Friday, June 23, 2006

An officer says No to 'war crimes'

From Peek
Posted by Evan Derkacz at 11:41 AM on June 22, 2006
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/37996/

Today, as his Stryker Brigade leaves for the Air Force Base that will transport them to Iraq, Lt. Ehren Watada becomes the first commissioned officer to refuse deployment claiming that "[my]participation would make me party to war crimes."

When Watada, who had attempted to resign his commission at least twice, learned in May that his request was denied, he simply refused to deploy, saying:

"Although I have tried to resign out of protest, I am forced to participate in a war that is manifestly illegal. As the order to take part in an illegal act is ultimately unlawful as well, I must as an officer of honor and integrity refuse that order."


Upon learning of Watada's intentions, his commanding officer attempted to shut him up by launching an official investigation into his public opposition. Needless to say, it didn't work.

Conscientious Objector status, by the way, is only available to those who are strict pacifists -- rejecting all war, "legal" or not -- so flat-out refusal was the only means at his disposal.

In fact, far from being a pacfist, Watada's objections are specific to Iraq; as the Seattle P-I reported, Watada has said that "he would serve in Afghanistan."

Video of tuesday's press conference is HERE. Watada's mother, Carolyn Ho, who flew in from Hawaii, had this to say:

My son’s decision to refrain from deploying to Iraq comes through much soul searching. It is an act of patriotism. It is a statement to all Americans, to men and women in uniform, that they need not remain silent out of fear, that that they have the power to turn the tide of history: to stop the destruction of a country and the killing of untold numbers of innocent men, women, and children. It is a message that states unequivocally that blindly following orders is no longer an option. My son, Lt. Watada’s stance is clear. He will stay the course. I urge you to join him in this effort.


Standing with Watada is retired Col. Ann Wright, who resigned in 2003. She noted that: "The country of Iraq did nothing to the United States of America," and supported Watada's right to disobey "illegal orders."

***

UPDATE, from Thank You site: "At this time Lt. Watada has been restricted to base, possibly confined to quarters, and has been ordered to have no contact with any non-military personnel, with the exception of his civilian lawyer."

More info HERE.

Drug Prices Already Rising Under New Medicare Plan

by Jessica Azulay, NewStandard
http://newstandardnews.net/content/index.cfm/items/3320

June 22 – Now that millions of seniors are locked into Medicare's new private prescription drug plans, an analysis released this week found that prices for medication sold through the plans rose in just the first five months.

Families USA, a liberal healthcare-reform group critical of the Medicare Part D program, evaluated prices charged by the private companies administering the program for the 20 drugs most-often prescribed to seniors. Comparing prices reported by the companies in November, when seniors began enrolling in the program, to prices the next April, researchers found that nearly all companies raised rates for the majority of the medications studied.

"At the same time that the Bush administration and congressional leaders are touting the effectiveness of the Medicare drug plans, those plans are quietly raising the prices that they charge," said Ron Pollack, executive director of Families USA, in a press statement announcing the study. "As a result, seniors will pay more and more – as will America's taxpayers."

Peter Ashkenaz, a spokesperson for Medicare, told reporters that many seniors were insulated from the cost increases because they enrolled in plans with flat co-pays.

Among the key findings: all of the plans raised prices for the cholesterol-lowering drug Zocor, nearly 99 percent upped costs for the osteoporosis medication Fosamax, and more than 97 percent increased charges for Lipitor, another cholesterol-lowering drug.

More than nine out of ten companies raised prices on Actonel for osteoporosis, Toprol XL for high blood pressure, Xalatan for glaucoma, Clebrex for pain, Nexium for gastrointestinal problems, Norvasc for heart problems, and Aricept for Alzheimer's symptoms.

At least half the drugs studied went up in price by 3.7 percent or more, and of the 2,202 Medicare-plan prices analyzed, more than 88 percent rose, while only 7.6 percent fell.

While the companies involved in the Medicare program are free to change their prices at any time, seniors and people with disabilities enrolled in the plan are not able to switch between companies to get better rates.

Since Congress explicitly forbade Medicare from negotiating with pharmaceutical companies for lower prices, Families USA also compared drug prices under Medicare to those under the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health plan, which is allowed to bargain with drugmakers for lower prices.

Zocor cost over $1,200 per year under the Medicare plan with the best rates for that drug, while the VA paid just over $127 for the same amount. Fosamax, under the cheapest Medicare price, went for nearly $730, while the VA got the medication for just under $463.

The study found that all of the 20 most frequently prescribed drugs for seniors cost more under the lowest Medicare price than the VA's price.

A separate report put out by the senior advocate AARP this week found that prices for the most widely used 193 brand-name medications by seniors rose about 6.2 percent over the last year, almost twice the rate of general inflation.

The Families USA study also compared the Medicare Part D price increases to wholesale price changes by pharmaceutical companies and found that in almost all cases, they were parallel.

"This means," said Pollack, "that Part D plans are doing essentially nothing to contain the fast-rising prices by the drug industry."

The group did not report whether the prices paid by the VA went up during the same period.
© 2006 The NewStandard.

Wednesday, June 21, 2006

The Minimum Wage Goes Down...

From Katrina vanden Heuvel's The Notion:

The GOP just shafted the working people of America. By rejecting an attempt to raise the minimum wage, the Republican-controlled Senate showed that it is far more interested in lining the pockets of its campaign contributors than – as Paul Krugman wrote in a New York Times op-ed on Monday – arriving at a "new New Deal" and working to "rebuild our middle class." The 52-46 vote was eight short of the 60 needed for approval. (The measure drew the support of eight Republicans --four of these are up for reelection in the fall.)

Sen. Edward Kennedy's amendment would have raised the wage from the current $5.15 an hour to $7.25 – the first raise in a decade. "The minimum wage," as economist Gwendolyn Mink, makes clear, is supposed to guarantee an income floor to keep full-time wage-earners out of poverty. But today, the federal minimum wage guarantees abject poverty for workers... nearly $6,000 per year below the federal poverty line for a family of three."

But the vast majority of Republican Senators, several of them millionaires several times over, don't care about poverty or the well-being of their working class constituents, What they really care about is that they're sitting pretty, having voted themselves another raise --to $168,500 --on January 1.

Even the not-exactly-populist Wall Street Journal points out, "While the minimum wage has remained frozen, lawmakers' salaries have risen with annual cost-of-living increases keyed to what is given federal employees. And last week's vote in the House Appropriations Committee followed a floor vote days before in which the House cleared the way for members to get another increase valued at thousands of dollars annually." So, while Congress will soon make close to $170,000 a year, hardworking full-time minimum wage workers make just $10,700 annually.

One group that did important work to end this inequity is the Let Justice Roll coalition--a fast-growing program of more than 70 faith and community groups. The coalition labored mightily to target senators who were critical to passing this legislation and preventing it from being weakened by Republican's bogus charges of "class warfare." (For the true definition of class warfare, check out my Dictionary of Republicanisms. "Class warfare, n.: any attempt to raise the minimum wage").

For millions of families, this callous vote means another day of choosing between rent and health care, putting food in the refrigerator or gas in the car. Meanwhile, a Big Oil CEO makes $37,000 an hour. Want to talk about class warfare?

Permalink Here...

Reclaim the Issues - "Occupation, Not War"

by Thom Hartmann

Every time the media - or a Democrat - uses the phrase "War in Iraq" they are promoting one of Karl Rove's most potent Republican Party frames.

There is no longer a war against Iraq.

It ended in May of 2003, when George W. Bush stood below a "Mission Accomplished" sign aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln and correctly declared that we had "victoriously" defeated the Iraqi army and overthrown their government.

Our military machine is tremendously good at fighting wars - blowing up infrastructure, killing opposing armies, and toppling governments. We did that successfully in Iraq, in a matter of a few weeks. We destroyed their army, wiped out their air defenses, devastated their Republican Guard, seized their capitol, arrested their leaders, and took control of their government. We won the war. It's over.

What we have now is an occupation of Iraq.

The occupation began when the war ended, and continues to this day. According to our own Pentagon estimates, at least ninety five percent of those attacking our soldiers are Iraqi civilians who view themselves as anti-occupation fighters. And last week both the Defense Minister and the Vice President of Iraq asked us for a specific date on which the occupation would end.

The distinction between "war" and "occupation" is politically critical for 2006 because wars can be won or lost, but occupations most honorably end by redeployments.

We won World War II and it carried Roosevelt to great political heights. We lost the Vietnam War and it politically destroyed Lyndon B. Johnson, Richard Nixon, and Jerry Ford. And as we fought to a draw in Korea, it so wounded Harry S. Truman politically that he didn't have a strong enough base of support to run for re-election against Dwight D. Eisenhower.

American's don't like to lose or draw at a war. Even people who oppose wars find it uncomfortable, at some level, to lose, and Republican strategists are using this psychological reality for political gain. When wars are won - even when they're totally illegal and undeclared wars, like Reagan's adventure in Grenada - it tends to create a national good feeling.

On the other hand, when arguably just wars, or at least legally defensible "police action" wars, like Korea, are not won, they wound the national psyche. And losing a war - like the German loss of WWI - can be so devastating psychologically to a citizenry that it sets up a nation for strongman dictatorship to "restore the national honor."

