Bruce Gagnon is coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space.
He offers his own reflections on organizing and the state of America's declining empire....
Saturday, December 30, 2006
MOVING INTO THE NEW YEAR
We've only had one snow this winter so far, normally we have about 28 inches by this time, and before today we only had 2.8 inches. Just as we were unloading the truck at the storage facility it began to snow, a light but steady snow and we took it as a good sign. It's snowing harder now and everything is turning a beautiful white.
It was a joyful time to have our extended community come help us with the move and it made clear that our hope of living in an intentional community - a community that shares the work and joys of life will be a great experience for us.
So I am now sitting in a local cafe using the wireless connection as I won't have my own local Internet facilities for a few weeks.
Best wishes to all in the new year. Let's all keep doing what we can to keep the fires of peace burning. Gather yourselves and gather the wood.
Thursday, December 28, 2006
MASS TRANSIT NOW!
So that leaves us the taxpayers. All that money we are now wasting in Iraq could be used to create a world-class public transit system. But the oil corporations, auto makers, and road builders won't support it. That means the public is going to have to start rattling our chains and demanding mass transit now!
Help create the momentum for public mass transit.
Tuesday, December 26, 2006
GLOBAL NETWORK TURNS 15 IN 2007
Each year we meet in a different part of the world. If you click on the link in the headline above you will see our new video called War from Space? This video is from our 2006 annual meeting in Vancouver, Canada which was held in conjunction with the World Peace Forum.
On March 22-24, 2007 we will meet in Darmstadt, Germany to celebrate our work together and continue our deliberate and determined effort to expand opposition to Star Wars. We should be posting the full agenda for the Germany space organizing conference on our web site soon.
Our friend Holly Gwinn Graham from Olympia, Washington, pictured above, is one of our new members of our board and is a singer/songwriter who has composed a number of great songs about space. This picture was taken last October as Holly entertained and taught folks during our annual Keep Space for Peace Week of local actions.
The Global Network now has about 150 affiliated organizations all over the world and we are working hard to reach out to new regions of the planet in hopes that a widening consciousness about preventing an arms race in space will help build the kind of international grassroots movement that will be necessary to keep the heavens free from the bad seed of war and greed.
We thank all of you who have helped us in the past and look forward to working with you again in 2007.
Peace to you and your families.
Sunday, December 24, 2006
FEAR ENDS, HOPE BEGINS
Friday, December 22, 2006
NAVAJO MESSAGE TO THE MOON
One day, a Navajo elder and his son came across the space crew walking among the rocks. The elder, who spoke only Navajo, asked a question. His son translated for the NASA people: "What are these guys in the big suits doing?" One of the astronauts said that they were practicing for a trip to the moon. When his son relayed this comment,the Navajo elder got all excited and asked if it would be possible to give to the astronauts a message to deliver to the moon.
Recognizing a promotional opportunity when he saw one, a NASA official accompanying the astronauts said, "Why certainly!" and told an underling to get a tape recorder. The Navajo elder's comments into the microphone were brief. The NASA official asked the son if he would translate what his father had said. The son listened to the recording and laughed uproariously… but he refused to translate.
So the NASA people took the tape to a nearby Navajo village and played it for other members of the tribe. They too laughed long and hard, but also refused to translate the elder's message to the moon.
NASA had to take the tape back to Washington and made a Navajo working at the Bureau of Indian Affairs translate it. After he finally stopped laughing, the translator relayed the message:
"WATCH OUT FOR THESE ASSHOLES. THEY HAVE COME TO STEAL YOUR LAND."
Thursday, December 21, 2006
UAV TESTING COMING TO MAINE?
One presentation proposed using the BNAS facility as a research, development and testing center for the Pentagon's Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) program.
UAV's are remotely piloted aircraft used in reconnaissance and intelligence-gathering roles and are now being deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan to fly over the battlespace and to send back "real time" pictures via satellite technology to ground operators who then can order the UAV's to fire rockets and machine guns mounted on board.
Many of the recent bombings and killings of innocent people in Iraq and Afghanistan have been done by UAV's.
In the Brunswick presentation it was suggested that the Pentagon is spending a lot of research and development dollars on UAV's and Maine should try to grab some of those funds. The proposal also made the case that creating such a facility would create spin-off commercial "defense" jobs that would service the UAV operation.
The presentation also said the UAV's would be useful to Homeland Security for "surveillance" of our region.
This is just one more glaring example how the economy of the U.S. is becoming militarized as 50% of every federal tax dollar is now going into weapons technology development.
Former Maine Speaker of the House John Richardson from Brunswick, just appointed by Gov. Baldacci to head the state's Department of Economic and Community Development, has previously advocated in the local newspaper that BNAS be used as a UAV test facility.
It would appear to me that the decision has been made to use BNAS for this purpose and now the public sales job is underway. Now would be the right time for people to speak out against this UAV test facility at BNAS.
Would it not be better that our tax dollars be used at BNAS to build mass transit rail systems, solar systems and windmills rather than more weapons for endless war? (Click the link in the headline above for a glimpse of what positive things could be done with our money.)
Hersch Sternlieb testified before this same public hearing today advocating that a world class garden be established at BNAS.
So just imagine a world class garden full of tourists and tulips with UAV's circling overhead practicing endless war and domestic surveillance.
Welcome to America.
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
DEMS JOIN BUSH IN DIGGING DEEPER INTO IRAQ QUAGMIRE
The Washington Post reported today that administration sources were saying that up to 70,000 additional troops could be added to the military with tens of thousands of troops added to the force now in Iraq. Bush will also be requesting more than $100 billion for the occupation in 2007 - this coming after Congress has already appropriated $70 billion for 2007 war funding. The total expenditures for Iraq in 2007 will now be 50% more than originally projected.
You'd think the "opposition party" would be going bonkers about this announcement from Bush. Instead top Democrats are rushing to join side with King George. Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid said last weekend on TV news shows that he would support more troops in Iraq.
Even before news of Bush's latest plan, Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.), incoming chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, told reporters that the military is "bleeding" and "we have to apply the tourniquet and strengthen the forces."
"I am glad he has realized the need for increasing the size of the armed forces . . . but this is where the Democrats have been for two years," said Rep. Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), the new House Democratic Caucus chairman.
National peace groups are asking people to call Congress this week to protest Bush's plan to escalate the Iraq occupation and the weak response from the Democratic party. Please call your Congressional delegation and call for (1) A no vote on the $100 billion supplemental expected to be approved in January (2) An immediate withdrawal from Iraq - not an escalation.
Also call the offices of Democratic party leaders Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi to express your outrage. The Capitol switchboard is (202) 224-3121.
Also please begin discussing in your local community participation in the February plans to occupy the local offices of Congress members in response to their slavish support for the madness in Iraq. As Bush and the Democrats link arms and escalate this war the peace movement must non-violently step up our protest activity at the local and national level.
Be sure to read the piece by Alexander Cockburn linked in the headline above.
Sunday, December 17, 2006
RETREATING FOR PEACE
One thing we talked about at the retreat this weekend was that we can't count on and wait for the Democrats to bail us out these days - from either the occupation in Iraq, global warming, or a host of other problems we now face.
We talked about how we need to act independently and to recognize that no politician will be our savior. The people are going to have to take back our democracy and save ourselves from the hot frying pan that we are now sliding into.
