tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-78508862024-03-14T04:14:23.692-04:00Peace GardenLooking at the news, politics and life through the eyes of a liberal.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2108125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-45310893992540511792009-12-12T18:33:00.000-05:002009-12-12T18:33:17.788-05:00Lack of PostsWondering why I was having so much trouble posting here. It was quite easy posting to <a href="http://www.greenerspaces.blogspot.com">Greener Spaces</a>. Why so difficult to be motivated here?<P>
I realize that it is frustration! Frustrated that we are still in Iraq and increasing the war in Afghanistan. Frustrated that we still rattle the swords at Iran and use the term "evil" at Nobel Peace Prize awards. Frustrated about the growing chasm between classes. Frustrated that Tiger Wood's sex escapades are more "newsworthy" and interesting to most than climate change conferences, the wars, medical insurance legislation...<p>
Our consumer culture is still dominant. Our belief that "our way" is the only way is still dominant. The lack of concern about our future is still dominant.<P>
This frustration, I realize, is what has made it hard to post here. I look at world events/news and cry. We are no better than we were when I submitted my first blog so many years ago. <P>
<a href="http://www.greenerspaces.blogspot.com">Greener Spaces</a> has a different feeling for me. It is much easier to talk about and comment on things I can do and influence - my own eating habits, lifestyle, purchases... So much easier to post there about my garden or the latest green item.<P>
Sure I will still post here on a very sporadic basis - when my anger or concern is greater than my frustration with the world. But my efforts at Greener Spaces will continue (and grow) because there it is about my own life and choices - things I directly influence. I do not need a new President or a group to be at peace in my home or in my garden. Greener Spaces is in a sense my own personal Peace Garden. Selfish? In a way - but isn't it so important to be at peace with oneself first before we can spread the peace to others?Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-74322666339173206382009-12-01T22:10:00.000-05:002009-12-01T22:10:47.401-05:00Obama's Afghanistan plan wins conservative praise<a href="http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/latest-news/obamas-afghanistan-plan-wins-conservative-praise">Obama's Afghanistan plan wins conservative praise</a>: <blockquote><p><strong>Washington (<a href="http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/12/01/obamas-afghanistan-plan-wins-conservative-praise/">CNN</a>)</strong> - It's not often the Republican National Committee holds a conference call with reporters during which President Barack Obama is largely praised.</p><p>But amid news the president has decided to beef up U.S. forces in Afghanistan by at least 30,000 within the next six months, the RNC deployed conservative foreign policy expert Dan Senor to offer accolades of the plan.</p><p>'I have been critical of the process over the last 90-some days through which the president has arrived at his decision, but it sounds to me, based on what we know, that it is a very good decision and I applaud him,' said Senor, an adjunct senior fellow at the non partisan Council on Foreign Relations and a former advisor to the U.S. led coalition in Iraq.</p></blockquote>Why? Just withdraw the troops. It is over. It can never succeed. That should be clear to you, OBushama, when someone like Senor applauds your move.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-24573957508007708452009-11-26T10:19:00.000-05:002009-11-26T10:19:55.741-05:00Shame<a href="http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/latest-news/us-will-not-join-treaty-banning-landmines">U.S. will not join treaty banning landmines</a>:
<blockquote><p>WASHINGTON (<a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/us_usa_arms_landmines">Reuters</a>) –
<span>President Barack Obama</span>
has no plans to join a global treaty banning landmines because a policy
review found the United States could not meet its security commitments
without them, the State Department said on Tuesday.</p>
<p>
'This administration undertook a policy review and we decided that our
land mine policy remains in effect,' spokesman Ian Kelly told a
briefing five days before a review conference in Cartegena, Colombia on
the 10-year-old Mine Ban Treaty.</p>
<p>
'We determined that we would not be able to meet our national defense
needs nor our security commitments to our friends and allies if we
signed this convention,' he said.</p>
<p>
It was the first time the administration had publicly disclosed the decision.</p>
<p>
The treaty bans the use, stockpiling, production or transfer of