On the other hand, an "occupation" is something that logically should one day end, and, if it's an expensive occupation in lives or money, will find popular support to end as soon as possible.

The various colonial powers of Europe ended their occupations of most of Africa, for example, and there was no national emotional pain associated with it. Churchill's withdrawal from Uganda increased his popularity with Brits.

While Americans hate to lose wars, we're generally pleased to wrap up occupations. We had no problem with ending our occupation of The Philippines, numerous South Pacific islands, and the redeployment of our troops stationed in nations conquered in World War II (Japan and Germany) from broad-based "occupation" to locally based "assistance." (Although we still have troops in Japan and Germany, neither country has been functionally "occupied" by us since the late 1940s and the "legal" occupation of both ended shortly thereafter. It should also be remembered that not a single American life was lost because of hostile fire in either brief post-war occupation.)

If Democrats can succeed over the next three months in making it clear to average Americans that the "War In Iraq" ended in 2003, and that we're now engaged in an "Occupation Of Iraq," then Democratic suggestions to end or greatly diminish the occupation will take on a resonance and cogency that will both help them in an election year, and help to bring our soldiers to safety and Iraq to stability.

On the other hand, if Democrats are perceived as pushing for America to "lose the war in Iraq," they will be vilified and damned by Republicans and many swing voters, and could thus lose big in 2006.

The "War" is over. The Occupation has now lasted 3 years and one month - far longer than necessary.

Here's a "for example" scenario - fictitious at this moment - of how Democrats should play it out:

[Tim Russert]: So, Senator Reid, what do you think of this most recent news from the War In Iraq?

[Senator Reid]: The war ended in May of 2003, Tim. Our military did their usual brilliant job, and we defeated Saddam's army. The Occupation Of Iraq, however, isn't going so well, in large part because the Bush Administration has totally botched the job, leading to the death of thousands of our soldiers, and dragging our nation into disrepute around the world. I'd like to see us greatly scale down the current Occupation of Iraq, redeploy our Occupation Forces to nearby nations in case we're needed by the new Iraqi government, and get our brave young men and women out of harm's way. Occupations have a nasty way of fomenting civil wars, you know, and we don't want this one to go any further than it has.

[Tim Russert]: But isn't the War In Iraq part of the Global War On Terror?

[Senator Reid]: Our Occupation Of Iraq is encouraging more Muslims around the world to eye us suspiciously. Some may even be inspired by our Occupation of this Islamic nation to take up arms or unconventional weapons against us, perhaps even here at home, just as Osama Bin Laden said he hit us on 9/11 because we were occupying part of his homeland, Saudi Arabia, at the Prince Sultan Air Force Base, where Bush Senior first put troops in 1991 to project force into Kuwait and enforce the Iraqi no-fly zone. The Bush policy of an unending Occupation Of Iraq is increasing the danger that people will use the tactic of terror against us and our allies, and, just like George W. Bush wisely redeployed our troops from Saudi Arabia, we should begin right now to redeploy our troops who are occupying Iraq.

[Tim Russert]: But the War...

[Senator Reid]: Tim, Tim, Tim! The war is over! George W. Bush declared victory himself, in May of 2003, when our brave soldiers seized control of Iraq. That's the definition of the end of a war, as anybody who's ever served in the military can tell you. Unfortunately, our Occupation Of Iraq since the end of the war, using a small military force and a lot of Halliburton, hasn't worked. We should take Halliburton's billions and give them to the Iraqis so they can rebuild their own nation, the way we helped Europeans rebuild after World War Two. And go from being an occupying power to being an ally of Iraq and the Iraqi people, like we did with Japan and Germany.

[Tim Russert (bewildered)]: I can't call it a war anymore? We have to change our NBC "War In Iraq" banners and graphics?

[Senator Reid (patting Russert's hand)]: Yes, Tim. The war is over. It's now an occupation, and has been for three years. And like all occupations, it's best to wrap it up so Iraq can get on with their business. I'm sure your graphics people can come up with some new logos that say "Occupation Of Iraq." It'll be a nice project for them, maybe even earn them some much-needed overtime pay. The "War In Iraq" graphics are getting a bit stale, don't you think? After all, soon we'll be able to say that we fought World War II in less time than we've been in Iraq. Wars are usually short, but occupations - particularly when they're done stupidly - can be hellish.

[Tim Russert (brightening)]: Ah, so! Now I get it! I even wrote about wars and occupations in my book about my dad. Thanks for coming on the program today and clarifying this for us.

If the Democrats don't shift the discussion from "war" to "occupation," the Republicans will succeed in painting them as being "in favor of losing a war," which will destroy their electoral possibilities.

Instead, every time a Republican or a member of the press uses the Rove slogan "War in Iraq," Democrats need to correct them by saying, "You mean the Occupation of Iraq..."

Thom Hartmann is a Project Censored Award-winning best-selling author, and host of a nationally syndicated daily progressive talk show carried on the Air America Radio network and Sirius. www.thomhartmann.com

Sunday, June 18, 2006

NEW MEDICAL STUDY LENDS SUPPORT TO THEORY THAT WE SHOULDN'T BE SO CLEAN

AP - Gritty rats and mice living in sewers and farms seem to have healthier immune systems than their squeaky clean cousins that frolic in cushy antiseptic labs, two studies indicate. The lesson for humans: Clean living may make us sick. The studies give more weight to a 17-year-old theory that the sanitized Western world may be partly to blame for soaring rates of human allergy and asthma cases and some autoimmune diseases, such as Type I diabetes and rheumatoid arthritis. The theory, called the hygiene hypothesis, figures that people's immune systems aren't being challenged by disease and dirt early in life, so the body's natural defenses overreact to small irritants such as pollen.


The new studies, one of which was published Friday in the peer reviewed Scandinavian Journal of Immunology, found significant differences in the immune systems between euthanized wild and lab rodents. When the immune cells in the wild rats are stimulated by researchers, "they just don't do anything they sit there; if you give them same stimulus to the lab rats, they go crazy," said study co-author Dr. William Parker, a Duke University professor of experimental surgery. He compared lab rodents to more than 50 wild rats and mice captured and killed in cities and farms.

USA Today Article

NEWS MAGAZINES TREATS LATINOS LARGELY AS A PROBLEM

RICHARD PRINCE, JOURNAL-ISMS - An examination of the portrayal of Latinos in the nation's leading newsmagazines in 2005 shows the group to be depicted chiefly in the context of immigration and principally as problems. The study, "U.S. News Magazine Coverage of Latinos," was conducted for the National Association of Hispanic Journalists by the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Arizona State University and released at the NAHJ convention in Fort Lauderdale,
Fla. . .

"As is often the case regarding minority groups, the representations seem to fall at the end of two extremes," the report said. "Latinos were either positioned as a problem/threat, or as the successful exception/role model of their community, even the success of Latinos in politics was often represented with ambivalence and danger.

"And yet, the majority of Latinos do not fall into either camp. Indeed, the majority of the coverage did not represent Latinos as average Americans leading mainstream lives. It also suggests that Latinos are only newsworthy when they are doing something that marks them as unique. As long as these news practices persist, Latinos cannot be incorporated as full citizens in U.S. society."

The report found that of 1,547 magazine stories published in Time, Newsweek and U.S. News & World Report, only 18 stories, or 1.2 percent, were about Latinos. Twelve of the 18 focused on immigration.

"In these immigration stories, Latino immigrants were portrayed, for the most part as a negative and disruptive force on U.S. society," it said.

The study noted a headline in Newsweek after the election of Antonio Villaraigosa as mayor of Los Angeles: "A Latin Power surge. A New Mayor in L.A. A Decisive Showing in 2004. Latinos are Making their Mark on Politics as Never Before. Get Used to It." . . .

http://www.maynardije.org/columns/dickprince/060614_prince/

http://www.nahj.org/resources/magazine/magazinereport.pdf

RUMSFELD ORDERS MEDIA OUT OF GITM0

GREG MITCHELL AND JOE STRUPP, EDITOR & PUBLISHER - In the aftermath of the three suicides at the notorious Guantanamo prison facility in Cuba last Saturday, reporters with the Los Angeles Times and the Miami Herald were ordered by the office of secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to leave the island today.

A third reporter and a photographer with the Charlotte Observer were given the option of staying until Saturday but, E&P has learned, were told that their access to the prison camp was now denied. An E&P "Pressing Issues" column on Tuesday covered an eye-opening dispatch by the Observer's Michael Gordon carried widely in other papers.

He had listened in, with permission, as the camp commander gave frank instructions to staff on how to respond to the suicides. A Pentagon spokesman, J.D. Gordon, confirmed the order to leave the island this morning, but told E&P it was unrelated to the stories produced by the journalists, while admitting that Gordon's piece had caused "controversy." He asserted that the move was related to other media outlets threatening to sue if they were not allowed in. He did not say why, instead of expelling the reporters already there, the Pentagon did not simply let the others in, beyond citing new security concerns. . . A curt e-mail to reporters Carol Rosenberg of the Herald and Carol Williams of the L.A. Times mentioned a directive from the office of Rumsfeld, and stated: "Media currently on the island will depart on Wednesday, 14 June 2006 at 10:00 a.m. Please be prepared to depart the CBQ [quarters] at 8:00 a.m."

Article here...


MICHAEL GORDON'S REPORT

WARNING: FOREIGN VISITORS NO LONGER SAFE IN U.S.

