Wednesday, February 14, 2007

THIS JUST IN! LITTLE BULLY BOY CANNOT TELL THE TRUTH!

 
 
IN A STUMBLING, BUMBLING, PUNCH DRUNK PERFORMANCE TODAY, BULLY BOY OF THE UNITED STATES DECLARED THAT IRAN WAS "CONTRIBUTING TO AMERICAN DEATHS IN IRAQ".
 
LEFT UNSTATED OF COURSE WAS:
 
1) THE LITTLE BOY WHO CRIED W.M.D. IS PROBABLY THE LAST PERSON MOST AMERICANS WILL TRUST TODAY.
 
2) AMERICANS AND IRAQIS DYING IN IRAQ DO SO BECAUSE BULLY BOY STARTED AN ILLEGAL WAR. 
 
NATURALLY, LED BY LAPDOG MICHAEL GORDON, MOST WHITE HOUSE PRESS CORPS DROPPED TO ALL FOURS TO BEGIN LAPPING UP THE BULLY BOY'S LATEST LIES.
 
 
 
Starting with news of war resistance and staring with Ehren Watada.  Watada became the first officer to publicly refuse to deploy to Iraq in June.  Last week, he became the first officer to be court-martialed for refusing to deploy in the illegal war.  The court-martial ended in a mistrial.  Many rush to weigh in and while we disagree with the right, we can respect their passion.  It's the useless we have no respect for.  Meet Kati Irons.
 
Apparently upset that she can't bore everyone with her thoughts on Battlestar Galatica one more time, Irons hems and haws and throws some stones.  For instance, she doesn't care for Sean Penn's speech in Tacoma.  Now in a very small setting, she's quite happy to stay silent even while she is disturbed by a conversation  - dumb ass and a coward.   Congratulations, Kati!  And congratulations on being offensive to everyone:  "Under present circumstances, to have one child in the military may be considered a source of pride, but four seems like carelessness,"  Irons offers.  Insulting everyone doesn't mean you're "telling it like it is" -- it just means you're an idiot.  (Irons scractched down a few thoughts for Blogcritics -- we don't link to trash.)
 
Fortunately, not all are useless idiots.  As Paul Guggenheimer (Sioux City Journal) notes,
"If there is one story that strikes at the heart of the immorality and unethical nature of the war in Iraq, it is the story of U.S. Army 1st Lt. Ehren Watada'."  As Mike Davis (Great Britain's Socialist Worker) reminds: "He has refused to serve on the ground that the war is 'immoral and unlawful . . . and would compel complicity in war crimes'."  Jason Farbman and Sam Bernstein (Socialist Worker) report on the double jeopardy issue that Judge Toilet's (aka Lt. Col. John Head) decision to call a mistrial (over the objection of the defense) is only one issue that may prevent a retrial: "If the court-martial does resume March 19, Watada's lawyers will object and appeal, possibly pushing the trial back to May.  But in the meantime, Watada will have served out his remaining time in the Army.  His lawyers are now saying they think he could walk away a free man."
 
Dan Carptener (The Indianapolis Star) reports on Carolyn Ho ( Ehren Watada''s mother) whose "voice was cracking from overuse and a lingering cold as the soldier's mother recounted the story, having spent the past six months traveling the country on his behalf" who spoke of the change she'd seen since her son went public in June: "In the early days one individual wrote me that I was a terrible mother and he was going to send me a one-way ticket to France.  Since that time we've had an overwhelmingly positive response.  It's a telling commentary on how people feel about this war."
 
Talking about the war and the mistrial, David Mitchell spoke yesterday at the Fellowship of Reconciliation in Upper Nyack.  Akiko Matsuda's (The Journal News) reports: "Mitchell gave his own analysis, saying the judge manipulated the trial because as it proceeded, Watada's good standing as a soldier became apparent.  Mitchell also thought the judge was afraid of the impact on the other soldiers should Watada be acquitted.  Mitchell said that at one point in the trial, a female officer told the judge she was impressed by Watada's action because he stood by what he believed in."
 
