP

WASHINGTON (Nov. 19) – Americans would have to sign up for a new military draft after turning 18 under a bill the incoming chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee says he will introduce next year.

Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., said Sunday he sees his idea as a way to deter politicians from launching wars.

“There’s no question in my mind that this president and this administration would never have invaded Iraq, especially on the flimsy evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft and members of Congress and the administration thought that their kids from their communities would be placed in harm’s way,” Rangel said.

Rangel, a veteran of the Korean War who has unsuccessfully sponsored legislation on conscription in the past, has said the all-volunteer military disproportionately puts the burden of war on minorities and lower-income families.

Read it here.

IF YOU ARE AGAINST THE WAR, TAKE THIS QUIZ
By Danny Schechter
Nov 19, 2006, 09:22

New York, New York: Ok, class. No talking. Pencils up. All eyes on the exam. Here’s the first multiple-choice question:

The Iraq War is Bad Because:

1. It is illegal, immoral, and criminal
2. It has ended up killing and maiming millions of Iraqis we promised to free
3. It has devastated a country and ignited world opinion against the United States and caused thousands of US casualties
4. It has debased our media and turned much of it into a propaganda organ
5. It was badly managed and poorly executed

And that’s where we begin to disagree with what young Schechter says. Although each of a through e are true (well, except d – the media was already a piece of flaming garbage before 19 March 2003), it’s beside the point saying anything but the Iraq war is illegal, immoral and criminal. But now let’s get on with holding those responsible to account for the breaking of numerous international laws. Let’s get on with opening the Nuremburg Tribunal once again so that we can bring the Amerikan criminals to the dock where they belong. And let’s get on with turning off our televisions, ceasing to purchase propaganda sold as news in the US, and face reality and the truth. Richard Jehn

Now on with Schechter’s article:

If you survey world opinion, there would be a consensus on selecting A-D as a response. If you polled most Democratic politicians and mainstream journalists, you would find overwhelming support ONLY for E-“the we screwed it up” thesis as the correct answer.

What was once hailed as a heroic mission is now being dismissed as a fiasco, error and “mistake,” and to some former war boosters, even a “noble mistake.”

In fact, that’s the view that seems to be framing what debate there has been on the war. It is still-AAU-All About Us. In this view, all that matters is our policy objectives but rarely our economic or geo-political agenda. Iraq as a nation, as a culture and a people barely exists.

Read the rest here.

Norman Solomon: The New Media Offensive for the Iraq War
Submitted by BuzzFlash on Thu, 11/16/2006 – 2:52pm. Guest Contribution
by Norman Solomon

The American media establishment has launched a major offensive against the option of withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq.

In the latest media assault, right-wing outfits like Fox News and the Wall Street Journal editorial page are secondary. The heaviest firepower is now coming from the most valuable square inches of media real estate in the USA — the front page of the New York Times.

The present situation is grimly instructive for anyone who might wonder how the Vietnam War could continue for years while opinion polls showed that most Americans were against it. Now, in the wake of midterm elections widely seen as a rebuke to the Iraq war, powerful media institutions are feverishly spinning against a pullout of U.S. troops.

Under the headline “Get Out of Iraq Now? Not So Fast, Experts Say,” the Nov. 15 front page of the New York Times prominently featured a “Military Analysis” by Michael Gordon. The piece reported that — while some congressional Democrats are saying withdrawal of U.S. troops “should begin within four to six months” — “this argument is being challenged by a number of military officers, experts and former generals, including some who have been among the most vehement critics of the Bush administration’s Iraq policies.”

Reporter Gordon appeared hours later on Anderson Cooper’s CNN show, fully morphing into an unabashed pundit as he declared that withdrawal is “simply not realistic.” Sounding much like a Pentagon spokesman, Gordon went on to state in no uncertain terms that he opposes a pullout.

If a New York Times military-affairs reporter went on television to advocate for withdrawal of U.S. troops as unequivocally as Gordon advocated against any such withdrawal during his Nov. 15 appearance on CNN, he or she would be quickly reprimanded — and probably would be taken off the beat — by the Times hierarchy. But the paper’s news department eagerly fosters reporting that internalizes and promotes the basic worldviews of the country’s national security state.

Read the rest here.

I don’t know why I hear Judy Garland singing “Somewhere Over the Rainbow” and have a vision of many little people dressed in green …

Leahy Seeks Documents on Detention
Associated Press
Saturday, November 18, 2006; Page A07

Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), who will chair the Senate Judiciary Committee next year, asked the Justice Department to release two newly acknowledged documents, which set U.S. policy on how terrorism suspects are detained and interrogated.

The CIA recently acknowledged the existence of the documents in response to a lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union.

The first is a directive President Bush signed giving the CIA authority to establish detention facilities outside the United States and outlining interrogation methods that may be used against detainees.

The second is a 2002 memo from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel to the CIA’s general counsel regarding interrogation methods that the spy agency may use against al-Qaeda leaders.

“The American people deserve to have detailed and accurate information about the role of the Bush administration in developing the interrogation policies and practices that have engendered such deep criticism and concern at home and around the world,” Leahy wrote Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales.

Read the rest here.

Plea agreements puzzle experts
By Linda Deutsch and Thomas Watkins
Associated Press

CAMP PENDLETON – In the beginning, there were eight. A squad of seven Marines and a Navy corpsman charged with kidnapping and murdering an Iraqi man, a crime described by a prosecutor as especially brutal.