"Lawyers in the suit. . . said parts of the ruling could potentially be used . . . to detain any non-citizen in the United States for any eason."


NINA BERNSTEIN, NY TIMES - A federal judge in Brooklyn ruled yesterday that the government has wide latitude under immigration law to detain non-citizens on the basis of religion, race or national origin, and to hold them indefinitely without explanation. The ruling came in a class-action lawsuit by Muslim immigrants detained after 9/11. . . This is the first time a federal judge has addressed the issue of discrimination in the treatment of hundreds of Muslim immigrants who were swept up in the weeks after the 2001 terror attacks and held for months before they were cleared of links to terrorism and deported. The roundups drew intense criticism, not only from immigrant rights advocates, but also from the inspector general of the Justice Department, who issued reports saying that the government had made little or no effort to distinguish between genuine suspects and Muslim immigrants with minor visa violations. Lawyers in the suit, who vowed to appeal yesterday's decision, said parts of the ruling could potentially be used far more broadly, to detain any non-citizen in the United States for any reason.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/15/nyregion/15detain.html

Four Months Into Aid Cutoff, Gazans Barely Scrape By

June 18, 2006
By STEVEN ERLANGER
NYT Article Here (free registration necessary)...

JABALIYA CAMP, Gaza Strip, June 16 — In the fourth month without salaries from the Hamas-led Palestinian Authority, the Abu Rizek family scours greenhouses after the harvest, looking for potatoes left in the ground.

Mariam al-Wahedi no longer receives her $21 a month from social services and is living off the $200 she got last month by selling her last piece of jewelry, a bracelet given to her 30 years ago. Khalid Muhammad, a policeman, moonlights in a friend's shop, selling used cellphone batteries for $2.25, and says he now yells at his wife and sometimes hits his children. Umm Jihad, with six children, begs in the market.

Awni Shibrawi, a jeweler, admits that he is almost too bad-tempered to go to work in his shop and sit all day doing nothing. Khadida Farajabah, a vegetable seller, says she has granted nearly $2,000 in credit, digging out the list she keeps inside her blouse, and cannot afford to give any more. Majid Nofad, a butcher, says business is down 60 percent and he has stopped giving credit after the total mounted to nearly $3,000.

More middle-aged men can be seen on the piers of Gaza, fishing with boys, to try to catch some protein for dinner. Couples are postponing marriage. Muhammad Kahloot, a colonel in the Palestinian police, is trying to decide whether he can afford the $700 his son, Khaled, needs to finish his last semester at the university, or whether to use the money for food and utilities.

When Colonel Kahloot uses his cellphone, he hangs up quickly, so his number appears as a "missed call" and he is not charged, leaving it up to a friend to phone him back.

Mr. Muhammad, 31, the moonlighting policeman, has four children. "When my wife goes to the grocery, the owner says, 'Where's the money?' And she says, 'Maybe today, maybe tomorrow,' and this way we pass the time." Mr. Muhammad said the family eats beans and local greens, which are about 20 cents a pound. "Forget about meat," he said, laughing. "We don't know the chicken anymore. We hear in the news about the fish."

The ordinary Palestinians of Gaza are coping as best they can in a world without salaries and very little money circulating, after the Western cutoff of aid to the Palestinian Authority, which Hamas took over in March. The Authority employs almost 40 percent of those with regular jobs in Gaza.

There is not a humanitarian crisis here yet, but one is building. No one knows anyone who is starving, but nearly everyone dependent on government salaries is eating less and less well, with a sharp reduction of chicken, meat and vegetables in a diet that is now based on the cheapest ingredients — beans, potatoes, greens and bread.

The World Food Program, with 160,000 nonrefugee beneficiaries out of Gaza's population of 1.4 million, sends its workers on house visits. They say people are cutting down on the number of meals a day, and few are eating meat, eggs or yogurt, said Kirstie Campbell, a spokesman, who estimates that half the population of Gaza is not getting enough to eat.

More Here...

Thursday, June 15, 2006

NEWS FROM THE COLONIES

UN REPORT ACCUSES AFGHAN OFFICIALS OF WAR CRIMES

DECLAN WALSH, GUARDIAN - A controversial UN report that has been shelved for 18 months names and shames leading Afghan politicians and officials accused of orchestrating massacres, torture, mass rape and other war crimes. The 220-page report by the UN high commissioner for human rights, which the Guardian has obtained, details atrocities committed by communist, mujahideen, Soviet and Taliban fighters over 23 years of conflict. Originally scheduled for release in January 2005, the report's publication has been delayed repeatedly due to sensitivities over identifying former warlords still in positions of power. . . Debate over the role of former warlords has grown more heated since anti-foreigner riots rocked Kabul two weeks ago, casting clouds over the $12bn western-funded reconstruction effort. European diplomats are angered that days after the riots President Hamid Karzai appointed 13 former commanders with links to drugs smuggling, organized crime and illegal militias to senior positions in the police force. The names were inserted at the last minute into a list of 86 police chiefs that had been selected by US, German and Afghan officers as part of a drive to professionalize the corrupt force. . .

A European official said the 13 appointments had strained Mr Karzai's relationship with foreign donors and further eroded his credibility with ordinary Afghans. "This is not acceptable to us. If we let people who have committed human rights abuses and economic crimes slip through, Afghans are going to start asking what we are doing here," he said.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article13582.htm

NEWS FROM THE COLONIES

UN REPORT ACCUSES AFGHAN OFFICIALS OF WAR CRIMES

DECLAN WALSH, GUARDIAN - A controversial UN report that has been shelved for 18 months names and shames leading Afghan politicians and officials accused of orchestrating massacres, torture, mass rape and other war crimes. The 220-page report by the UN high commissioner for human rights, which the Guardian has obtained, details atrocities committed by communist, mujahideen, Soviet and Taliban fighters over 23 years of conflict. Originally scheduled for release in January 2005, the report's publication has been delayed repeatedly due to sensitivities over identifying former warlords still in positions of power. . . Debate over the role of former warlords has grown more heated since anti-foreigner riots rocked Kabul two weeks ago, casting clouds over the $12bn western-funded reconstruction effort. European diplomats are angered that days after the riots President Hamid Karzai appointed 13 former commanders with links to drugs smuggling, organized crime and illegal militias to senior positions in the police force. The names were inserted at the last minute into a list of 86 police chiefs that had been selected by US, German and Afghan officers as part of a drive to professionalize the corrupt force. . .

A European official said the 13 appointments had strained Mr Karzai's relationship with foreign donors and further eroded his credibility with ordinary Afghans. "This is not acceptable to us. If we let people who have committed human rights abuses and economic crimes slip through, Afghans are going to start asking what we are doing here," he said.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article13582.htm

RHODE ISLAND COPS TO 4TH AMENDMENT: FERGETABOUTIT

BOSTON GLOBE - The Rhode Island General Assembly is considering legislation that could give police access to Internet and phone records and credit card and bank information without a warrant or other court review, civil libertarians said. The state police said the legislation would help track down the increasing instances of Internet-based crime, including fraud and child exploitation. They say they are only seeking expanded access to Internet records, not phone or banking records.

But lawyers familiar with this area of law say the bills as crafted would give Rhode island police the right to obtain the same information that some of the nation's major communication companies have been accused of giving to the National Security Agency illegally. . . State police say going before a judge to get a warrant can be time-consuming and cumbersome. Cpl. John Killian, the state police's computer crime specialist, said it can take three to four hours of work to obtain a warrant. "There's a balance between privacy and police authority," Killian said.

BG Article Here...

BUSH CAN'T EVEN DEFEND ILLEGAL SPYING IN COURT

GREGG KRUPA, DETROIT NEWS - The Bush Administration argued in U.S. District Court on Monday that it cannot defend itself against accusations that a domestic spying program is illegal and unconstitutional because details of the program would be revealed, rendering it ineffective and jeopardizing national security. "The president has decided that the program is necessary to protect and defend the United States," Anthony Coppolino, a lawyer for the Department of Justice said in the nation's first court hearing on the program. "Without evidence that goes to the heart of the matter, the president's claims cannot be addressed.". . .

A lawyer for the plaintiffs argued that the Bush Administration's position about state secrets is of little relevance."The issue in this case is simply whether the National Security Administration is violating the law and the Constitution in eavesdropping on the telephone calls of Americans without a warrant," said Ann Beeson, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/3963728.html

Donald Hall, Poet Laureate

By VERLYN KLINKENBORG

The question, What is poetry for? has a corollary: What is everything that is not poetry for? That's what I found myself wondering as I reread Donald Hall's poem "The One Day" after hearing the good news that he will be the next poet laureate of the United States. The question has a circular, elliptical answer. In the life of a poet, what is not poetry is for the making of poems. It is the raw stuff, like "a bad patch of middle-life," as Mr. Hall puts it in his note on "The One Day." It took 17 years to make that 60-page poem, and 17 years for a poem of that magnitude is a decent rate of exchange.