antipersonnel mines. It has been endorsed by 156 countries, but the
United States, Russia, China and India have not adopted it.</p>
<p>U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy, a leading advocate for the treaty, called the decision 'a default of U.S. leadership.'</p>
<p>
'It is a lost opportunity for the United States to show leadership
instead of joining with China and Russia and impeding progress,' Leahy,
a Vermont Democrat, said in a statement.</p></blockquote>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-17834226509007781602009-11-17T22:36:00.000-05:002009-11-17T22:36:51.002-05:00Amen<a href="http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/latest-news/ca-dems-obama-get-out-afghanistan">CA Dems to Obama: Get Out of Afghanistan</a>: <blockquote><p>The California Democratic Party just sent a loud message to
President Obama, who is pondering the next U.S. move in Afghanistan:
Get out.</p><p>The state's Dems have gone on record with a Get Out message before -- <a href="http://www.cadem.org/c.jrLZK2PyHmF/b.5368045/k.37A8/Exit_Strategy_for_Afghanistan/siteapps/advocacy/ActionItem.aspx">like at their confab</a> last summer. But this one is more specific. And bolder. Marin County activist and media critic <a href="http://www.normansolomon.com/">Norman Solomon</a> passes on that the CDP's 300-member statewide <a href="http://www.cadem.org/site/c.jrLZK2PyHmF/b.5539823/k.B44C/eBoard.htm">exec board</a> passed a resolution Sunday called: 'End the U.S. Occupation and Air War in Afghanistan.' You can find the resolution <a href="http://www.uslaboragainstwar.org/article.php?id=20827">here</a>. </p><p>Update: CA Dem Party czar John Burton just called to weigh in on
this. He says Obama has two choices now: Go all in and give Gen.
Stanley McChrystal what he wants or begin a pullout. </p><p>The politics of it, according to Burton: If Obama proposes something
less than what McChyrstal wants and the mission goes sideways, 'The
Republicans will pound him for it.' </p><p>'It's not going to work over there,' Burton told us. 'You've got a <a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/1023/p06s01-wogn.html">corrupt government</a>. The guy put together a ticket of drug lords and war lords.'</p>
<p>Plus, Burton said he 'doesn't have a lot of confidence' in McChyrstal after the <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/01/jon-krakauer-mcchrystals_n_341545.html">general's role in the misclassification</a> of Pat Tillman's death. </p><p>Burton remembers when a forerunner of the Cal Dem Party opposed
LBJ's oversight of the Vietnam War -- soon thereafter its leader was
bounced. As for whether he expects any other state party organizations
to follow suit. 'I hope so,' he said. 'We just do what we do.' </p><p>Writes Norman Solomon: </p><p>'The resolution supports 'a timetable for withdrawal of our military
personnel' and calls for 'an end to the use of mercenary contractors as
well as an end to air strikes that cause heavy civilian casualties.'
Advocating multiparty talks inside Afghanistan, the resolution also
urges Obama 'to oversee a redirection of our funding and resources to
include an increase in humanitarian and developmental aid.'</p><p>'While Obama weighs Afghanistan policy options, the California
Democratic Party's adoption of the resolution is the most tangible
indicator yet that escalation of the U.S. war effort can only fuel
opposition within the president's own party -- opposition that has
already begun to erode his political base.'</p></blockquote>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-23673079825118950182009-11-09T22:07:00.000-05:002009-11-09T22:07:15.343-05:00Cheney returns<a href="http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/latest-news/cheney-urges-strong-us-commitment-afghan-war">Cheney urges strong U.S. commitment to Afghan war</a>: BE<blockquote>NTON HARBOR, Michigan - Former Vice President Dick Cheney on Thursday urged President Barack Obama to commit enough troops to win the war in Afghanistan, warning hesitation would embolden U.S. foes and devastate its allies.</p><span></span>
<p>'I don't see how he can do anything other than move aggressively to
achieve victory,' the Wyoming Republican, a harsh critic of the new
administration, said in a speech to a Michigan business group.</p><span></span>
<p>'Our adversaries take heart from our hesitation and vacillation,' Cheney said.</p><span></span>
<p>'Our not following through will have devastating consequences not
only for Afghanistan but also for our NATO allies. This is the first
time ever (NATO members have) committed troops to combat.'</p><span></span></blockquote>
Two questions:<br>
- Can wars ever be won?<P>