This weekend's retreat reminded me that we are not alone. One of our friends at the retreat sent this quote to us today after she got home. I think it tells the story.
"Hear me! A single twig breaks, but the bundle of twigs is strong."
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
NASA PLANS MOON BASE TO CONTROL PATHWAY TO SPACE
In an interview on December 4 from the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas, Scott Horowitz, NASA’s associate administrator for exploration said, “We’re going for a base on the Moon.”
The NASA plan is portrayed as the next phase of the space agency’s exploration agenda after space shuttles are retired in 2010. NASA’s ambitious schedule includes a 2009 test of one of the lunar spaceships, a 2014 manned test flight of the new Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) without a Moon landing, and a 2020 flight with a four-astronaut crew that would land on the Moon for a short visit. NASA envisions people living on the Moon for six-month intervals beginning in 2024.
The most likely destination for the permanent base is the Moon's south pole because it's sunlit for three-quarters of the time and has possible resources to mine in areas nearby.
Just to ensure that Congress will support funding for the Moon program, NASA is spreading the operation out to 13 states: Alabama, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Ohio, Texas, Utah, and Virginia. Pratt & Whitney in West Palm Beach, Florida is now working on the engines for a lunar lander. Bechtel is interested in building structures on the Moon for NASA.
Last year, NASA said it would cost $104 billion just to return to the Moon for a first visit, but has declined to give estimates for the total cost of a permanent base. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports that NASA’s procurement plan for the Moon lander risks delivering a product that is late, over budget, and short on capability. This is what happened in the case of the International Space Station (ISS) that was originally supposed to cost taxpayers $10 billion; the price has grown to $100 billion and the station is still not complete.
With space-related spending a low priority for most governments around the world, NASA hopes that by calling the Moon base an international post it will be able to recruit partners to help convince their publics and politicians to buy into the new exploration plan. By inviting some “allies” to share in the creation of the Moon base, the U.S. also hopes to absorb energies from countries like Japan that have announced plans of their own to establish Moon colonies.
The idea of a U.S. base on the Moon is nothing new. In a secret study called “A U.S. Army Study for the Establishment of a Lunar Outpost” published on June 9, 1959, the military maintained that, “The lunar outpost is required to develop and protect potential United States interests on the Moon; to develop techniques in Moon-based surveillance of the Earth and space; in communications relay, and in operations on the surface of the Moon; to serve as a base for exploration of the Moon…Any military operations on the Moon will be difficult to counter by the enemy because of the difficulty of his reaching the Moon, if our forces are already present and have means of countering a landing or of neutralizing any hostile forces that have landed.”
In 1999, John Young, former Gemini, Apollo, and space shuttle astronaut, said that the Moon would also be useful for “planetary defense.”
Recognizing that “control” of the Moon could cause enormous conflict over time, the United Nations created the Moon Treaty in 1979. Much of the Moon Treaty reiterates earlier and internationally-accepted “space law,” particularly the Outer Space Treaty of 1967. Article 11 of the treaty maintains, “The Moon and its natural resources are the common heritage of mankind.” The treaty also prohibits national appropriation, adding the words “by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.” In other words, no military bases and no claims of ownership are allowed. The U.S. never signed the Moon Treaty, and in fact it was only ratified by nine nations.
A 1989 study commissioned by Congress, called "Military Space Forces: The Next 50 Years" reports that whoever holds the Moon militarily will control the "earth-Moon gravity well" and thus will essentially control the front gate to the Moon.
Former Nazi Major General Walter Dornberger, who was in charge of the entireV-1 and V-2 missile operation for Hitler’s Germany, testified before the U.S. Congress in 1958 that America's top space priority ought to be to "conquer, occupy, keep, and utilize space between the Earth and the Moon." (Dornberger, along with 1,500 other top Nazi scientists, was smuggled into the U.S. under Operation Paperclip after WW II. He became Vice-President at Bell Aerospace in New York.)
The Moon has one resource that is getting everyone’s attention. It is helium-3, and, say many space enthusiasts, could be used for fusion power back here on Earth. In a 1995 New York Times op-ed, science writer Lawrence Joseph asks the question: “Will the Moon become the Persian Gulf of the 21st Century?” Joseph maintains that the most important technological question of our time will be “which nation will control nuclear fusion?” He ends his piece by saying, “If we ignore the potential of this remarkable fuel, the nation could slip behind the race for control of the global economy, and our destiny beyond.”
One person who is not ignoring helium-3 on the Moon is former astronaut and engineer Harrison Schmitt who has created a corporation to mine the Moon for it. Schmitt, though, is concerned about obstacles to his grand plans. In a 1998 piece for the industry newspaper Space News called “The Moon Treaty: Not a Wise Idea” he writes, “The strong prohibition on ownership of ‘natural resources’ also causes worry….The mandate of an international regime would complicate private commercial efforts…. The Moon Treaty is not needed to further the development and use of lunar resources for the benefit of humankind...including the extraction of lunar helium-3 for terrestrial fusion power.”
Some scientists predict that one metric ton of helium-3 could be worth over $3 billion. Researchers at the Princeton University Plasma Physics Laboratory have estimated that some one million tons of helium-3 could be obtained from the top layer of the Moon.
If all this turns out to be true and scientifically possible, imagine the gold rush to the Moon and the conflict that could follow in years to come. Who would police the Moon, especially when countries like the U.S. refuse to sign the Moon Treaty that restricts “ownership claims”?
The U.S. Space Command's plan, Vision for 2020, says, "Historically, military forces have evolved to protect national interests and investments — both military and economic. During the rise of sea commerce, nations built navies to protect and enhance their commercial interests....Likewise, space forces will emerge to protect military and commercial national interests and investment in the space medium due to their increasing importance."
I have always been convinced that, by creating offensive space weapons systems, one of the major jobs of the Space Command would be to control who can get on and off planet Earth, thus controlling the “shipping lanes” to the Moon and beyond.
There has long been a military connection to NASA’s Moon missions. In early 1994, NASA launched the Deep Space Program Science Experiment, the first of a series of Clementine technology demonstrations jointly sponsored with the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO). The Pentagon announced that data acquired by the spacecraft indicated that there is ice in the bottom of a crater on the Moon, located on the Moon’s south pole — the same venue NASA now envisions as the site for the 2024 permanent base. According to a Pentagon website, “The principal objective of the lunar observatory mission though was to space qualify lightweight sensors and component technologies for the next generation of Department of Defense spacecraft [Star Wars]. The mission used the Moon, a near-Earth asteroid, and the spacecraft’s Interstage Adapter (ISA) as targets to demonstrate sensor performance. As a secondary mission, Clementine returns valuable data of interest to the international civilian scientific sector.”
In the end, the NASA plan to establish permanent bases on the Moon will help the military “control and dominate” access on and off our planet Earth and determine who will extract valuable resources from the Moon in the years ahead.
The taxpayers will be asked to pay the enormously expensive “research and development” costs of this program that in the end will profit the aerospace industry and those corporation like Bechtel that intend to build the bases and extract resources on the Moon.
NASA is not really looking for the “origins of life,” as it tells school children today. Instead, it is laying the groundwork for a new gold rush that will drain our national treasury and enrich the big corporations that now control our government. It is beyond time for the American people to wake up to the shell game underway.