Watada is a part of a movement of resistance with the military that includes others such as Agustin Aguayo (whose court-martial is currently set to begin on March 6th), Kyle Snyder, Darrell Anderson, Ivan Brobeck, Mark Wilkerson, Ricky Clousing, Aidan Delgado, Joshua Key, Camilo Meija, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Jeremy Hinzman, Corey Glass, Patrick Hart, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey and Kevin Benderman. In total, thirty-eight US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.

Information on war resistance within the military can be found at Center on Conscience & War, The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters.
 
Patrick Hart, noted above, is a war resister who went to Canadal.  The Buffalo News reports that "Hart was a dealt a setback when the Canadian Immigration and Refugee Board denied his claim of refugee status" and that his next step is to "appeal the decision to the Canadian Federal Court."  In July, Patrick, Jill and Rian Hart appeared before Canada's Immigration and Refugee Board to make their appeal.  Peter Koch (Art Voice) noted in July that "everyonw who has received a decision has been denied."  The denial was a denial to Patrick Hart and it was also a denial to Jill Hart and to their son Rian.  These are people who are attempting to start a life in a Canada.  The Harts, like Joshua and Brandi Key, have uprooted their families and moved to Canada not as a stop-over, but as a final destination.  During Vietnam, Canada was welcoming of war resisters.  Today, the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada makes laughable their claim to be the "largest independent administrative tribunal" as they show no independence and make the same 'finding' repeatedly, over and over with no indication of indepence, no indication of thought, but strong indications that they are afraid to take a stand.  Since none of the war resisters can be called a "security risk" or seen as having violated human or internatioinal rights, committed a serious crime or been involved in organized crime, the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada has made a loud, repeated joke of itself and done so while the world was watching.
 
 
Meanwhile, England is in violation of UN protocol, Robert Stansfield and Maggie Barry (The Daily Mirror) report, since they've been sending service members under the age of 18 to fight in Iraq and, while Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram can claim that was a mistake, it was also illegal.  Stansfield and Barry speak with one who was under 18, "Chris," and he explained why he decided to self-check out and joined over 1,000 British soldiers who have done just that since the start of the illegal war as well as sharing his opinions of the illegal war: "I think they should just take everyone out of Iraq.  If the Americans want to stay then just let them but they should take our troops out.  It's not worth being in there.  It's not worth getting killed for."
 
 
 
David Barsamian:  You're 1967 book Vietnam: The Logic of Withdrawal was reissued by South End Press.  I was reading some of the exchanges in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that you reproduce there.  And although there are no such hearings going on now, it almost replicates a lot of the media commentary about how we cannot just quit and run from Iraq, that our prestige would suffer, we would lose credibility.  What do these things mean?  What is prestige?  What is credibility?         
 
Howard Zinn:   That's an interesting point because those statements are made again and again, from war to war to war, that we must continue doing this because if we don't continue doing this, we will lose standing, lose prestige, that other countries in this, we will lose standing, lose prestige, that other countries in the world will lose respect for us.  I think what they really mean is that other countries will stop fearing us.  The truth is that the United States in general does not get the respect of other countries in the world, but it instills fear in other countries, fear that they will lose economic benefits given to them by the United States.  As a result, some of them go along.  But, of course, those words prestige and fear need to be examined to see what they mean because if you looked at them in moral terms, you would ask, What presitge adheres to a government that conducts an immoral war?  What respect does the United States get from the rest of the world when it engages in such a war?  What's interesting in this case, and I think this is really unprecedented in the case of Iraq, is that on the eve of the war the world as a whole rose up everywhere and protested agains the U.S. entrance into the war, making it claer that by going into the war the United States was losing the respect, losing whatever prestige it had in the world.
 
 


Don't get soaked. Take a quick peak at the forecast
with theYahoo! Search weather shortcut.