- Who asked Uncle Dick's opinion? Who cares about his opinion?Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-39193228542969586912009-11-08T20:59:00.000-05:002009-11-08T20:59:27.834-05:00Bring them home<a href="http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/11/07-5">Obama Leaning Toward 34,000 More Troops for Afghanistan</a>: <blockquote><div>by Jonathan S. Landay, John Walcott and Nancy A. Youssef</div><div><img src="http://www.commondreams.org/files/article_images/dover-obama.jpg"></div><p> WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama is nearing a decision to send more than 30,000 additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan next year, but he may not announce it until after he consults with key allies and completes a trip to Asia later this month, administration and military officials have told McClatchy.</p><p>As it now stands, the administration's plan calls for sending three Army brigades from the 101st Airborne Division at Fort Campbell, Ky. and the 10th Mountain Division at Fort Drum, N.Y. and a Marine brigade, for a total of as many as 23,000 additional combat and support troops.</p><p><a href="http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/11/07-5">read more</a></p></blockquote>Wrong answer. Unless you are sending them there to pack the bags and bring the others home.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-38020182341486089862009-10-26T19:50:00.000-04:002009-10-26T19:50:19.137-04:00Attack of the Drones?<a href="http://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/2034722/rk57h/alternet~Attack-of-the-Drones-Airstrikes-Wont-Build-a-Better-Future-in-Afghanistan">Airstrikes Won't Build a Better Future in Afghanistan</a>: <blockquote>"The media is enamored of high-tech, sexy-sounding airstrikes over Pakistan. They shouldn't be." <br>
Indeed, behind the glittering mirage of news about the technological wizardry of drones and the giddy success of manufacturers from California to Karachi lies a chilling void of information about their use. In June the UN Human Rights Council condemned the U.S. failure to count and disclose, much less prevent, civilian casualties from drones in Afghanistan. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the U.S. commander in Afghanistan, pledged to regulate their use (implying a disturbing lack of regulation till then). But the government still refuses to share even the most basic information about attacks, partly because in Pakistan they are run by the CIA. Independent reporters who dare to investigate -- like Stephen Farrell, who went to Kunduz after an airstrike killed about a hundred civilians -- court death as well as condemnation for taking "unnecessary" risks for something as trivial as the truth.</blockquote>Better future? We get out!Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-67848782440662459172009-10-06T22:01:00.000-04:002009-10-06T22:01:23.374-04:00We'll Follow Obama's Orders on Afghanistan<a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TRUTHOUT/~3/B1F9rMj0Ceo/1006094">Gates to Army: We'll Follow Obama's Orders on Afghanistan</a>: <p> <blockquote>Washington - Amid tension between the military and President Barack Obama over
military action in Afghanistan, Secretary of Defense
Robert Gates told a gathering of Army officers Monday that the Pentagon would
follow any strategy that Obama orders.</p>
<p> "Speaking for the Department of Defense, once the commander in chief makes
his decisions, we will salute and execute those decisions
faithfully and to the best of our ability," Gates told the Association
of the U.S. Army in Washington.</p><p><a href="http://www.truthout.org/1006094">read more</a></p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/TRUTHOUT/~4/B1F9rMj0Ceo" height="1" width="1"></blockquote>There is something that nags me. There is this impending doom feeling. Maybe it stemmed from the pulled article about a military coup (I forget where it was being run). It just feels like the political chasm is growing larger and larger each day. And now the military is getting involved.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-12355534253443806482009-09-26T21:35:00.000-04:002009-09-26T21:35:48.357-04:00So what's new now<a href="http://www.campaigniran.org/casmii/index.php?q=node/8654">U.S. was aware of ?new? Iranian nuke site for years</a>: <blockquote>Summary: WASHINGTON (CNN) The United States was aware of Iran's unfinished uranium enrichment site for several years, senior U.S. officials told CNN on Friday. <p> source: CNN</blockquote>So why are we revving up the machine now?Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-20141343415177392332009-09-26T21:31:00.002-04:002009-09-26T21:33:18.904-04:00New President - Same War Drums<a href="http://www.myantiwar.org/view/188447.html">Israel: Iranian nuclear facility for weapons</a><blockquote>Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman says the newly exposed Iranian nuclear facility proves the Islamic Republic is pursuing nuclear weapons.