In this country there is no job description for the poet laureate. And yet the title, which carries a stipend and a travel grant, is not entirely honorific. It's assumed that the laureate will try to advance the cause of poetry — especially the public awareness of poetry — in a manner somehow separate from the writing of poems. To speak on behalf of poetry sounds like a natural task for a poet, and for some poets it certainly is. I don't know whether Donald Hall will turn out to be that kind of laureate, and, in a way, I hope he doesn't. So much of his poetry has emerged from the rigor of his privacy — from what appears in his verse to be a deep, unsettling sense of what's possible in one's life. There's always the temptation for the laureate to find some anodyne ground to stand on. But these are not anodyne times.

To many readers, Donald Hall has lived what appears to be an eminently poetical life — in an ancient farmhouse in New Hampshire. The setting is pastoral, and yet there is a ferocity in Mr. Hall's voice that undoes the pastoral, which is always waiting to be undone. As Mr. Hall once wrote in an essay about the withering of the National Endowment for the Arts, "the mathematics of poetry's formal resolution does not preclude moral thought, or satisfaction in honest naming, or the consolation of shared feeling." I'm looking forward to the mathematics and the morality of this new laureate. After all, it doesn't matter where you watch life from if your gaze takes in the whole world.

NYT Editorial...

A Leap of Faith, Off a Cliff

On Monday, the Bush administration told a judge in Detroit that the president's warrantless domestic spying is legal and constitutional, but refused to say why. The judge should just take his word for it, the lawyer said, because merely talking about it would endanger America. Today, Senator Arlen Specter wants his Judiciary Committee to take an even more outlandish leap of faith for an administration that has shown it does not deserve it.

Mr. Specter wants the committee to approve a bill he drafted that tinkers dangerously with the rules on wiretapping, even though the president has said the law doesn't apply to him anyway, and even though Mr. Specter and most of the panel are just as much in the dark as that judge in Detroit. The bill could well diminish the power of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, known as FISA, which was passed in 1978 to prevent just the sort of abuse that Mr. Bush's program represents.

The committee is considering four bills. Only one even remotely makes sense now: it would give legal standing to groups that want to challenge the spying in court. The rest vary from highly premature (Senator Dianne Feinstein's proposed changes to FISA) to the stamp of approval for Mr. Bush's claims of unlimited power that Senator Mike DeWine drafted.

Mr. Specter's bill is not that bad, but it is fatally flawed and should not go to the Senate floor. He is trying to change the system for judicial approval of government wiretaps in a way that suggests Congress is facing a technical problem with a legislative solution, when in fact it is a constitutional showdown.

There is also a practical problem: a bill on the floor of this Senate becomes the property of the Republican leadership, which will rewrite it to the specifications of Vice President Dick Cheney, the man in charge of this particular show of imperial power. Mr. Specter, of all people, should have no doubt of that, having been forced to watch in embarrassment last week as Mr. Cheney seized control of the committee's deliberations on the spying issue.

Mr. Specter says his bill would impose judicial review on domestic spying by giving the special court created by FISA power to rule on the constitutionality of the one program that Mr. Bush has acknowledged. But the review would be optional. Mr. Specter's bill would eliminate the vital principle that FISA's rules are the only legal way to eavesdrop on Americans' telephone calls and e-mail. It would give the president power to conduct surveillance under FISA "or under the constitutional authority of the executive." That merely reinforces Mr. Bush's claim that he is the sole judge of what powers he has, and how he exercises them.

Mr. Specter's lawyers have arguments for many of these criticisms, and say the bill is being improved. But the main problem with the bill, like most of the others, is that it exists at all. This is not a time to offer the administration a chance to steamroll Congress into endorsing its decision to ignore the 1978 intelligence act and shred constitutional principles on warrants and on the separation of powers. This is a time for Congress to finally hold Mr. Bush accountable for his extralegal behavior and stop it.

NYT Editorial...

US 'biggest global peace threat'

People in European and Muslim countries see US policy in Iraq as a bigger threat to world peace than Iran's nuclear programme, a survey has shown.

The survey by the Pew Research Group also found support for US President George W Bush and his "war on terror" had dropped dramatically worldwide.

Goodwill created by US aid for nations hit by the 2004 tsunami had also faded since last year, the survey found.

The survey questioned 17,000 people in 15 countries, including the US.

The latest in a series of annual polls by the Pew Global Attitudes Project interviewed respondents between 31 March and 14 May 2006.

Its release coincides with a surprise visit by President George W Bush to Baghdad in an effort to shore up support for US policy in the region.

'Fading goodwill'

The latest survey shows the worldwide reputation of the US continues to suffer over its prosecution of the "war on terror".

Sharp declines in the public perception of the US were particularly apparent in India, Spain and Turkey.

Goodwill towards the US had fallen from 71% to 56% in India, from 41% to 23% in Spain and from 23% to 12% in Turkey.

A majority of people in 10 of the 14 countries outside the US surveyed said the war in Iraq had made the world a more dangerous place.

Some 60% of people in the UK, which is the US biggest ally, felt the Iraq war had made the world less secure, while 30% said it had made the world safer.

According to the survey:

* Worldwide support for the "war on terror" has remained the same or declined
* European confidence in Mr Bush has sunk even lower than it was last year
* A majority of people in most countries feel the US will not achieve its goals in the "war on terror"

The survey also found little remaining evidence of the goodwill the US had earned over its aid for victims of the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami.

In Indonesia, a major recipient of US tsunami aid, favourable opinions of the US had fallen from 38% in 2005 to 30% this year.

"Last year we saw some good news in countries like Russia and India," Andrew Kohut, director of the Pew Research Centre, told the Associated Press news agency.

"That good news being wiped away is a measure of how difficult a problem this is for the United States."

Muslim differences

According to the survey, people in the US and Europe have grown increasingly concerned in the last year over Iran's nuclear programme.

The US has accused Iran of seeking to build a nuclear bomb - but Iran says its nuclear programme has a purely civilian objective.

Almost half of the Americans surveyed, 46%, viewed the current government in Iran as a "great danger" to stability in the Middle East and to world peace - a figure that has risen from 26% in 2003.

In Germany, Spain, France and the UK, the percentage of people who regard Iran as a great danger is roughly three times greater than it was three years ago.

However, the poll showed public opinion in predominantly Muslim countries was far less troubled by Tehran's nuclear programme.

Muslim people also appeared less concerned than Europeans and Americans by the victory of the Hamas militant group in Palestinian elections earlier this year.

The survey found concern over bird flu was largely confined to Asia, while two-thirds of people surveyed in each country said they were worried by global warming.

Concern over the greenhouse effect was highest in India and Japan and lowest in the US and China.

The survey interviewed people in China, Egypt, France, Germany, Great Britain, India, Indonesia, Japan, Jordan, Nigeria, Pakistan, Russia, Spain, Turkey and the US.

Its margin of error was two to six percentage points.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/5077984.stm

Tuesday, June 13, 2006


Click Pic For Larger Image

CANADA'S NEW IMMIGRATION PROBLEM (Satire)

MANITOBA HERALD, CANADA - The flood of American liberals sneaking across the border into Canada has intensified in the past week, sparking calls for increased patrols to stop the illegal immigration. The actions of President Bush are prompting the exodus among left-leaning citizens who fear they'll soon be required to hunt, pray, and agree with Bill O'Reilly.

Canadian border farmers say it's not uncommon to see dozens of sociology professors, animal-rights activists and Unitarians crossing their fields at night. "I went out to milk the cows the other day, and there was a Hollywood producer huddled in the barn," said Manitoba farmer Red Greenfield, whose acreage borders North Dakota. The producer was cold, exhausted and hungry. "He asked me if I could spare a latte and some free-range chicken. When I said I didn't have any, he left. Didn't even get a chance to show him my screenplay."

Canadian citizens have complained that the illegal immigrants are creating an organic-broccoli shortage and renting all the good Susan Sarandon movies. "I feel sorry for American liberals, but the Canadian economy just can't support them," an Ottawa resident said.

WHY THE MEDIA ISN'T REPORTING THE BILDERBERG STORY

The Bilderberg Conference is an ideal example of how the American elite turns its back on facts even as it denigrates those who wonder what the hell is going on.

As of Saturday night, no major American media had reported the meeting of 130 of the world's most powerful and wealthiest individuals, a meeting so secret that one reporter was arrested for merely flying into the host city and the Ottawa police had to show credentials to private security guards to be permitted on the premises. The invited also include some nasty individuals such as Richard Perle and Ahmad Chalabi. You don't invite such types to a secret meeting if you plan to do anything worthwhile. There are no reports of any person of known moral standing being invited.

How does one explain the utter lack of journalistic curiosity about all this? One could come up with a conspiratorial explanation but the answer is probably even more troubling: no conspiracy was needed at all. Like a well trained child, the media doesn't even want to know what is going on.

Well, that isn't completely true since past participants have included the likes of Don Graham of the Washington Post and Paul Gigot of the Wall Street Journal.

Many city councils in America operate under some sort of freedom of information and/or sunshine law. Why is it so important that we know what our town council is talking about behind our backs and so irrelevant what 130 of the most powerful individuals in the world are talking about secretly? Sorry, the American media is not cleared to give you an answer.

Monday, June 12, 2006

Rove 'truth' to come 'out'

By Evan Derkacz
Posted on June 12, 2006
http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/evan/37460/

Several weeks back, Truthout investigative reporter Jason Leopold reported that a source informed him of an imminent Rove indictment in the Valerie Plame investigation.