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Saturday, December 09, 2006
IMPEACHMENT RESOLUTION FILED IN HOUSE
Rep. McKinney's floor statement on the impeachment of George W. Bush
By Cynthia McKinney
Published: Friday December 8th, 2006
Mr. Speaker: I come before this body today as a proud American and as a servant of the American people, sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States.
Throughout my tenure, I’ve always tried to speak the truth. It’s that commitment that brings me here today.
We have a President who has misgoverned and a Congress that has refused to hold him accountable. It is a grave situation and I believe the stakes for our country are high.
No American is above the law, and if we allow a President to violate, at the most basic and fundamental level, the trust of the people and then continue to govern, without a process for holding him accountable —what does that say about our commitment to the truth? To the Constitution? To our democracy?
The trust of the American people has been broken. And a process must be undertaken to repair this trust. This process must begin with honesty and accountability.
Leading up to our invasion of Iraq, the American people supported this Administration’s actions because they believed in our President. They believed he was acting in good faith. They believed that American laws and American values would be respected. That in the weightiness of everything being considered, two values were rock solid —trust and truth.
From mushroom clouds to African yellow cake to aluminum tubes, the American people and this Congress were not presented the facts, but rather were presented a string of untruths, to justify the invasion of Iraq.
President Bush, along with Vice President Cheney and then-National Security Advisor Rice, portrayed to the Congress and to the American people that Iraq represented an imminent threat, culminating with President Bush’s claim that Iraq was six months away from developing a nuclear weapon. Having used false fear to buy consent—the President then took our country to war.
This has grave consequences for the health of our democracy, for our standing with our allies, and most of all, for the lives of our men and women in the military and their families—who have been asked to make sacrifices—including the ultimate sacrifice—to keep us safe.
Just as we expect our leaders to be truthful, we expect them to abide by the law and respect our courts and judges. Here again, the President failed the American people.
When President Bush signed an executive order authorizing unlawful spying on American citizens, he circumvented the courts, the law, and he violated the separation of powers provided by the Constitution. Once the program was revealed, he then tried to hide the scope of his offense from the American people by making contradictory, untrue statements.
President George W. Bush has failed to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States; he has failed to ensure that senior members of his administration do the same; and he has betrayed the trust of the American people.
With a heavy heart and in the deepest spirit of patriotism, I exercise my duty and responsibility to speak truthfully about what is before us. To shy away from this responsibility would be easier. But I have not been one to travel the easy road. I believe in this country, and in the power of our democracy. I feel the steely conviction of one who will not let the country I love descend into shame; for the fabric of our democracy is at stake.
Some will call this a partisan vendetta, others will say this is an unimportant distraction to the plans of the incoming Congress. But this is not about political gamesmanship.
I am not willing to put any political party before my principles.This, instead, is about beginning the long road back to regaining the high standards of truth and democracy upon which our great country was founded.
Mr. Speaker: Under the standards set by the United States Constitution, President Bush—along with Vice President Cheney, and Secretary of State Rice— should be subject to the process of impeachment, and I have filed H. Res. _ in the House of Representatives.
To my fellow Americans, as I leave this Congress, it is in your hands— to hold your representatives accountable, and to show those with the courage to stand for what is right, that they do not stand alone.
Thank you.
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
IRAQ OPTIONS RANGE FROM BAD TO WORSE
Commenting on the report, William Hartung at the World Policy Institute said, “Despite some early headlines suggesting that the Iraq Study Group would be calling for a withdrawal of U.S. combat forces from Iraq by the beginning of 2008, a look at the fine print suggests otherwise. The group's recommendations look more like an exercise in ‘bait and switch’ than an actual commitment to U.S. withdrawal.”
“By offering the prospect of some change - even if it leaves tens of thousands of combat troops and trainers in Iraq in 2008 and beyond - the Baker-Hamilton report could take pressure off Republicans and Democrats alike. Major figures in both parties could be relieved of the demand to push for a genuine withdrawal prior to the 2008 presidential elections. Citizens who want a quicker timeline for U.S. withdrawal and a genuine military disengagement from Iraq will need to make their voices heard if U.S. policy is to go beyond the half-measures set out by the Baker-Hamilton panel.”
The Democrats in Congress held a secret meeting yesterday in Washington to figure out their position on Iraq. Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic Speaker-designate and a frequent critic of George W. Bush, announced the forum to flush out fresh ideas. Afterward, she said: "What we heard today is that there are no easy answers in Iraq."
Watching Robert Gates, nominated to replace Rumsfeld as Secretary of War, on TV yesterday while in Congressional hearings was no encouragement either. Then today I read reports on his testimony and a couple things stuck out like a sore thumb. Gates said his “greatest worry” about Iraq is that if U.S. forces leave the country “in chaos,” a variety of regional powers will become involved, “and we will have a regional conflict on our hands.” Gates said he wants to “forge that kind of bipartisan approach going forward” so that those who want to harm the U.S. “know we’re in it for the long haul.”
It’s the Vietnam-era domino theory making a comeback. Gates is invoking the fear that if the U.S. leaves, the region will be taken over by terrorists and other bad guys like Syria and Iran. So we are now seeing the justification shifting to a new excuse for keeping the occupation alive.
Then this morning I read a piece from Newsweek that interviewed the soon-to-be chairman of the House Intelligence Committee – Rep. Silvestre Reyes (D-TX) who was just appointed by Nancy Pelosi to head that post. Rep. Reyes, like so many other Democrats, says he is against the war. Reyes says now though, “We could not allow Iraq to become a safe haven for Al Qaeda, for Hamas, for Hizbullah, or anybody else. We cannot allow Iran or Syria to have a free hand in there to further destabilize the Middle East.”
Reyes continues, “We’re all interested in getting out of Iraq. That’s the common goal. How we do it, I think, is the tough part. There are those that say, they don’t care what Iraq looks like once we leave there. Let’s just leave there. And I argue against that. I don’t think that’s responsible. And I think it plays right into the hands of Syria and Iran.”
Do you notice the similarity between the words from Gates and Reyes? The administration’s talking points are making the rounds and are being picked up by the Democrats as well as the Republicans. Who said the Democrats are the opposition party?
Rep. Reyes is also calling for more troops in Iraq, from 20,000 – 30,000, so the U.S. can “dismantle the militias.” Isn’t it interesting that Nancy Pelosi appoints a guy to head the Intelligence Committee that wants more troops in Iraq and wants to expand the fighting? Do you think she didn’t know his thinking on Iraq?
Ray McGovern, a former CIA analyst who is active in the anti-war movement said this in response to Rep. Reyes, “I think he needs a course in Insurgency 101. Have they learned nothing from Vietnam? If he pushes this and gets some support for it, and with McCain in the Senate, it could become more respectable…I think Reyes has got a lot to learn.”
I was at a meeting last night and learned that a friend's son, who was in Iraq for a year with the Army, is being called back to active duty. Their son had been discharged over a year ago and has been attending the University of Maine. He is now being made to go back into the Army and will probably be sent back to Iraq. That is a draft. His parents, who severely suffered during his whole time in Iraq, are devastated at the thought.
Don’t think for a moment that this occupation is going to end anytime soon. The U.S. government is now playing with our heads and setting in motion the shell-game to keep this thing going for a long, long time.
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
GN'S SPACE CONFAB TO BE HELD IN GERMANY
The Global Network will hold its 15th annual international membership meeting and conference in Darmstadt, Germany, on March 23-24, 2007. The theme of the conference will be: The Role of the European Union in the Militarization of Space.