Lieberman told Israel radio on Saturday that "without a doubt" the reactor was for military purposes.
Iran kept the facility, located 100 miles southwest of Tehran, hidden from the U.N. nuclear watchdog until revealing it in a letter to the IAEA on Monday.
Iran insists its enrichment facilities are only for producing fuel for power plants rather than for weapons.
Israel considers Iran a strategic threat due to its nuclear program, missile development and repeated references by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Israel's destruction.</blockquote>He speaks and we are listening? <p>
The drums are beating and the sabres are rattling - AGAIN!Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-31421919965507638952009-09-22T21:21:00.002-04:002009-09-22T21:24:37.040-04:00Cronkite a US enemy?<a href="http://www.myantiwar.org/view/188211.html">FBI may have destroyed files on Walter Cronkite</a><blockquote>Officials with the Federal Bureau of Investigation said they may have destroyed files on legendary newsman Walter Cronkite in an October 2007 document purge.
One of Cronkite's closest friends, Mike Ashford, said he wouldn't be surprised if Cronkite's name showed up in FBI files, but that it was probably for innocuous reasons.
"He was routinely in the company of presidents and received clearance to enter secret places like a nuclear submarine," Ashford, who spoke at Cronkite's funeral, told Raw Story. "If there was anything on him, it probably said: 'He's a good guy and okay to have dinner with the president.' Walter was never fretting about the FBI following him around."
</blockquote>Or was it for his Vietnam war comments? Let us hope that Sir Walter was on file because of those clearances he received. But my gut tells me otherwise.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-39205754056765072182009-09-22T21:16:00.000-04:002009-09-22T21:16:37.449-04:00Bring 'em Home<a href="http://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/1296917/cx2cx/alternet~New-Pew-Poll-on-Afghanistan-Shows-Dwindling-Support-for-the-War">New Pew Poll on Afghanistan Shows Dwindling Support for the War</a>: <blockquote><img align="left" border="0" height="1" width="1" style="border:0;float:left;margin:0" vspace="0" hspace="0" src="http://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/i/1296917/cx2cx/alternet"><p>Even though more than three-quarters of Americans consider the Taliban a threat, an increasing number want Obama to start withdrawing troops.</p></blockquote>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-15850568731681625762009-09-17T21:14:00.000-04:002009-09-17T21:14:36.781-04:00Rush on the crazy train<a href="http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/142702/limbaugh_wants_jim_crow_back:_"we_need_segregated_buses"?utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzRss&utm_campaign=alternet">Limbaugh Wants Jim Crow Back: "We Need Segregated Buses"</a><blockquote>Last week, a video of a school bus beating showing two African American children assaulting a white student began circulating the internet. Despite claims by authorities that the attack was not necessarily racially motivated, hate radio host Rush Limbaugh jumped on the story and claimed that in "Obama's America the white kids now get beat up." Yesterday, Limbaugh proposed a solution to this problem -- a return to segregated busing:
LIMBAUGH: I think the guy's wrong. I think not only it was racism, it was justifiable racism. I mean, that's the lesson we're being taught here today. Kid shouldn't have been on the bus anyway. We need segregated buses -- it was invading space and stuff. This is Obama's America.</blockquote>Glenn Beck rides the train. Sean Hannity rides it...Are these guys trying to outdo the other with insane ideas?Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-648364229518516022009-09-14T21:19:00.000-04:002009-09-14T21:19:15.985-04:00Tip of the hat to Murtha<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/14/murtha-to-obama-no-more-t_n_285976.html">Murtha To Obama: No More Troops</a>: H<blockquote>ouse defense spending cardinal John Murtha, an early bellwether of congressional opposition to the Iraq war, has made his strongest comments yet opposing more U.S. troops for the war in Afghanistan.</p>