As you know, that indictment never occurred. A flurry of "ohmygod are there hacks in the progressive media?" questions ensued and Leopold's reputation (along with Truthout's) hung in the balance.

Neither TO nor Leopold budged and now reveal that they have a case number for the indictment. Hmm. Via Dave Johnson at Seeing the Forest:

As of Friday afternoon that indictment, returned by the grand jury the week of May 10th, remains under seal - more than a month after it was handed up by the grand jury.

The case number is "06 cr 128." On the federal court's electronic database, "06 cr 128" is listed along with a succinct summary: "No further information is available."

Johnson writes: "He is not backing off. Truthout isn't either. Maybe there is something to this." (SeeingTheForest)

Evan Derkacz is a New York-based writer and contributor to AlterNet.
© 2006 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/evan/37460/

Thursday, June 08, 2006

WE DID IT! THE FMA HAS BEEN DEFEATED!

In the battle for fairness, the Federal Marriage Amendment suffered a resounding defeat this morning in the U.S. Senate.

Not only did not a single Senator from the compromised left buckle to pressure and advertising campaigns from right-wing groups to switch their vote, but we gained two Senators, Senators Gregg (R-NH) and Specter (R-PA), who voted the other way in 2004.

President Bush and the Republican leadership gambled their dwindling political capital on a discriminatory amendment and came up empty.

To read the coverage in the press, visit http://www.hrc.org/voteno/headlines.htm.

Sunday, June 04, 2006

Tomdispatch Interview: Ehrenreich, The Prey and the Predators

A Guided Tour of Class in America
A Tomdispatch Interview with Barbara Ehrenreich

You turn into a middle-class, suburban housing project on the periphery of Charlottesville, Virginia, and at a row of attached homes, you pull up in front of the one with the yellow "for sale" sign on the tiny patch of grass. Ushered inside, you take in an interior of paint cans, a mop and pail, and cleaning liquids. On the small porch that overlooks a communal backyard, workmen are painting the weathered wood railings a nice, clean white. Later, when they're gone, we step out for a minute, on a balmy late spring afternoon, and she says, "You know what I need out here? Flowers!" And it's true, the nearest neighbor's small porch is a riot of red, orange, and purple blooms, while hanging from her railing are three plant holders with only dirt and the scraps of dead vegetation in them.

Not surprising really. Barbara Ehrenreich, our foremost journalist of, and dissector of class is regularly not here. Practically a household name since she entered the low-wage working class disguised as herself and, in her already classic account, Nickel and Dimed, reported back on just how difficult it is for so many hard-working Americans to get by. Then, a few years later, she repeated the process with the middle class, only to find herself not in the workforce but among the desperately unemployed who had fallen out of an ever meaner corporate world. Her most recent book, Bait and Switch, The (Futile) Pursuit of the American Dream, was the result. Now, she spends much time traveling the country talking to audiences about her -- and their -- experiences. She has become a blogger, is involved in launching a new group to help organize the middle-class unemployed, and in her spare time she's even finished a new book.

Now, after four years in Virginia (at least some of the time), she's about to head north. She gestures at the bookshelves. "There are a lot fewer books this week than last. I'm giving them to the Virginia Organizing Project." And it's true, the place is clearly being stripped down for sale. But you have the feeling, looking around, that it was a no-frills life to begin with, as Ehrenreich herself, in her short hair, jeans, T-shirt, and sneakers, presents a distinctly no-frills look. (Suddenly, imagining her with an image make-over advisor in Bait and Switch trying to give herself that perfect corporate look of employability seems amusing.)

Her mind is wide-ranging and daring indeed. Some years back, in a book entitled Blood Rites, she even managed to turn traditional ideas about the origins of war on their head. She is a thoroughly no-nonsense national resource.

Looking forward to a trip to the local gym followed by a visit with her two grandchildren (the daughters of her daughter Rosa Brooks, a law professor and columnist for the Los Angeles Times), we sit down at a paper-and-book cluttered dining-room table, which shows no evidence of having held a meal in some time, and -- eye on the clock, no fooling around -- begin.

Tomdispatch: You were at a graduation ceremony recently where the students were bouncing beach balls in the stands. The college president leaned over and whispered, "This is the problem with having the commencement in the afternoon. Some of these people have been partying for hours." In response, you wrote: "There are reasons, whether the graduates know them or not, to want to greet one's entrance into the work world with an excess of Bud." Could you start by explaining why an excess of Bud might be an appropriate response to leaving college today?

Barbara Ehrenreich: Well, a lot of graduates are simply not going to find jobs appropriate to their credentials. They're going to be wait staff. They're going to be call-center operators. Their twenties could be spent like that. I recently got Jared Bernstein of the Economic Policy Institute to do some research on this. It's still tentative, but he found that 17% of people in jobs that do not require college degrees have them. Those are very often people in their twenties who can't get professional-type employment, or people in their fifties who have been through one too many lay-off and are no longer employable because they're quote too old. So I was thinking of that, and then I was thinking that for a lot of those who do get jobs, you know, the fun is over. They're going to be sitting in cubicles and they won't be able to bounce balls around when they're in boring meetings with their bosses.

TD: The real earnings of college graduates fell by 5% between 2000 and 2004, so they also have that to look forward to.

Ehrenreich: There still is a real big earnings gap between college and non-college graduates, but it's begun to shrink. Jared tells me that the reason it was growing so fast in the nineties was not that college graduates were doing so well, but that low-wage people, blue-collar people, were doing so poorly. Their wages were being held down -- and that remains true.

TD: In 1989, you published a book about the middle class, or the professional-managerial class as you call them, entitled Fear of Falling. The book was way ahead of its time. If you were titling a work on the subject today you might just call it, Falling.

Ehrenreich: What I was thinking about then was the fear of intergenerational falling, the fear a lot of upper-middle class people have that their children will not get into the same class, because you can't just bequeath your class status to them. They can't inherit. They have to go through this whole education thing. Now, it could be Free Fall, though it isn't quite that bad… yet.

TD: In Bait and Switch, the book where, as an investigative reporter, you sought a corporate job and found yourself in the world of the middle-class unemployed or anxiously employed, you wrote, "On many fronts, the American middle class is under attack as never before." What happened to the middle class between then and now?

Ehrenreich: In Fear of Falling, I was concerned with the distance between the professional managerial class and the traditional working class. I thought I saw a new class developing. The strict Marxist idea is: You've got the bourgeoisie. Everybody else is a wage earner and they're not that different, whether they're accountants or laborers. And I was saying, no, there's a real difference here. The white-collar worker who sits at a desk is telling other people what to do in one way or another. Such workers are in positions of authority when compared to blue and pink-collar people.

Back then, I was emphasizing the differences. Today, in Bait and Switch, what I'm emphasizing is the lack of difference, that the security the professional-managerial class thought it had is gone. The safest part of that class, when I was writing in the eighties, seemed to be the professionals and managers with corporate positions. Then something happened in the nineties. Companies began to look at even those people as expenses to be eliminated rather than assets to be nurtured. What I was seeing in the late eighties was this pretty tight middle class where, really, the only problem was to get your kids into it, too.

Much More here...

Saturday, June 03, 2006

Today's Quote

"Enough details have emerged from survivors and military personnel to conclude that in the town of Haditha last November, members of the 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment perpetrated a massacre. The killings may have been in retaliation for the death of a Marine lance corporal, but this was not the work of soldiers gone berserk. The targets (children from 3 to 14, an old man in a wheelchair, taxi passengers), the hours-long duration of killings, the number of Marines involved, the careful mop-up--all amount to willful, targeted brutality designed to send a message to Iraqis. As Representative John Murtha has pointed out, the patently false story floated afterward, blaming the killings on roadside bombs, and Marine payoffs to survivors imply a cover-up that may extend far up the chain of command."

~~ The Nation Editors, Why Haditha Matters

CNN's White Supremacist Sourcing

By Evan Derkacz
Posted on May 24, 2006
http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/evan/36625/

The thin, thin line between Lou Dobbs' punitive conservative views on immigration and unabashed bigotry was crossed, erased and spat upon yesterday.

Bill Scher writes:

During a piece about illegal immigrants in Utah, reporter Casey Wian said, "Utah is also part of the territory some militant Latino activists refer to as Aztlan, the portion of the southwest United States they claim rightfully belongs to Mexico."




The above map that accompanied the report was provided by the white supremacist Council of Conservative Citizens classified as a hate group by the ADL.

Dave Neiwert explains the fundamental misunderstanding in hysterical reporting and rightwing gumflapping on the "reconquista" issue:

The belief that the Southwest is part of their historical homeland is a legitimate belief for most Latinos, and the marchers [the Washington Times] cite[s] seem to be expressing that point. They're also expressing the belief that this historical claim overrides the latter-day borders that would deny them their heritage. What's utterly absent is any claim that they intend to retake the Southwest for Mexico, which is what the reconquista theory is all about. On the contrary, they seem intent on becoming American -- but they also are claiming they have a right, by virtue of their heritage, to become one.


Silly Dave. This is called nuance and rationality, two qualities melting away from the public discourse like polar ice caps in a quaint belief system once known as "science." (LiberalOasis, Orcinus)

--Evan Derkacz is a New York-based writer and contributor to AlterNet.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/evan/36625/

From the "Wha', Where?" File...