Darmstadt, located close to Frankfurt am Main, hosts two major European and one US space facilities: the European Space Operation Centre (ESOC), which plans and conducts satellite operations for the European Space Agency; the European Organization for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites (EUMETSAT), which delivers weather and climate-related satellite data and images; and on the outskirts of the town a US spy station, which is part of the global Echelon surveillance system.
Two days of discussion, strategizing, planning, and protest will inform us all about the increasing role of space in the European Security and Defense Policy, about NATO and European missile defense plans, how these are related to US plans to dominate space in order to control the Earth, and what we can do about it.
To inquire about registration, contact globalnet@mindspring.com. For more information, see http://www.space4peace.org/ or send mail to gn_darmstadt2007@yahoo.de
Sunday, December 03, 2006
LOTS OF LAUGHS
Click on the cartoon to enlarge it so you can read it. You gotta laugh or you go nuts these days.
In the end one key reason I think they infiltrate groups is in order to create fear in the mind's of the public. The hidden message is - "Hey you don't want to associate with these people! If you do you will get on a list and like in the old Soviet Union you will find it harder to get a job if you have been identified as a dissident! So keep your nose clean. Don't rock the boat. You can't beat city hall anyway."
This way the power structure can help to limit the growth of the opposition movements. They obviously also expose themselves as the public ultimately learns that the government does not believe in true democracy.
Friday, December 01, 2006
RANDOM RAMBLINGS
- This picture above comes from last weekend's protest at the School of the Americas in Columbus, Georgia (Ft Benning). The little spy house, raised up in the air, so the cops can watch the protest is a reminder what the power structure thinks of us these days. It's likely paid for by Homeland Security funds that have flowed to local police agencies in recent years.
- This month's installment of Liberty News can be viewed by clicking on the link in the headline above. The show, produced by a friend of mine in his basement in nearby Portland, features a great bit on the "holy war" now underway right here in the U.S. as Christians are being trained at Jesus camp to fight against non-believers inside the U.S. and around the world. (If the show stops and starts now and then don't worry - just be patient and it will get going again.)
- It is being reported that Bush's Iraq Study Group will call for U.S. troops to be brought home by 2008 which essentially means that there will be no change in policy during the remainder of time King George II is in office. No surprise here. The Democrats will fall right in line behind the recommendation. Expect more killing, more dying, more wasted $$$$$. And more big corporate profits. Two telling comments by so-called "liberal" politicians are below:
"I think that the Baker report is . . . going to change the debate in this country," Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) told CNN.
Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.), speaking on MSNBC's "Hardball," said that "I suspect there may be a growing bipartisan support in this country for what Jim Baker, Lee Hamilton, the other members of that commission have put together."
Translation - the peace movement is left high and dry by the Dems. Back to work folks. We will be meeting in Maine on January 6 in Portland to decide on our next organizing steps in the state around the Iraq occupation and funding issues. Plans are underway nationwide for congressional office occupations in early February. How badly do you want to see this occupation ended?
- My son Julian came home for 5 days during Thanksgiving. He is finishing up college in Texas and I had not seen him in quite awhile. It was wonderful to have him home. Mary Beth and I took him kayaking one day and cooked lobster for him one evening. We took him to Boston on the last day and stopped at the Fogg Art museum at Harvard and saw a great display called Dissent!
- If you have not noticed, I asked Dave Webb (the Global Network's great web master and board convenor) to put a link to my cable TV show called This Issue on the blog so folks can watch it. So just below click on the TV graphic and see my interview with independent journalist Dahr Jamail. We'll put other shows on there as well in the future.
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
SICK AMERICANS
You must click on the link in the headline above and watch this very sick video of U.S. troops in Iraq getting their jollies off by making little kids chase after their speeding truck for a bottle of water. The GI's, who we are told in this country are heroes, are sick *##+*#+*#*#'s !!!
Is it any wonder people around the world hate us the way they do? Unfortunately few Americans see this kind of stuff and when they do they say "Well it is just a few of the GI's that act this way." I wish that were true.
The media is all a jabber these days about civil war in Iraq. Is there one or not? Bush and company say no. NBC News says yes. Good of them to figure it out at last. Bush says he is not bringing the troops home during the rest of his time in office. The Dems, who were saying troops out by the end of 2007 are now slipping in a second year, 2008, into their plan for a phased withdrawal. Big surprise there.
People should be asking the Democrats two basic questions now.
1) What is the mission in Iraq today?
2) When would you propose it would be accomplished?
Watch them squirm (to twist about like a worm: wriggle) on that one.
Over 3,000 Iraqi people are leaving the country each day now as refugees. They carry nothing with them. They face an uncertain future with no hope. If they stay in Iraq their future is even worse.
Dick Cheney just went to Saudia Arabia to ask them to "use its influence to help foster reconciliation in Iraq." Saudia Arabia, like the U.S., has no influence in Iraq today. Nor does Bush's puppet government hiding behind U.S. troops in the Green Zone in downtown Baghdad.
The Democrats are similarly hiding from this issue because they have no influence either in Washington. They have none because they are not willing to get off their knees and open their mouths to King George II. Thus we will keep wasting $8.5 billion a month on the occupation.
Talking reason and logic to the Democrats is a waste of time. They have no courage to listen to logic and no guts to listen to reason or moral appeals. The only tool to use on the Democrats from now on is shame and ridicule (the act of exposing to laughter: derision: to laugh at or make fun of mockingly or contemptously).
The politicians in Washington should be made to watch the video linked above. Then they should be made to pass out water to the starving children on the streets of Iraq.
Monday, November 27, 2006
AEGIS WARSHIPS UPGRADED WITH PROVOCATIVE "MISSILE DEFENSE" SYSTEMS
The U.S. has announced that it will install so-called "theatre missile defense" (TMD) systems on Navy Aegis warships now deployed in Japan's Yokosuka base. Also called "boost-phase defense" systems, the job of these missiles would be to get close to North Korea and China in order to give the U.S. the ability to knock out any nukes launched from those countries soon after they have been launched.
The testing program for these TMD systems (also called Standard Missile-3) has been going fairly well for the Navy, as it is much easier to hit a missile soon after it has been launched. They are easy to spot as the flames shoot out of the rocket, they are relatively slow as they lift-off from the ground, and the Aegis warships would be right along the coastline and able to be much closer to the missiles.
The military's other "missile defense" program is called "National Missile Defense" which would wait until a nuke got way up into deep space before it would try to have a bullet hit a bullet at 15,000 m.p.h. This program has been the one with the glaring test failures and could also be easily overwhelmed with decoys and multiple warhead missiles.
The Aegis destroyers used by the Navy for the TMD program are made in Bath, Maine. The Republican and Democratic Party politicians of this state are slaves to the General Dynamics Corporation, which builds the ships. Each ship costs taxpayers over $1 billion.
Bath Iron Works [BIW], Maine's largest private employer, was purchased by General Dynamics in September 1995. Bath had run into financial trouble and become the property of Prudential Insurance Co. of America when debt payments could no longer be made. General Dynamics picked up the yard for half what Prudential paid for it.
We are told that the Aegis ships are being outfitted with TMD systems to protect Japan from a nuclear attack by North Korea. Not true!