<p>The Pennsylvania lawmaker and Vietnam veteran, who plays a crucial role in forming the budgets that would fund an increased troop presence, is skeptical of the basic logic of adding personnel.</p></blockquote>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-86858897154020009362009-09-12T20:51:00.002-04:002009-09-12T20:54:33.681-04:00Tea Party Crazies<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/12/tea-party-protester-we-th_n_284701.html">Tea Party Protester: "We Think The Muslims Are Moving In And Taking Over" (</a>: <blockquote>A protester at Saturday's Tea Party on the National Mall in Washington, D.C. made clear that she was afraid, saying 'We are losing our country, we think the Muslim's are moving in and taking over.'</p>
<p>NBC Nightly News interviewed the woman, who was surrounded by fellow protesters as she made the remarks. Her name was not used.</p>
<p>Participants at the event, billed 'March on Washington' by its organizers, rallied against President Obama's health care plan and what they say is out-of-control spending.</p>
</blockquote>Hope she doesn't look under her bed, the little green men have set up camp.<p>
Sorry I missed chief loony Coulter in Bridgeport the other day. I could have used a good laugh.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-49939705857665640672009-09-11T18:51:00.000-04:002009-09-11T18:51:09.979-04:00Obama's Quagmire Looks a Lot like Vietnam<a href="http://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/1083214/bqi0z/alternet~Obamas-Quagmire-Looks-a-Lot-like-Vietnam">Obama's Quagmire Looks a Lot like Vietnam</a>: <blockquote><img align="left" border="0" height="1" width="1" style="border:0;float:left;margin:0" vspace="0" hspace="0" src="http://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/i/1083214/bqi0z/alternet"><p>The way he's headed on Afghanistan, Barack Obama is threatened with a quagmire that could bog down his presidency.</p></blockquote>
Time to say - ENOUGH!Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-26869788430596258952009-09-08T18:17:00.002-04:002009-09-08T18:17:50.007-04:00Team Obama Divided on Afghanistan<a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TRUTHOUT/~3/Vu3T_4j2yzA/090809S">Team Obama Divided on Afghanistan</a>: <blockquote>Top officials of the Obama administration are divided on the expected request of the Pentagon for more troops in Afghanistan <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/04/us/politics/04military.html">reported Friday</a>.
<p> <i>'The military's anticipated request for more troops to combat the insurgency in Afghanistan has divided senior advisers to President Obama as they try to determine the proper size and mission of the American effort there, officials said Thursday.'</i><p><a href="http://www.truthout.org/090809S">read more</a></p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/TRUTHOUT/~4/Vu3T_4j2yzA" height="1" width="1"></p></p>"</blockquote>Leading the opposition - Biden.<p>
Listen to us - bring the troops home.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-42508642379934229902009-09-03T21:14:00.000-04:002009-09-03T21:14:48.424-04:00Obama Is Leading the U.S. Into a Hellish Quagmire<a href="http://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/1005930/axndq/alternet~Obama-Is-Leading-the-US-Into-a-Hellish-Quagmire">Obama Is Leading the U.S. Into a Hellish Quagmire</a>:<blockquote>Obama is doubling down in Afghanistan with more troops deployed now than the Soviets ever had, at a time when public support for it is sinking like a rock.<p>Why hasn't anyone pointed out that America's troop commitment now exceeds the Red Army's? For some inexplicable reason the corporate media has decided to shuffle the figures and exclude the US military contractors from the total figure of US military personnel. It makes no logical sense -- we still count the Hessians among the British forces in the War of Independence. It's as if the only thing left that Americans are capable of is accounting fraud -- the only talent we perfected over the past decade was how to move all the bad numbers off the official books, as if it's become an instinctive reflex.<p>The Afghanistan War has somehow escaped most of America's attention.