During an interview with the Early Show concerning BushCo's new bid for isolationism in the U.S. while rampant corporate globalization is shoved down the throat of "developing" nations, one can actually see immigrants jumping the "most technologically advanced" border barrier ever.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BqDtHOE5zs

Priceless!

Thanks to Jack Spellman (and Bryan, whoever you are)

Friday, June 02, 2006

Kennedy: 2004 Election was rigged

Via Alternet
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/36993/

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. writes, in Rolling Stone:

...what is most anomalous about the irregularities in 2004 was their decidedly partisan bent: Almost without exception they hurt John Kerry and benefited George Bush. After carefully examining the evidence, I've become convinced that the president's party mounted a massive, coordinated campaign to subvert the will of the people in 2004. Across the country, Republican election officials and party stalwarts employed a wide range of illegal and unethical tactics to fix the election.

On Exit Polls:

On the evening of the vote, reporters at each of the major networks were briefed by pollsters at 7:54 p.m. Kerry, they were informed, had an insurmountable lead and would win by a rout: at least 309 electoral votes to Bush’s 174, with fifty-five too close to call. In London, Prime Minister Tony Blair went to bed contemplating his relationship with President-elect Kerry.

As the last polling stations closed on the West Coast, exit polls showed Kerry ahead in ten of eleven battleground states – including commanding leads in Ohio and Florida – and winning by a million and a half votes nationally. The exit polls even showed Kerry breathing down Bush’s neck in supposed GOP strongholds Virginia and North Carolina. Against these numbers, the statistical likelihood of Bush winning was less than one in 450,000.


On Ohio:

[Ohio Sec of State Kenneth Blackwell] has openly denounced Kerry as ''an unapologetic liberal Democrat,''(50) and during the 2004 election he used his official powers to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of Ohio citizens in Democratic strongholds. In a ruling issued two weeks before the election, a federal judge rebuked Blackwell for seeking to ''accomplish the same result in Ohio in 2004 that occurred in Florida in 2000.''


There's more. Much more.

Thursday, June 01, 2006

If Free Borders Are Good Enough For Corporations, Then Why Not For People, Too?

JONATHAN ROWE - There is an egregious disconnect in the case for the global economy, corporate version. We are told that the world should be without borders, for corporations and stuff. Borders are clogs in the celestial mechanism of the market. They are protectionism, which is darkness to the market's light.

But when the discussion turns to people, somehow the argument flips. Then it's troops, fences, regulations up the kazoo. Corporations get magic visas; cars and video games get them too. But when an actual human being tries to cross the border - well, call out the National Guard.

To which one has to say, "Wait a minute." If the world should be borderless for artificial persons called corporations, then why not for real people? If Ford can go to Mexico to find cheaper labor, then why should not Mexican workers be able to come to the U.S. to find higher-paying jobs - or jobs period? The proponents of global corporatism think that real people should be content with second-class status. I don't think so.

http://onthecommons.org/node/904

Morning Line

Courtesy of Sam Smith, The Progressive Review

WE'RE SURPRISED by how many are dismissing the FBI raid on Capitol Hill as permissible law enforcement. The danger is not just the threat of blackmail, but the broader intimidation of Congress by the executive branch. As former House solicitor Charles Tiefer pointed out, "The framers, who were familiar with King George III's disdain for their colonial legislatures, would turn over in their graves." . . .

Now details of the raid suggest the FBI was up to far more than an ordinary search. They were in the office for 18 hours without any legal representation from the Congress and they downloaded all of Rep. Jefferson's computer files.

Let's say, to be kind, that 5% of the material related to bribery or other malfeasance. That means 95% of what the FBI was up to was spying on Congress' constitutional operations and documents that it had no business viewing. Not to mention the possibility that Jefferson's files contain memos outlining Democratic strategy for the next election and, as Tiefer notes, the personal business of "countless innocent constituents."

This is far worse than the Valerie Plame affair. This involves executive branch thuggery designed to intimidate Congress now and perhaps blackmail some of its members later.

Let's impeach the motherfucker already! --Pete

Santorum's Harpies

Santorum: The frothy mix of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the result of anal sex. (http://www.spreadingsantorum.com/)--Pete

By Lindsay Beyerstein
Posted on June 1
http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/lindsay/36957/

Will Bunch reports that the five "angry young women" who were ejected from Rick Santorum's book signing last August have filed suit. Hat tip to Crooks and Liars.

In other Santorum-related news, AMERICAblog reports that Santorum is 23% behind Bob Casey in PA Senate race.

[Attytood, Crooks and Liars, AMERICAblog]

Lindsay Beyerstein a New York writer blogging at Majikthise.

America's Shame

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Editorial
Jun 1, 2006

The United States being hauled up before the U.N. Committee Against Torture in Geneva last month was a sharp reminder of how America's reputation as a beacon of human rights has sagged in recent years.

There was a time when the United States could go on the offensive in international forums against countries that were human rights violators. It could do that since its position was solidly based on a strong record of respect of civil rights and deeply entrenched rule of law at home.

That base now no longer exists, and American professions of indignation at other countries' violations of human rights have a tinny ring in the light of what has happened to the United States in that regard. It isn't so much that the United States has taken strong measures at home and abroad in response to the 9/11 attacks and to seek to preclude other such events. That was normal. It is rather the degree to which the United States has violated its own previous standards of justice, in the name of 9/11, in the name of what is sold to the American public as defense of U.S. national security.

What it appears took place at U.S. military detention facilities that include Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad, Bagram Air Force Base in Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay in Cuba and in the CIA's secret prisons in Europe, plus the practice of U.S. captors turning prisoners over to countries where torture is openly practiced, are a shame to America.

At home, the Bush administration's disregard of law in designating American citizens as enemy combatants, thus putting them outside of normal, traditional U.S. due process of law; its disregard of the legal requirement that a court approve wiretaps; and the hundreds of times that President Bush has followed signature of a law passed by Congress with a statement that he might, or he might not, carry out that law as Congress passed it are simply some of the ways in which this U.S. government has riddled governance by law in the United States over the past five years with holes like a rural highway sign that has stopped a shotgun blast.

And so the United States gets hauled up before a U.N. human rights tribunal. There is almost always an element of dishonesty in such U.N. institutions, given that their membership frequently includes countries whose own records on such subjects are morally degenerate _ the Zimbabwes, Sudans and Myanmars of this world.

All the worse that the U.S. record in that regard is now so bad that America, the land of the free, ends up in the dock, for torture.

Wednesday, May 31, 2006

True Patriotism Emerges

By Sean Gonsalves, AlterNet
Posted on May 30, 2006
http://www.alternet.org/story/36875/

Most dictionaries define a patriot as a person who loves, supports and defends his or her country.

But, according to Ambrose Bierce's "Devil's Dictionary," a patriot is "one to whom the interests of a part seem superior to those of the whole. The dupe of statesmen and the tool of conquerors." Cynical as it is, the truth of Bierce's definition is plain, especially in light of the my-country-right-or- wrong mentality that has blossomed under President Bush.

Immediately following 9/11, it was hard to tell the difference between jingoistic "patriotism," which puts feelings of trust above truth, and the true patriotism that is emerging at this moment, triggered by the Bush administration's disregard for the Constitution.

It's not news to any reader of this column that I've never been a Bush supporter. I have a laundry list of reasons why, but what's far more interesting and important than my own sense of historical and spiritual consciousness is the burgeoning constitutional consciousness of ordinary citizens who once counted themselves among Bush supporters.

Glenn Greenwald is just such a citizen. A constitutional lawyer who lived and worked in Manhattan on Sept. 11, 2001, Greenwald speaks for many in the preface of his new book "How Would A Patriot Act?" Like many Americans, Greenwald felt like the Constitution prevented any serious abuses of power from either party and that since both parties had their share of extremists, "I was never sufficiently moved to become engaged in the electoral process."

Over the past five years, "all that has changed." Greenwald sees extremism shredding the Constitution, which once served to keep him from becoming politically engaged.

"This extremism is neither conservative or liberal in nature, but is instead driven by theories of presidential power wholly alien, and antithetical, to the core political values that have governed this country since its founding," Greenwald writes.

He goes on to talk about his initial faith, even admiration, in Bush's leadership, which crystallized when the president wrapped his arm around a firefighter on top of a pile of Ground Zero rubble.

What first began to shake his "faith" was the Jose Padilla case, in which the Bush administration claimed it could hold a U.S. citizen indefinitely without issuing a charge or providing access to counsel. The Iraq WMD farce really threw Greenwald for a loop. Then came Abu Ghraib.

In October 2005, Greenwald started the "Unclaimed Territory" blog as a way to uphold "the supremacy of our constitutional principles and the corresponding duty of every American citizen to defend these liberties when they are under assault."

Greenwald's analysis, particularly of the NSA wiretapping debacle, is something that should be pondered by all those whose reaction to the NSA program is: "If you're doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about."

Greenwald walks the reader through how the Bush administration successfully urged Congress to broaden presidential powers with the Patriot Act, including the expansion of eavesdropping powers under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

After it was passed, the president said he had all the tools he needed to fight the war on terror. So when Bush admitted that he authorized the NSA eavesdropping program without going to the FISA court, he did so "in violation of the very act he had just signed into law," Greenwald said.