The reality is that the U.S. is using the Aegis to surround the coastal region of China and intends to negate China's current nuclear weapons force of 20 missiles that are capable of hitting the continental U.S.
By making this move the U.S. will force China to build more nuclear weapons or face loosing their existing nuclear deterrent force in a first-strike attack. For the past few years the U.S. has been war-gaming a first-strike attack on China, set in the year 2016. After seeing what the U.S. has done in Iraq, and knowing that the U.S. is now doubling its military presence in the Asian-Pacific region, China can't afford to take any chances. Thus off we go to a new arms race in the region. The weapons industry would benefit for sure.
On May 26, 2000 the Washington Post ran a story entitled, For Pentagon, Asia Moving to Forefront. The article made the case for the U.S. to "manage" China by militarily controlling the region and being able to prevail in a war with China. Here is some of the language from the article:
The Joint Chiefs' wrestling with how to think about China--and how open to be about that effort--captures in a nutshell the U.S. military's quiet shift away from its traditional focus on Europe. Cautiously but steadily, the Pentagon is looking at Asia as the most likely arena for future military conflict, or at least competition.
The new U.S. military interest in Asia also reverses a Cold War trend under which the Pentagon once planned by the year 2000 to have just "a minimal military presence" in Japan, recalls retired Army Gen. Robert W. RisCassi, a former U.S. commander in South Korea.
The U.S. military's favorite way of testing its assumptions and ideas is to run a war game. Increasingly, the major games played by the Pentagon--except for the Army--take place in Asia, on an arc from Tehran to Tokyo. The games are used to ask how the U.S. military might respond to some of the biggest questions it faces: Will Iran go nuclear--or become more aggressive with an array of hard-to-stop cruise missiles? Will Pakistan and India engage in nuclear war--or, perhaps even worse, will Pakistan break up, with its nuclear weapons falling into the hands of Afghan mujaheddin? Will Indonesia fall apart? Will North Korea collapse peacefully? And what may be the biggest question of all: Will the United States and China avoid military confrontation? All in all, estimates one Pentagon official, about two-thirds of the forward-looking games staged by the Pentagon over the last eight years have taken place partly or wholly in Asia.
The Japanese peace movement clearly understands what is at stake here with these upgrades to the Aegis system. They fear growing instability in the region will ultimately lead to a war. They regularly protest the Aegis warships at Yokosuka Naval base. They seek the support of the peace movement in the U.S.
In the state of Maine it is just a few activists who are concerned about the Aegis and those who do protest against Aegis rarely ever talk about the role of TMD and Aegis. Instead the activists talk about the cruise missiles on-board the Aegis (which are nuclear capable). While it is important to inform people about the cruise missiles, they are first-strike weapons, it is also crucial to begin to educate the activist community and the public at large about the expanded provocative role that Aegis is now playing in the overall U.S. aggressive military strategy in the region.
The ultimate solution is to begin to call for conversion of places like BIW. We must show the public, who are primarily concerned about jobs, that by converting shipyards like BIW we will be able to create many times more jobs with the money that is now wasted down the military rat hole. By creating a constituency for conversion we also begin to reduce the support for the dangerous and aggressive U.S. military schemes in the Asian-Pacific region.
Wednesday, November 22, 2006
INTENTIONAL COMMUNITY - LEARNING TO SHARE OUR LIVES
Big plans are now underway in our household. Mary Beth and I have put our house up for sale. Our friend Karen Wainberg (on right in photo) from Portland has put her house on the market. We've found a house in the nearby town of Bath and we hope to be able to purchase it soon.
We plan on creating an intentional community.
Over the years as I have traveled I've visited several Catholic Worker houses around the country. Each are a bit different. Some feed the poor and others have large gardens. Still others specialize on local organizing and taking in a family from time to time that needs temporary shelter.
Mary Beth and I have been talking for a long time about living in such a community but the opportunity had never emerged. Then about a year ago we began talking with Karen about such a life.
We started talking about the way we live in isolation from each other. My Italian mother's family lived multi-generationally and I always loved visiting them in between our moves from one military base to another when I was young. It was exciting to feel connected to a much larger community. I've never liked the isolation of the nuclear family. "Nuclear" family is a phrase that to me represents blowing up the extended family for the present system of "every man for himself" way of living.
The nuclear family is not a sustainable way to live. Each small family unit must have their own lawn mower, vacuum, washer/dryer, cars, TV's, and on and on. By living together we learn to use less by sharing more. I think our present economic system has largely been built by fostering this notion of "individuality" in the way we live - alone and heavy consumers.
It's also not sustainable to be emotionally remote from each other.
By sharing our energies and resources in community we also lessen our need to make as much money freeing each of us up just a bit to have more time to do service work in our community at a pace that does not burn us all out.
One other vision we have for our intentional community will be to invite others, not directly living with us, to still be a part of the community. By holding regular suppers and sharing circles we will explore with each other questions like these: What does community mean to us? How can we act together to build our community and have an impact on the wider world? How do we have conversion of the military industrial complex without conversion in our own lives? How do we expand our commitment to work for change? How do we share our bounty with those who have much less? How do we live as a community more gently on the Earth? You get the drift.
For me it is all about trying to integrate my broader vision of a sustainable society into my everyday way of living. I want it all. I want a feeling of community all the time - not just when I go to a retreat or a wonderful potluck supper. I want to ride my bike and a train instead of my car. I want to see military production facilities converted so they can build the trains. I want
to see people work closer together in order that we help each other through these hard and frustrating times - help each other through the isolation of the nuclear age.
For me being human means to be in a constant state of questioning and change. In a constant state of reevaluation of the way I am living and being open to new possibilities.
We are excited about our emerging new way of life.
Monday, November 20, 2006
MILITARY NEEDS MORE TROOPS
The Pentagon is going to need more troops as the U.S. is not likely to pull out of Iraq for another 5-10 years insiders are now predicting. Thus the boys inside the military are looking at innovative ways to reach younger people to get them emotionally committed early-on to a "life at war."
Click on the link in the headline above for a short bit from a recent episode of The Simpsons. Even though quite funny, it is also quite revealing.
All across the country recruiters are now throwing birthday parties for young elementary school kids by providing military tents and vehicles for the kiddies to crawl around on. Increasingly, as local school budgets are cut, military personnel are brought in to teach kids or even take classes out to training centers for extended "camps" where they run the kids through military exercises. This is usually being done under the guise of anti-drug programs or "behavior modification" programs.
In the 1930's Mussolini trained a whole generation of Italian boys in the ways of fascism by these methods. In Rome they had the Central Military School of Physical Education and the Fascist Academy of Physical Education. These two schools were the cornerstone of the fascist system of indoctrination - rather than education - of the youths. They recruited boys from the age of 6-18 for weekly meetings, where they practiced physical exercise, received paramilitary training and performed drills and parades.
A peace activist woman I know from Maine told me a story last week. She went to visit her grandchild who is in elementary school. She thought it would be fun to go out into nature and while playing she shared with her grandchild her feelings about the Iraq war. Her grandkid immediately snapped to attention and recited the pledge of alliegiance.
The way I see it is the "war on terror" is now being transformed into the war on Islam. And this war will have no end as the corporations and the Pentagon know that in order to control the oil in the Middle East and Central Asia the U.S. permanent bases in Iraq and Afghanistan must remain open. And they must be expanded into Iran, maybe Syria, and more.