</blockquote>Time to bring attention to this issue. Time to end both wars.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-54682495446458753202009-09-01T20:17:00.000-04:002009-09-01T20:17:02.670-04:00Bush's Third Term? OBushama?<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-swanson/bushs-third-term-youre-li_b_274438.html">David Swanson: Bush's Third Term? You're Living It</a>: <blockquote><p><em>Cross-posted with <a href="http://tomdispatch.com/">Tomdispatch.com</a></em></p>
<p>It sounds like the plot for the latest summer horror movie. Imagine, for a moment, that George W. Bush had been allowed a third term as president, had run and had won or stolen it, and that we were all now living (and dying) through it. With the Democrats in control of Congress but Bush still in the Oval Office, the media would certainly be <a href="http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/02/02/in-big-media-bipartisanship-beats-policy/">talking endlessly</a> about a mandate for bipartisanship and the importance of taking into account the concerns of Republicans. Can't you just picture it?<br>
<br>
There's Dubya now, still <a href="http://www.davidswanson.org/node/1926">rewriting</a> laws via signing statements. Still creating and destroying laws with executive orders. And still <a href="http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/42584">violating laws</a> at his whim. </blockquote>And the list goes on and on... But we elected a change agent - didn't we?<blockquote>
Now, here's the funny part. This dark fantasy of a third Bush term is also an accurate portrait of Obama's first term to date. In following Bush, Obama was given the opportunity either to restore the rule of law and the balance of powers or to firmly establish in place what were otherwise aberrant abuses of power. Thus far, President Obama has, in all the areas mentioned above, chosen the latter course. Everything described, from the continuation of crimes to the efforts to hide them away, from the corruption of corporate power to the assertion of the executive power to legislate, is Obama's presidency in its first seven months.<br>
<br>
Which doesn't mean there aren't differences in the two moments. For one thing, Democrats have now joined Republicans in approving expanded presidential powers and even -- in the case of wars, military strikes, lawless detention and rendition, warrantless spying, and the obstruction of justice -- presidential crimes. In addition, in the new Democratic era of goodwill, peace and justice movements have been <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/30/us/30antiwar.html">strikingly defunded</a> and, in some cases, even shut down. Many progressive groups now, in fact, take their signals from the president and his team, rather than bringing the public's demands to his doorstep.<br>
<br>
If we really were in Bush's third term, people would be far more active and outraged. There would already be a major push to really <a href="http://www.nogoodwar.org">end the wars</a> in Iraq and Afghanistan/Pakistan. Undoubtedly, the Democrats still wouldn't impeach Bush, especially since they'd be able to vote him out before his fourth term, and surely four more years of him wouldn't make all that much difference.<br>
<br>
Copyright 2009 David Swanson</p></blockquote>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-73110713269728234752009-08-29T20:42:00.000-04:002009-08-29T20:42:13.303-04:00Cindy Sheehan: Obama's wars now<a href="http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/latestnews/index.php?id=14358">Cindy Sheehan: Obama's wars now</a>: <blockquote><font face="verdana" size="-2">2009-08-28</font><br><font face="verdana" size="2" color="#990000"><b>CINDY SHEEHAN: OBAMA'S WARS NOW</b></font><br><br><p><p><b>
'System... stays the same, no matter who is in charge,' protester laments.
</b></p>
<p>
By Mark Silva / <a href="http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2009/08/cindy_sheehan_obamas_wars_now.html">Chicago Tribune</a>
</p>
<p>
Cindy Sheehan is back.
</p>
<p>
But this time, the war protester who lost her son, Casey, at war in Iraq, is not camped outside the Texas ranch of former President George W. Bush, who ordered the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.
</p>
<p>
She is staking out the media on Martha's Vineyard, where President Barack Obama, who has pledged to withdraw troops from Iraq but is boosting the U.S. military deployment at war in Afghanistan, is spending a week's vacation.
</p>
<p>
Sheehan, who liked to pitch a 'peace camp'' outside the vacationing Bush's ranch near Crawford, Texas, showed up today outside the schoolhouse in Oak Bluffs, Mass., where reporters covering the vacationing Obama are working. The president is tucked away at Blue Heron Farm, a 28-acre rented estate, no brush clearing.
</p>
<p>
'The reason I am here is because ... even though the facade has changed in Washington DC, the policies are still the same,' Sheehan told a handful of journalists, with a Camp Casey banner behind her. Calling on peace activists to wake up and protest Obama's escalation of the war in Afghanistan, and complaining that troops still remain in Iraq, she said: 'We have to realize, it is not the president who is power, it is not the party that is in power, it is the system that stays the same, no matter who is in charge.'