They faced military trials; the death penalty was possible.

And now there are four. In the six months the men have been held at the Camp Pendleton brig, the profile of the Al-Hamdaniyah cases has changed dramatically. The death penalty is off the table and four of the defendants have struck plea bargains.

Some observers of the military justice system find the developments mystifying.

Gary Solis, a former Marine Corps prosecutor and judge who teaches law of war at Georgetown University Law Center, said he was surprised by the number of plea agreements in this case.

“It’s a wonderment to me that it’s happening in the military system,” he said.

The group was accused of kidnapping 52-year-old Hashim Ibrahim Awad in the town of Al-Hamdaniyah, taking him to a roadside hole, shooting him and then trying to cover up the incident. According to court testimony, the service members planned to kidnap and kill a known insurgent, and when they couldn’t get to him, some members of the squad went into Awad’s home.

“They killed a 52-year-old crippled man in cold blood,” Lt. Col. John Baker, a prosecutor, said during a recent hearing. “They killed a retired police officer with 11 children and four grandchildren. Hashim Awad was a very forgiving and gentle man. He was precisely the kind of man” the Marines were sent to help.

Read the rest here.

I’ve a story to tell before posting this piece about Henry Kissinger. When I was young, perhaps 11 or 12 years old, I recall visiting with a neighbour boy over their wooden fence. I was casually leaning on it with my arms crossed on top the fence as we conversed. I didn’t realize for some minutes that there was a small brazil-nut shaped creature under my left wrist, at least not until I began to feel a tingling in my arm. Within half an hour, my left arm was completely lifeless and numb, most of the left side of my body was paralyzed, and I was vomiting almost uncontrollably. This lasted for several hours. The doctor informed my folks that there really wasn’t much he could do for me.

That little creature is termed an asp in Texas, and has a powerful punch. Snakes, spiders, ants, and such are creatures that have too useful a purpose on earth to let Henry Kissinger be termed one of them. But the asp is such a vile thing that perhaps we can resort to calling the man one of those. At least, this asp seems to be getting pragmatic about the situation his buddy W has created.

Recall our post just previous and our comments about ‘courage of convictions.’ Richard Jehn

Kissinger Paints Bleak Iraq Picture
The Associated Press

LONDON — Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger said military victory was no longer possible in Iraq in a television interview broadcast Sunday.

In a wide-ranging interview on BBC television, Kissinger presented a bleak vision of Iraq, saying the U.S. government must enter dialogue with Iraq’s regional neighbors — including Iran — if any progress was to be made in the region.

“If you mean, by ‘military victory,’ an Iraqi government that can be established and whose writ runs across the whole country, that gets the civil war under control and sectarian violence under control in a time period that the political processes of the democracies will support, I don’t believe that is possible,” he said on the BBC’s Sunday AM program.

But Kissinger warned against a rapid withdrawal of troops, saying it could lead to “disastrous consequences,” destabilizing Iraq’s neighbors and causing a long-lasting conflict.

“If you withdraw all the forces without any international understanding and without any even partial solution of some of the problems, civil war in Iraq will take on even more violent forms and achieve dimensions that are probably exceeding those that brought us into Yugoslavia with military force,” he said.

“All the surrounding countries — especially those that have large Shiite populations — will be, in all likelihood, destabilized,” he said.

Kissinger has been advising U.S. President George W. Bush on Iraq.

Source

I suppose it could also be a red tide, equally poisonous and undesirable. We’ve said something about the courage of one’s convictions before, and it’s a recurring theme for us. This guy should learn to keep his mouth shut if he didn’t believe what he promoted in the first place. But since they’re all ignorant assholes anyway, why should we have such high expectations?

Embittered Insiders Turn Against Bush
By Peter Baker
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, November 19, 2006; Page A01

The weekend after the statue of Saddam Hussein fell, Kenneth Adelman and a couple of other promoters of the Iraq war gathered at Vice President Cheney’s residence to celebrate. The invasion had been the “cakewalk” Adelman predicted. Cheney and his guests raised their glasses, toasting President Bush and victory. “It was a euphoric moment,” Adelman recalled.

Forty-three months later, the cakewalk looks more like a death march, and Adelman has broken with the Bush team. He had an angry falling-out with Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld this fall. He and Cheney are no longer on speaking terms. And he believes that “the president is ultimately responsible” for what Adelman now calls “the debacle that was Iraq.”

Adelman, a former Reagan administration official and onetime member of the Iraq war brain trust, is only the latest voice from inside the Bush circle to speak out against the president or his policies. Heading into the final chapter of his presidency, fresh from the sting of a midterm election defeat, Bush finds himself with fewer and fewer friends. Some of the strongest supporters of the war have grown disenchanted, former insiders are registering public dissent and Republicans on Capitol Hill blame him for losing Congress.

A certain weary crankiness sets in with any administration after six years. By this point in Bill Clinton’s tenure, bitter Democrats were competing to denounce his behavior with an intern even as they were trying to fight off his impeachment. Ronald Reagan was deep in the throes of the Iran-contra scandal. But Bush’s strained relations with erstwhile friends and allies take on an extra edge of bitterness amid the dashed hopes of the Iraq venture.

“There are a lot of lives that are lost,” Adelman said in an interview last week. “A country’s at stake. A region’s at stake. This is a gigantic situation. . . . This didn’t have to be managed this bad. It’s just awful.”

Read it all here.