All of this will require several more generations of troops. On the homefront the powers that be know that a worsening economic situation will help steer working class kids into the military because they will have few other job options. But the best recruitment tool for the military is to create a greater war culture in the U.S. and that plan appears to me to now be well underway.
It is our job to see this developing and to stand in resistance to it at every turn. We must call America on its addiction to war and violence.
Saturday, November 18, 2006
IRAQ OCCUPATION COST KILLING AMERICA
The Bush administration is preparing to submit a request to Congress for up to $160 billion to fund the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan for fiscal year 2007. This will be on top of $70 billion that Congress has already approved for 2007.
Since 2001, Congress has approved $502 billion for the war on “terror,” roughly two-thirds for Iraq.
The cost of the entire Vietnam War, in today’s dollars, was $536 billion.
The UK’s Guardian recently reported that Bush told senior advisers that the U.S. must make “a last big push” to win in Iraq and may increase U.S. military forces by as many as 20,000 soldiers.
In our recent national election, the people voted for a change in policy in Iraq. The message seems to have reached Washington and their answer to the public appears to be “Ok, we will change our policy. We will dramatically increase the amount of money we are spending on the war and we will send even more troops.”
Not quite what the 62% of Americans who oppose the war had in mind.
The net result of this new policy will likely be more violence in Iraq, more hostility toward U.S. troops, more casualties on all sides, and a deepening quagmire.
Another important result will be that the Democrats, who so far have been most willing to support ALL Bush’s funding requests for the occupation of Iraq, get locked in to the “new policy.”
Bush has long said that in his remaining time in office he will not bring the troops home. Thus the only way to end the costly and outrageous Iraq fiasco is to cut the funding for the occupation. This is ultimately how the Congress had to end the war in Vietnam.
Soldiers are now coming home from Iraq and not getting adequate treatment from the VA because of lack of funding. Cutbacks in social programs are now becoming the norm in the U.S. as we spend 50% of every tax dollar on the Pentagon budget.
Our nation’s number one industrial export product today is weapons. In 2006 the U.S. exported over $21 billion in weapons – up from $10.6 billion the previous year.
Studies have long shown that military spending is capital intensive. In other words, each million dollars spent on military production creates far fewer jobs than if the money were invested in any other kind of job creation effort, including building trains, solar panels or windmills.
America is now hemorrhaging jobs and our debt is over $8.6 trillion and growing by $2 billion a day. We’d better wake up quick and tell the Democrats that they must stop funding this war. It’s killing our country.
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
THE SLIDE BEGINS - AND SO SOON TOO
And so it now begins.
This morning I got a mass email from Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) who is in line to chair the House Judiciary Committee. He is the one who has been leading the fight for years to investigate Bush/Cheney for impeachable offenses.
But a couple months ago, before the election, Nancy Pelosi began sending messages to the public. One of her declarations was that if the Dems took power that she might not honor the senority system to award committee chairmanships. Anyone who was paying attention knew that she was talking about Conyers.
Then she got even bolder, when just shortly before voting day, she said that impeachment was off the table. Ipso facto. No more discussion. The declaration was made. Forget all the obvious lies and constitutional violations of the Bush administration. The Democrats were pledging to go soft even before they took power.
In today's email Conyers acknowledges that he has fallen into line. Obviously, he got the message and if he wants to sit as chairman of the Judiciary Committee then he understands he has to play the game. Remember, the constitution is just a piece of paper anyway.
In his message Conyers says, "As many of you also know, I have agreed with Speaker-to-be Pelosi that impeachment is off the table. Instead, we agree that oversight, accountability and checks and balances – which have been sorely lacking for the last six years – must occur. I have nothing but respect for those who might disagree, but that is where I come out.......I am hopeful that I will be selected as Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.........If I am selected as Chair, I believe it will place us in a position to make real and meaningful changes for the good of the American people."
I think the Conyers quote speaks for itself.
As if that wasn't enough, I then clicked on an article this morning from Mother Jones magazine called So You Want to Impeach? This piece strongly laid out the well-known case against the Bush pirate team and then ended with a final swift stroke, "Impeaching Bush alone, of course, would be of no use -- for Cheney, equally if not more culpable, is but another head of the same abominable Hydra. And there's the rub. Take away Bush, take away Cheney, and the line of succession would point to... President Nancy Pelosi. In order to replace a president who (for his many grievous sins) was popularly elected in a national election after the fiercest campaign in memory, we'd anoint a politician who hasn't faced serious opposition in two decades and was last elected by 225,000 true blue citizens... of San Francisco."
Are you still sitting in your chair? And Mother Jones is supposed to be a progressive publication. The Democrats and their sycophants are throwing the people who just put them into office the old brushback pitch. This one is aimed right at our heads. They are playing mind games with us. First they rev us up before the election to get us good and angry, then after they win they bring us down.
It's kind of like what the Republicans have done to their Christian base for years with issues like abortion, school prayer, and public display of the 10 commandments. Pander to them, fire them up, use them up, and then don't deliver on political promises. Both parties have this technique down to a fine art.
In the headline above is a link to one of the key groups now organizing impeachment campaigning in the U.S. We can't let the Dems off the hook. Hell, they are not even in power and they are already sending Bush signals that they are not going to hold him accountable! It's time for the people to speak out and put the heat on the weak-willed Democrats and the constitution-busting Republicans.
It's our country. The time for the people to take over has come.
Tuesday, November 14, 2006
HELP STOP U.S.-INDIA NUCLEAR DEAL
Before the deal can be finalized, Congress must amend the Atomic Energy Act to allow the U.S. to enable nuclear cooperation with India without requiring India to sign the NPT or give up production of nuclear bomb making materials. The House passed legislation on July 26, 2006 allowing the deal to proceed while the companion bill in the Senate has not been voted on. Maine Democratic Party Congressmen Tom Allen and Mike Michaud voted in favor of the House bill that passed by a margin of 359-68. Most progressive members of Congress voted against it. (Tom Allen has publicly stated that the U.S. must help India expand its nuclear industry in order to deal with global warming.)
Everywhere Mary Beth Sullivan and I went during our recent speaking tour in India our peace activist hosts were talking about this nuclear deal. While the U.S. is condemning North Korea and Iran for pursuing nuclear weapons, the White House is offering to supply India with nuclear fuel that would enable them to build as many as 30-40 more nukes a year. They could not understand why the American peace movement was not more aware of the bill that will dramatically increase nuclear tensions in Southern Asia, already a flashpoint for nuclear war as Pakistan and China will be forced to respond to India’s nuclear expansion. It became clearer to me that the U.S. intends to use India as a “military outpost” in its aggressive attempt to surround and “manage” China in the years ahead. The U.S. weapons industry is arming Pakistan and India, playing divide and conquer in the region, and making enormous profits in the process from the resulting arms race.
The New York Times, wrote on March 7, 2006, "The nuclear deal that Mr. Bush concluded with India threatens to blast a bomb-size loophole through the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. It would have been bad enough on its own, and disastrously ill timed, because it undercuts some of the most powerful arguments Washington can make to try to galvanize international opposition to Iran's nuclear adventurism..."
"This nuclear bill is not about nuclear technology or about selling some US reactors to India," the diplomat said. "The U.S. is buying a relationship and in the process India's strategic interest is being served. It will also help the Indian economy to grow by 10 per cent."