</p>
<p>
'We are here to make the wars unpopular again,' Sheehan said.</p></p></blockquote>It is time to end the wars. It is time to hold OBushama accountable.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-68935066049205881172009-08-29T20:37:00.000-04:002009-08-29T20:37:58.024-04:00Cheney ‘OK’ With Violating Felony Torture Statute<a href="http://www.myantiwar.org/view/186804.html">Cheney ‘OK’ With Violating Felony Torture Statute</a><blockquote>In an interview with Fox News to be aired this Sunday, former Vice President Dick Cheney said he is “OK” with CIA interrogations that violated Justice Department guidelines and condemned the prospect of any investigation of abuses as potentially “devastating” to morale.</blockquote>"OK" with crimes - if done in his name. Amazing that we are still debating whether to investigate abuses AT ALL LEVELS!Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-87686590172492325692009-08-24T21:30:00.000-04:002009-08-24T21:30:03.376-04:00Kudos to Feingold<a href="http://www.myantiwar.org/view/186459.html">Feingold to Obama: Announce Withdrawal Timetable from Afghanistan</a><blockquote>Sen. Russ Feingold, D-WI, called on President Obama to announce a timetable for withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan. "This is a strategy that is not likely to succeed," Sen. Feingold said about the troop buildup in Afghanistan.
"After eight years, I am not convinced that pouring more and more troops into Afghanistan is a well thought out policy," said Feingold. The liberal Democrat said he has expressed his reservations with President Obama, Admiral Mullen, and others inside the administration and he says he has "never been convinced they have a good answer."
"I think it is time we start discussing a flexible timetable so that people around the world can see when we are going to bring our troops out," said Feingold. "Showing the people there and here that we have a sense about when it is time to leave is one of the best things we can do," he added.</blockquote>Not too flexible though. This is a now win war - as if any war is winnable. Let us learn our lessons from past forays into Afghanistan.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-81665041158143633412009-08-23T20:27:00.003-04:002009-08-23T20:33:29.489-04:00Old Devils - Whitmore<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dLoTLq_ArHY&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dLoTLq_ArHY&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
<div width="200px"><embed src="http://www.6lyrics.com/mods/singit.swf" flashvars="lyricid=old_devils&iurl=http://www.6lyrics.com/images/scroll/0000_pre6.jpg&fo=66&s=31" quality="high" width="200" height="300" scale="exactfit" wmode="transparent" name="6Lyrics.com Widget" align="middle" allowScriptAccess="sameDomain" allowFullScreen="true" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" /><br><font size="1" face="verdana"> <a href="http://www.6lyrics.com/music/william_elliott_whitmore/lyrics/old_devils.aspx" title="Old Devils by William Elliott Whitmore on 6Lyrics.com" target="_blank">William Elliott Whitmore</a> widget by <a href="http://www.6lyrics.com" title="Top albums, mp3 & lyrics on 6Lyrics.com" target="_blank">6L</a> & <a href="http://www.daxii.com" title="Daxii.com : The Q/A Community">Daxii</a></font></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-34981509760825395532009-08-22T22:33:00.000-04:002009-08-22T22:33:01.618-04:00State Department Still Paying Blackwater More Than $400M -- Despite Public Break With Company<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/22/state-department-still-pa_n_265966.html">State Department Still Paying Blackwater More Than $400M -- Despite Public Break With Company</a>: <blockquote>WASHINGTON -- Despite publicly breaking with an American private security company in Iraq, the State Department continues to award the company, formerly known as Blackwater, more than $400 million in contracts to fly its diplomats around Iraq, guard them in Afghanistan, and train security forces in antiterrorism tactics at its remote camp in North Carolina.</p>
More on Afghanistan</blockquote>
Yeah sure - a break. Pretty clear who runs our government.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7850886.post-57688767372003056242009-08-20T22:08:00.000-04:002009-08-20T22:08:12.197-04:00We already knew this<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/20/tom-ridge-i-was-pressured_n_264127.html">Tom Ridge: I Was Pressured To Raise Terror Alert To Help Bush Win</a><blockquote>Ridge was never invited to sit in on National Security Council meetings; was "blindsided" by the FBI in morning Oval Office meetings because the agency withheld critical information from him; found his urgings to block Michael Brown from being named head of the emergency agency blamed for the Hurricane Katrina disaster ignored; and was pushed to raise the security alert on the eve of President Bush's re-election, something he saw as politically motivated and worth resigning over.</blockquote>Manipulation? Who didn't think this was happening?Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0