"When George Bush ordered the secret NSA program," he continues, "it was not the first time an American president had acted illegally. But what is so astounding, and so profoundly alarming, about the president's behavior is not that he just violated the law deliberately but that he did so repeatedly over the course of many years, and when he was caught he defiantly insisted he had the right to do so."

Though exploring that one fact alone makes Greenwald's 144-page book worth reading, his argument doesn't rest solely on the NSA example. Rather, by analyzing the plethora of constitutional violations committed by the Bush administration over the past five years,

Greenwald's book is important because it raises a fundamental question about patriotism: Loyalty to Bush or to the Constitution?

Sean Gonsalves is a Cape Cod Times staff reporter and a syndicated columnist.
© 2006 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at:
http://www.alternet.org/story/36875/

Sunday, May 28, 2006

Probe Finds Marines Killed Unarmed Iraqi Civilians

By Tony Perry
LA Times Staff Writer

May 26, 2006

SAN DIEGO — Marines from Camp Pendleton wantonly killed unarmed Iraqi civilians, including women and children, and then tried to cover up the slayings in the insurgent stronghold of Haditha, military investigations have found.
Officials who have seen the findings of the investigations said the filing of criminal charges, including some murder counts, was expected, which would make the Nov. 19 incident the most serious case of alleged U.S. war crimes in Iraq.
An administrative inquiry overseen by Army Maj. Gen. Eldon Bargewell found that several infantry Marines fatally shot as many as 24 Iraqis and that other Marines either failed to stop them or filed misleading or blatantly false reports.
The report concludes that a dozen Marines acted improperly after a roadside bomb explosion killed a fellow Marine, Lance Cpl. Miguel Terrazas.
Looking for insurgents, the Marines entered several homes and began firing their weapons, according to the report.
In its initial statement to the media, the Marine Corps said the Iraqi civilians were killed either by an insurgent bomb or by crossfire between Marines and insurgents.
But after Time magazine obtained pictures showing dead women and children and quoted Iraqis who said the attack was unprovoked, the Marine Corps backtracked on its explanation and called for an investigation.
The Marines, many of whom were on their third deployment to Iraq, are part of the 3rd Battalion, 1st Regiment of the 1st Marine Division.
The battalion commander and two company commanders were relieved of duty last month because, a spokesman said, Maj. Gen. Richard Natonski, commanding general of the division, had lost confidence in their leadership.
The Naval Criminal Investigative Service, which conducted a separate investigation, is expected to call for criminal charges, including murder, negligent homicide, dereliction of duty and filing a false report.
After the roadside bomb killed Terrazas, the Marines conducted a sweep of the area, a common military tactic. But instead of following the Geneva Convention rules about identifying combatants, the Marines killed Iraqis in homes and five sitting in a vehicle, reportedly without provocation, the investigation found.
Bargewell's report is to be given soon to Army Lt. Gen. Peter Chiarelli, the top operational commander in Baghdad. Chiarelli will make recommendations involving leadership, training and filing reports. Compensation has already been paid to families of some of the slain Iraqis.
Marine officials also confirmed Thursday that an investigation had been opened into an April 26 incident in which troops allegedly killed a civilian in the town of Hamandiya, west of Baghdad.
Marine Commandant Gen. Michael Hagee flew to Iraq on Thursday to talk to Marines and remind them of long-standing orders to protect Iraqi civilians and follow the Geneva Convention.
Hagee is emphasizing "the importance of our core values" and reminding troops about the laws of war, a Marine Corps statement said.
The Marine commandant planned to read to officers and enlisted personnel a statement reminding them: "We must regulate force and violence, we only damage property that must be damaged, and we protect the noncombatants we find on the battlefield."
Hagee last week briefed key congressional leaders on the upcoming report. One of those, Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), a retired Marine colonel, said later that Marines "killed innocent civilians in cold blood."
Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-El Cajon), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, held a news conference last Friday to plead with reporters, politicians and the public not to judge U.S. troops by the action "of one squad, in one city, on one morning."
The Marines have had more than 700 personnel killed in Iraq.
In his statement, Hagee said that Marines should overcome the tendency "of becoming indifferent to the loss of a human life" in their dealings with Iraqi civilians.

Article...

Fascism, Get To Know It...


Click pic for larger image

STUDY FINDS POT DOES NOT INCREASE RISK OF CANCER

HEATHER BURKE BLOOMBERG NEWS - People who smoke marijuana may be at less risk of developing lung cancer than tobacco smokers, according to a new study. The study of 2,200 people in Los Angeles found that even heavy marijuana smokers were no more likely to develop lung, head or neck cancer than non-users, in contrast with tobacco users, whose risk increases the more they smoke.

The findings are a surprise because marijuana smoke has some of the same cancer-causing substances as tobacco smoke, often in higher concentrations, said the senior researcher, Donald Tashkin, a professor at the David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California-Los Angeles.

One possible explanation is that THC, a key ingredient in marijuana not present in tobacco, may inhibit tumor growth, he said in an interview. .
.

About 1,200 adults under age 60 with cancer of the lung, tongue, mouth, throat or esophagus, took part in the study, as well as about 1,000 without cancer, between 1999 and 2003.


http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/health/271359_marijuana24.html

Sunday, May 21, 2006

ANTI-UNION SMEAR CAMPAIGN LAUNCHED

PR WATCH - The new industry-funded front group from lobbyist Rick Berman, the Center for Union Facts, has launched its first TV ad campaign. The 30-second spot, running on Fox News and local markets, has "actors posing as workers" saying "sarcastically what they 'love' about unions," like paying dues, union leaders' "fat-cat lifestyles," and discrimination against minorities. The ad campaign cost $3 million, which was raised "from companies, foundations and individuals that Mr. Berman won't identify." Another TV ad will be filmed in June. Labor and economics professor Harley Shaiken said the effort "to create an anti-union atmosphere" more generally, as opposed to business-funded ads against a particular union organizing drive or strike, "is a new wrinkle."

http://www.prwatch.org/node/4817

Ward Sutton and Sutton Impact: The Case of the Capitulating Corporate Media

Click pic for larger image

Friday, May 19, 2006

Irony alert: Bush asks people to pray for peace

From Alternet

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/36399/


From our you've-gotta-be-kidding-me file, George W. Bush on Tuesday issued a formal presidential proclamation designating May 29 -- Memorial Day -- as "a day of prayer for permanent peace."

"Those who lost their lives in the defense of freedom helped protect our citizens and lay the foundation of peace for people everywhere," reads the proclamation, signed by Bush on May 16. "On Memorial Day, a grateful Nation pays tribute to their personal courage, love of country, and dedication to duty."

In conjunction with a joint resolution of Congress issued in 1950 that compels the president to issue such a proclamation each year, Bush designated "…the hour beginning in each locality at 11:00 a.m. of that day as a time to unite in prayer." The proclamation also requests that all Americans observe a National Moment of Remembrance on Memorial Day at 3:00 PM local time.

As a Veteran, I observe Memorial Day in a private and personal way and, while I understand Bush's responsibility for issuing this proclamation, I don’t think it's any secret why this received almost zero mention in the media. Nobody wants to breach the dignity of Memorial Day and George W. Bush declaring any day a time to wish for peace is just dripping with too much sick irony to acknowledge.

Isn’t this just a bit like Charles Manson declaring a mental-health day or Rush Limbaugh proclaiming a certain date as a time to renounce recreational Oxycontin? How seriously are we suppose to take a pray-for-peace proclamation from a man who lied us into a pointless war and who has the blood of tens of thousands of human beings on his hands?

But I don’t think Bush has anything to worry about as most of the country has been praying for peace on a daily basis ever since he took office. In that way, May 29 will just be another day.

Thursday, May 18, 2006

Al Gore On SNL!

President Elect In Exile Gore made an unexpected appearance on corporate television recently in an attempt to lampoon the status quo. This seems to be a progressive trend, brought to the fore by Stephan Colbert, who woke us from our collective trance.

Check dis shit out here...

Video

Tuesday, May 16, 2006

After The Thaw

ZNet Commentary
After The Thaw May 16, 2006
By John Hepburn
http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2006-05/15hepburn.cfm

Great events in human history are captured in our memories like fish in ice at the sudden onset of winter. Frozen in time, to be thawed and trawled out in generations to come by curious grandchildren. What were you doing when it happened? Where were you? Who were you with? How did you feel?

Most of these defining moments are shared. The event happens. News flashes around the globe. For a moment we are transfixed, shocked, in awe. JFK has been assassinated…the Berlin Wall came down… the planes hit the twin towers… bonds are created as we share in the tragedy or the elation of the moment.

I recently experienced the defining moment of my generation - the event to dwarf all others. But strangely, I had it all to myself, staring at an email on my computer screen as I struggled to comprehend… humans are changing the climate.

My great grandchildren are unlikely to care about September 11, or about John Howard, or who won the world cup in 2006. They're going to want to know how, in the space of only 4 generations, we created a mass wave of extinctions by triggering a climatic shift so dramatic that evolution was left flailing in it's wake. And they're going to want to know why my generation didn't do anything when we knew it was happening.

Scientists revealed that the Siberian permafrost is melting. Researchers found that an area of permafrost spanning a million square kilometres - the size of France and Germany combined - has started to melt for the first time since it formed 11,000 years ago.