When Congress comes back to Washington for the short lame duck session in January, the administration is pushing the Senate to take up the U.S.-India nuclear deal.
The U.S. should develop a consistent position on nuclear weapons. We should not help other countries develop nukes and we should honor the NPT and get rid of our own.
Sunday, November 12, 2006
VETERANS DAY PARADE IN PORTLAND
This year though the American Legion, that organizes the parade each year, tried to keep our VfP chapter out of the event, largely due to our active and intense opposition to the war and occupation of Iraq. The American Legion said that if VfP was participating they had been told by other pro-war American Legion chapters in the area that they would refuse to be in the parade.
Our VfP chapter went public through the local media with our intention to continue participation and a series of letters to the editor brought the debate to the larger community. Eventually the city of Portland had to get involved and through their intervention the American Legion had to back down.
As usual our VfP delegation, mostly dressed in black, was the largest contingent in the parade. The small American Legion delegations were mixed into the parade as they normally are each carrying flags and rifles and busting out of their old military uniforms that long ago did not fit them properly. Other less controversial entrants in the parade were high school marching bands, clowns, unicyclists, fire trucks, Army vehicles and the like.
Following the parade a dull and lifeless rally was held at Monument Square where politicians and a few pro-war vets spoke. Our just reelected Rep. Tom Allen (D-ME) talked about his pride in our troops who are "protecting our interests" overseas. As he spoke our 100 strong VfP contingent stood just opposite him, many of the members having been active supporters of his opponent Dexter Kamilewicz, an Independent who got 22,689 votes for 8%, in last week's voting. Dexter stood with us, dressed in black as well, as a reminder that we would not let off with our pressure to bring the troops home now. Rep. Allen says he is against the war but has voted 7 times to the tune of $354 billion to enable Bush to build permanent bases in Iraq and keep this insane war going.
Following the official rally, after a 10-minute wait, VfP was given the podium for our own rally where Maine VfP President Doug Rawlings spoke. The local paper today reported that Doug said, "We are not here, as some of our detractors claim, to disrespect America. We're here in the name of decency and humanity....Let us leave here today with the understanding that war itself is evil." Not reported in the paper were Doug's words calling for an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq and a cut in funding for the war. (The photo above was also in the Sunday paper.)
Last night I read that the Bush administration is going to ask for a $160 billion supplemental to fund the war for the remainder of 2007. This would be the largest appropriation for the war to-date! It is clear that Bush is coming right out of the starting blocks and will call the Democrats bluff to see if they will take responsibility and help "manage" the war creating even more "bi-partisan" support for the occupation. From what we have heard so far from our congressman, and most of the Democratic party leadership, they would likely support such a request.
As we walked the length of the parade route yesterday we got an excellent reception from the crowd lined up along the street. It is clear that the people are tired of the war and are looking for a way out. Knowing this, the peace movement should feel emboldened to continue to escalate the pressure on Congress before even more lives are lost in Iraq.
Friday, November 10, 2006
REVIEWING ESTABLISHMENT TALKING POINTS FOR WAR DEBATE
Last night I took notes while watching the talking heads on the news programs. They were discussing what the Dems would/should do now that they control Congress.
It is clear to me that the American people are being prepared to lower their expectations now that the Dems will run the show in Congress. Here is a sampling:
* Rep. Peter King (R-NY) said that we must now "narrow the parameters of the debate" about Iraq. We should know in a year if a new policy is working in Iraq.
* Don Haass from the Council on Foreign Relations said there will be some troop reductions, that we will move troops out of Baghdad, sit our troops at the new permanent bases so that we have fewer casualties, guard Iraq's borders, and work on diplomacy more with Syria and Iran to get their help. The U.S. military role in Iraq would be "limited".
* Newly elected Sen. Claire McCaskell (D-MO) told Chris Matthews on MSNBC's Hardball that she'd likely support John Bolton's nomination at the U.N. (which has still not been approved by the Senate) even though he has pledged to destroy the U.N. Luckily it was reported today that Rhode Island Republican Sen. Lincoln Chaffe today said he would work to block the nomination. Sen. Chaffe, a real moderate, was defeated for reelection by a Democrat.
* Time Magazine's Jay Carney said the U.S. couldn’t leave Iraq because it would create "catastrophic chaos". We must get out "in a reasonable manner" he maintained.
* Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) who has authored the "redeployment" plan calling for U.S. troops to be moved to Kuwait, where we can bomb them from a distance and send Special Forces troops back into Iraq as needed, said there would be no cuts in Iraq war funding from the Democrats. He also said that the military now needs a lot of money to "resupply and retool" the Pentagon after they have had so much hardware destroyed in Iraq. I was once in Murtha's office years ago. He has all kinds of models of weapons systems displayed throughout his office. He is a true friend of the military industrial complex.
* My own “liberal” congressman, Rep. Tom Allen (D-ME) was on the radio yesterday and he said as long as the troops are in Iraq he feels a "moral obligation" to continue to fund the occupation. He is calling for a phased withdrawal sometime in the next year and he also supports the Murtha redeployment plan. I read today that CNN's exit polls of Maine voters revealed that 65% of them opposed the Iraq war.
Bush's nomination of Robert Gates to replace Rumsfeld at the Pentagon must be strongly resisted by the peace movement. Click on the link above and see what former CIA veteran Ray McGovern has to say about Gates while he was at the CIA. McGovern says Gates was "the one most responsible for institutionalizing political corruption of intelligence analysis". He would fit right in with the current crowd in Washington.
So to me the early signs are that the Dems, despite the fact that they rode the peace movement momentum into power, intend to play ball with Bush and keep the Iraq occupation going. Most importantly, the Dems plan to keep the military production process alive and well in order to ensure the military empire is well equipped and active.
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
WHAT'S NEXT FOR THE PEACE MOVEMENT?
The battle is on.
The new speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, is saying that the Dems will govern "from the middle." Impeachment is not on the table she recently said.
Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL), who led the effort on behalf of Democratic Party House candidates, is saying that they can't allow the party's liberal wing to dominate the agenda.
The changes in Congress are largely due to huge opposition (62%) to the U.S. occupation of Iraq. Again, quoting today's Washington Post, "The passion of the antiwar movement helped propel party activists in this election year."
How will the peace movement in America, that just turned itself nearly completely over to the Democratic Party, be rewarded for its loyalty?
"Many Democratic lawmakers have signed on to a vague plan for a phased withdrawal from Iraq, but the party remains divided between a base eager to get out soon and a foreign policy establishment that sees a precipitous withdrawal as potentially damaging to both the country's and the party's interests," the Washington Post concludes.
Pelosi is already pointing to a "Bi-partisan study group" on Iraq that is co-chaired by Texas oilman, and former Republican secretary of state, James Baker. Don’t expect any surprises here.
Most of the new Democratic Party gains in the House were conservative "Blue Dog" Democrats who do not support immediate withdrawal from Iraq. Instead these new Dems, controlled by Bill Clinton's Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), will steer the country on a basic status quo course. Their excuse will be - - hey we have a national election in two years and we want to take back the White House. So we have to go slow now so we don't alienate the public.
My translation - the corporations will control the new Democratic Party Congress and we will see no real basic change.
So what does the peace movement do now?
We must continue to call for immediate withdrawal from Iraq. We must call for a 50% cut in military spending and conversion of the military industrial complex. We must call for an end to Star Wars research and development funding which now stands at about $10 billion a year.
We must also call for investigations of Bush-Cheney for impeachable offenses. We must call for repeal of the Patriot Act and the recent Military Commissions Act - the torture bill.
We have to call out loudly and strongly for universal national health care and for new federal election laws that sets one national standard to ensure fair voting.
There are many more things that must now be advanced by the peace, justice, environmental, labor, and women's movements. And we must be impatient with the Democrats.
One last word here about liberal activists who supported the Dems fully knowing that many of them have been supporting the funding for the occupation of Iraq. I disagreed with this strategy of knee-bending loyalty to a party that does not deserve such support. But it is done now.
To these liberals peace activists I say this. Don't sell us all out now by going easy on the Dems. Don't tell us to wait, give them a chance, give them two years, let them take back the White House before we demand too much from them.
Don't sell yourself out. You have helped to create this new Democratic Party control of Congress. Get off your knees and now demand that they do something. Force the Dems to respond to you. If you don't you will have let down the long-suffering Iraqi people who are dying at the hands of U.S. military power. Don't let the GI's down who have died or suffered serious injury in Iraq for a war that was illegal in the first place. We must keep fighting, harder than ever, to bring this mad war to an end.
The battle has just begun. Where will you stand?
Monday, November 06, 2006
THE MILK IS BAD FROM ROCKET POLLUTION
The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) has released its long anticipated report on the human health effects of perchlorates, a byproduct of rocket fuel. Perchlorates, which are a common pollutant near military sites, have recently BEEN FOUND IN DRINKING WATER IN 35 STATES AS WELL AS IN 93 PERCENT OF LETTUCE AND MILK.
Along with the report, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has set drinking water standards indicating that perchlorates are roughly TEN TIMES MORE TOXIC to humans than the Department of Defense has been claiming. Perchlorates can inhibit thyroid function, cause birth defects and lower IQs, and are considered particularly dangerous to children. Monitoring wells across the U.S. are now finding perchlorate levels as high as 30,000 times what the EPA indicates would be safe exposure.
To avoid liability, the Pentagon is currently pressuring Congress to pass a new bill that states the military does not have to adhere to any environmental regulations (as a matter of national security).
Please take 30 seconds to send a quick online letter urging your Congressperson to protect the nation's food and water by reducing perchlorate pollution. Take action and learn more about this issue by clicking on the link in the headline above.
So forget about going to the health food store and buying organic milk and cheese. The reality is that when the cows eat the grass and drink the water it is practically all contaminated.
Protest and survive. We must fight now to protect the future generations. We don't have the luxury of walking away from this.
Send the letter today!
Saturday, November 04, 2006
ENDLE$$ WAR$ BENEFIT WEAPON$ INDU$TRY
They call this place the bone yard. It is located in Tucson, Arizona and at this airplane graveyard over 4,500 military planes are stored. I've seen it myself on one of my speaking trips to that community. You drive for miles, along the perimeter of the fenced off base, and see rows and rows of planes. Your mind roll$ like a slot machine and you can just imagine the enormous cost to the taxpayer. You begin to realize why endless war is America’s main job these days.
This year the military budget is over $550 billion. That is more than all the rest of the military budgets around the entire world combined. Russia and China each spend just over $50 billion a year.
Once you understand this you also begin to see how the corruption of both political parties works. Democrats and Republicans like to bring home the military production bacon. They like to take the donations from the weapons corporation executives and from the unions representing military production workers. Everybody makes out in this closed loop system. Everybody is happy.
Everybody that is except the taxpayer who is not in the gravy train line. The average taxpayer gets no health care coverage, sees their kid’s college tuition rising so fast they can't help them with the cost of college and their kids are falling into $40,000 debt or more after graduation. We are told there is no money for fixing roads and bridges. There is no money to fund a real mass transit system in the country so we can get out of our global warming producing cars. On and on the story goes.
But for those on the military production gravy train life is good. They make good money and they know that work will continue because the Pentagon has found a new enemy called "the global war on terrorism." That should keep the production lines humming for at least another 50 years they figure. So what if 650,000 innocent Iraqi civilians have to die. No matter. We killed 4 million civilians in Vietnam. A small price to pay for progress. The system works just fine for those making the $$$$$.
So this Election Day be sure to vote for those politicians who promise to keep this whole thing going. Be sure to vote for those Democrats and Republicans who say they are creating jobs back home in the “defense” industry.
Don't worry about those we are killing overseas. They don't vote here anyway.
Friday, November 03, 2006
NEW WORLD ORDER OUT TO LIMIT DEMOCRACY
Mexican activists in Oaxaca have been under fierce attack by death squads organized by their state's corrupt governor and now federal police. In recent months Mexico has seen much political activity as claims of cheating during federal elections stirred progressive forces to take to the streets throughout the country in order to defend democracy.
In the U.S. we are getting ready to vote next week and fears are growing about how "clean" our elections will be. A dozen states have now passed new laws requiring a photo ID before a person can vote. Many poor people, who don't own cars, don't have a photo ID which means thousands will be turned away from the voting booths in key states where elections will be decided by just a few votes. The Republican machine to steal elections, by any and all means, will be in full motion in coming days. Electronic voting machines, now all over the country, are known to be rigged. Why can't we just all be given a paper ballot that can be marked and put into a ballot box?
It is sad that in the country that claims to be the bastion of freedom, our citizens have to fight for the right to vote. But those in power today fear the people and will do just about anything to ensure they hold onto that power.
In 2004, when it was clear that John Kerry lost Ohio because of massive denial of primarily black progressive voters, why didn't the Democrats fight hard for the people? Why didn't Kerry use some of that big corporate money he had left over after the election to sue Ohio on behalf of thousands of people who were denied their sacred right to vote?
I asked Ohio journalist Bob Fitrakis this question last year. Bob was a leading researcher and writer about the many Republican tricks pulled in 2004 to deny people their chance to choose our nation's leaders. Bob told me that the Democrats did not fight for the people because they too had years of cheating history in Ohio and did not feel they could afford to have that exposed.
At first I was a bit skeptical about that answer. But then I started to think about what happened here in Maine and across the country as the Democrats, just before the 2004 national election, tried to keep third party candidate Ralph Nader off the ballot in my state. The Democrats went into state court and tried to pull some dirty tricks to keep Nader from being listed on the final ballot for fear that he would take votes away from Kerry. They challenged signatures that Nader's campaign had gathered across the state. They tried to smear the Nader campaign as being dirty and corrupt. The court threw out the Democrats attempt to "limit" democracy and Nader made it onto the ballot in Maine. Kerry still won Maine in the national election.
These days you read stories about how the Democrats all over the U.S. are pulling all kinds of tricks to keep the Greens off the ballot for fear they will take votes away from them. Somehow the Dems think they "own" the progressive voters and they want to limit anyone else from having access to them.
The fact is that the Repubs and the Dems are willing to play with the system to ensure their control over the people's government. This is not a good thing and I fear that unless we can have an honest election in the U.S. we too will move closer to the day when the people will have to take to the streets like in Mexico to fight for our right to vote for who we want.
We are living in a time when corporate globalization is determining that "democracy" is an obstacle to their control of the world. Their New World Order calls for "limiting democracy" and limiting the "damage" the people can do to their attempts to maximize profits and control resources. They are leaving the public few options in return.