The area in question, covering the entire sub-Arctic region of western Siberia, is the world's largest frozen peat bog and scientists fear that, as it thaws, it will release billions of tonnes of methane, a greenhouse gas 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide, into the atmosphere.

It is yet another example of a scenario climate scientists have feared since first identifying "tipping points" - delicate thresholds where a slight rise in the Earth's temperature can cause a dramatic change in the environment that itself triggers a far greater increase in global temperatures. The news managed to climb to the dizzy heights of story number 6 on the radio news. The lead story has already slipped from memory.

Much like the thaw of the permafrost or the dawn sweeping across the landscape, the realization that climate change is real and catastrophic spreads slowly. While I've had an intellectual understanding of climate change for many years and have followed the scientific developments with increasing concern, at some deeper level it just hadn't sunk in. Now it has. And it's not the loss of skiing holidays that is most concerning - it's the loss of life.

A 2004 study published in Nature magazine examined the extinction risk from climate change in six biodiversity-rich regions, representing one fifth of the Earth's land area. The researchers concluded that from 15 to 37% of all the species in the regions studied could be driven to extinction by the climate changes likely between now and 2050. Climate change and the impacts of industrialization and over-consumption are driving a mass wave of extinction that is leading many scientists, like world famous paleoanthropologist, Dr. Richard Leakey, to predict that up to 50% of all species will be extinct within the next 100 years.

Article...

WORKING ASSETS -- Tell The Telecoms Where They Can Get Off!

http://www.workingassets.com/

In light of new revelations about the big telecommunications carriers' handing over domestic calling records to the National Security Agency, you should know where Working Assets stands on the NSA's increasingly alarming activities.

Working Assets believes that the warrantless monitoring of phone conversations ordered by the Bush administration is illegal and unacceptable. We also unequivocally oppose the disclosure of domestic calling records to the NSA by our nation's telecommunications providers. As reported yesterday in USA Today,1 AT&T, Bell South and Verizon sold customer call records to the NSA. Working Assets would never, under any circumstances, give (let alone sell) records to the Bush administration without a warrant or a court order.

In fact, as Working Assets' president, I recently signed on to an amicus brief supporting the ACLU's law suit against the National Security Agency. We are the only telephone company participating in this law suit.

Working Assets has never been approached by any government agency seeking our help in illegally accessing the content of conversations by our customers, and we would refuse any such request. Similarly, we would not, under any circumstances, turn over customer call records to the government without a warrant. We are actively engaged in opposing warrantless monitoring, in pushing for full disclosure by the government regarding the scope of the monitoring, and in protecting citizens from intrusive and illegal exercises of governmental power. Additionally, we are fighting Bush's nomination of General Michael V. Hayden, the architect of the NSA's illegal wiretapping program, to head the CIA. . .


Working Assets' underlying carrier for both wireless and long distance is Sprint. After the news broke that AT&T, Verizon, and BellSouth were helping the NSA to compile a massive database of call records for domestic spying purposes, we contacted Sprint. Sprint has reassured us that they did not participate in this database. However, we continue to push for additional confirmation.

An important element of our relationship with Sprint is that while we utilize Sprint's underlying network on behalf of our customers, we do not give Sprint any of our customer information, including name, address, billing info.

http://www.workingassets.com/nsadatabase

Saturday, May 13, 2006

Can't Happen Here...?

What happened was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to be governed by surprise, to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believe that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if people could understand it, it could not be released because of national security. . .

To live in the process is absolutely not to notice it -- please try to believe me -- unless one has a much greater degree of political awareness, acuity, than most of us ever had occasion to develop.

Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, 'regretted.' . . . Believe me this is true. Each act, each occasion is worse than the last, but only a little worse. You wait for the next and the next. You wait for one shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock comes, will join you in resisting somehow. . .

Suddenly it all comes down, all at once. . . You remember everything now, and your heart breaks. Too late. You are compromised beyond repair.


--German professor describing arrival of Nazism to journalist Milton Mayer

Friday, May 05, 2006

Expunged Wiretap Report Here!

From The Memory Hole

http://www.thememoryhole.org/policestate/wiretaps_2005.htm


Each April, the Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts is required by federal law to submit to Congress a report detailing the number of federal and state wiretaps approved or authorized during the previous calendar year. On 01 May 2006, the Office posted this report here: www.uscourts.gov/wiretap05/contents.html (It has been removed)

One PDF file contained the main body of the report, and multiple separate PDFs contained the 9 text tables and 4 appendix tables.

A press release about the report is here.

On the evening of 03 May, a librarian reported on an email discussion list that all the files had been deleted from the US Courts website. A copy was not in Google's cache, although the cache did show a page with a deleted link to the 2005 report.

I contacted several journalists who had written about the report to see if they still had a copy of it on their hard drives. They didn't, but on 04 May, one of the reporters called the US Courts' press officer, who said that the report had been yanked because it contained information that is still under judicial seal. A sanitized version of the report is expected to be posted soon.

Soon after I contacted Marc Rotenberg of the Electronic Privacy Information Center about this, Sherwin Siy of EPIC kindly emailed the body of the original, uncensored report, which he had downloaded and saved. It is posted below.

PDF Report: 11 Pages, 125K

Thursday, May 04, 2006

BIGGEST U.S. GENERAL STRIKE IN MORE THAN 70 YEARS

Proud to say that Vicki, Suzanne and I marched in Northern Cali's largest demonstration--Pete

MICHAEL CONLON, REUTERS - Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc. said 29 of its more than 500 eateries were closed Monday because employees didn't show up but it was largely "business as usual" across the chain.

At the headquarters of American Apparel in Los Angeles, the largest garment factory in the United States, sewing machines fell silent when managers shut down to allow all 3,000 workers a chance to join the protests. . .

In Florida, about of half the state's farm workers stayed away from the fields, according to the Florida Fruit and Vegetable Association and many workers abandoned construction sites, according to contracting officials.

In New York City, demonstrators formed "human chains" at several points around the city. Hundreds, including school children, lined the streets in Queens waving U.S. and Latin American flags and banners saying, "We are Americans" and "Full Rights for All Immigrants."

The Catholic Church has come down strongly on the side of the immigrants in the debate, and priests at the parish level helped organize many of the protests. Cardinal Roger Mahony in Los Angeles has suggested he would order his priests to disregard any law against assisting undocumented immigrants.

Article...

Mr. Colbert has certainly struck a nerve, 'twould seem

A "Thank You" site, dedicated to recording the gratitude of viewers worldwide.

http://thankyoustephencolbert.org/wordpress/archives/3

Maryland's Steny Hoyer is apparently quite the idiot...

From Alternet
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/35781/

This is just heartbreakingly stupid suck-up-ness on the part of Maryland's Steny Hoyer. John Aravosis writes: "Sure, George Bush is plumetting in the polls. So what does Steny Hoyer do? The Hill newspaper reports that he takes a cheap shot at someone who's out there defending the party and taking the president on."

"I thought some of it was funny, but I think it got a little rough," Hoyer said. "He is the president of the United States, and he deserves some respect."

"I’m certainly not a defender of the administration," Hoyer reassured stunned observers, but Colbert “crossed the line” with many jokes that were "in bad taste." [VIDEO.]

Bad taste?! Bad taste?! Are you fucking kidding me? If anyone came to me, as a nationally recognized figure, and asked with the camera and lights on whether I thought Stephen Colbert's speech was in "bad taste" I would try to avoid the drool accumulating in the corners of my mouth and say:

You know what's in bad taste? Trampling on the Constitution, sending people to other countries to be tortured, starting a war on false pretenses that has taken the lives of over 2000 soldiers and untold Iraqis, many of whom were women and children, sending people, without trial, in the most un-American fashion to a black hole off the coast where they sit and rot without hope of release, tortured because the president has played with the law to make it difficult to prosecute, spying on Americans illegally and claiming he can do it like some kind of a monarch.

And you wanna talk about a comedian's jokes being in bad taste? Shame on you.


So I paraphrase Heathers the next time someone asks why the Dems don't win elections:
Because you're an idiot, Dad.

Tuesday, May 02, 2006

THE LIST

Where Hamas' government learned their stuff

[From the Washington Post]

Abdul Rahman Zeidan
Minister of Transportation
BA, civil engineering, University of Alabama

Sameer Abu Eisheh
Minister of Planning
Civil engineering, Pennsylvania State University

Aziz Duwaik
Speaker, Palestinian Legislative Council
MA, geography, State University of New York at Binghamton
PhD, regional science, University of Pennsylvania


Wasfi Kabaha
Minister of Prisoners and Released Prisoners' Affairs
BS, civil engineering, University of Detroit

Omar Abdel Razek
Minister of Finance
BA, with majors in mathematics, economics and computer science, Coe College, Cedar Rapids, Iowa)
PhD, economics, Iowa State University


Naser al-Shaer, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Education
Institute Fellow, Multinational Institute of American Studies, New York University

Mousa Abu Marzook, Deputy chief of Hamas political bureau
MA, industrial science, Colorado State University
Studied engineering, Louisiana Tech University


WaPo Article...

Monday, May 01, 2006

Stephan Colbert Skewers BushCo!

At the White House correspondents dinner - usually bootlicker journalist central - Stephan Colbert goes full tilt on the president, with GWB just feet away.

Bravo, Stephan!

Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcIRXur61II

Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HN0INDOkFuo

Part 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJvar7BKwvQ