GI SPECIAL 4D9:
WANTED
FOR TREASON:
THE
ENEMY DOMESTIC

REUTERS/Larry Downing
“It Is
Treason”
SEC. 601. (50 U.S.C. 421) (a) Whoever, having or
having had authorized access to classified
information that identifies a covert agent,
intentionally discloses any information identifying
such covert agent to any individual not authorized
to receive classified information, knowing that the
information disclosed so identifies such covert
agent and that the United States is taking
affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent's
intelligence relationship to the United States,
shall be fined under title 18, United States Code,
or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
07 April 2006 By William
Rivers Pitt, Truthout Perspective [Excerpt]
Is
there not some chosen curse,
Some
hidden thunder in the stores of heaven,
Red
with uncommon wrath, to blast the man
Who
owes his greatness to his country's ruin?
Joseph Addison
“I don't know of anybody
in my administration who leaked classified information,"
said George W. Bush on September 30, 2003. "If somebody
did leak classified information, I'd like to know it,
and we'll take the appropriate action."
"If someone leaked
classified information," said White House Press
Secretary Scott McClellan on October 7, 2003, "the
President wants to know. If someone in this
administration leaked classified information, they will
no longer be a part of this administration, because
that's not the way this White House operates, that's not
the way this President expects people in his
administration to conduct their business."
"I'd like to know if
somebody in my White House did leak sensitive
information," said Bush on October 28, 2003.
On this same day, Bush
said, "I have no idea whether we'll find out who the
leaker is, partially because, in all due respect to your
profession, you do a very good job of protecting the
leakers."
On Thursday, we found out
who the leaker is.
TruthOut investigative
reporter Jason Leopold wrote in the first of two reports
that, "Attorneys and current and former White House
officials close to the investigation into the leak of
covert CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson said Thursday
that President Bush gave Vice President Dick Cheney the
authorization in mid-June 2003 to disclose a portion of
the highly sensitive National Intelligence Estimate to
Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward and former New
York Times reporter Judith Miller."
In the second of Leopold's
reports, he writes, "Special Prosecutor Patrick
Fitzgerald stated in a court filing late Wednesday in
the CIA leak case that his investigators have obtained
evidence during the course of the two-year-old probe
that proves several White House officials conspired to
discredit former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, a critic of
the administration's pre-war Iraq intelligence. This is
the first time the special counsel has acknowledged that
White House officials are alleged to have engaged in a
coordinated effort to undercut the former ambassador's
credibility by disseminating classified intelligence
information that would have contradicted Wilson's public
statements."
So there it is.
We have
Bush authorizing the disclosure of classified
information, and we have that disclosure taking place
for no other reason than to discredit an administration
critic.
Bush is
often fond of defending his wildly inappropriate and
often illegal activities by claiming that he has every
right to do whatever he wants because America is "at
war."
Never
mind that no war has actually been declared.
If we
take his premise that we are in fact at war, than the
disclosure of classified information for political gain
must be defined simply and directly.
It is
treason.
We can even take this a
step further.
The name of covert CIA
operative Valerie Plame was all over the classified
National Intelligence Estimate Bush ordered to be
leaked.
The
pertinent text of the 1947 National Security Act reads
as follows:
SEC.
601. (50 U.S.C. 421) (a) Whoever, having or having had
authorized access to classified information that
identifies a covert agent, intentionally discloses any
information identifying such covert agent to any
individual not authorized to receive classified
information, knowing that the information disclosed so
identifies such covert agent and that the United States
is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert
agent's intelligence relationship to the United States,
shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, or
imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
(b) Whoever, as a result
of having authorized access to classified information,
learns the identity of a covert agent and intentionally
discloses any information identifying such covert agent
to any individual not authorized to receive classified
information, knowing that the information disclosed so
identifies such covert agent and that the United States
is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert
agent's intelligence relationship to the United States,
shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, or
imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
(c) Whoever, in the course
of a pattern of activities intended to identify and
expose covert agents and with reason to believe that
such activities would impair or impede the foreign
intelligence activities of the United States, discloses
any information that identifies an individual as a
covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive
classified information, knowing that the information
disclosed so identifies such individual and that the
United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal
such individual's classified intelligence relationship
to the United States, shall be fined under title 18,
United States Code, or imprisoned not more than three
years or both.
What do you think?
Comments from service men and women, and veterans,
are especially welcome. Send to
thomasfbarton@earthlink.net. Name, I.D., address
withheld unless publication requested. Replies
confidential.
IRAQ
WAR REPORTS
MILFORD
MARINE KILLED

4.7.06: Bryan Taylor, 20,
shown in this yearbook photo provided by Milford High
School, a graduate of Milford and Live Oaks Class of
2004 was killed in Iraq, while serving with the U.S.
Marine Corps. (AP Photo/Courtesy of Milford High School)
MAINE
SOLDIER KILLED

Spc. Dustin James Harris,
of Patten, Maine, a member of the 172nd Brigade Support
Battalion in Fort Wainwright, Alaska. Harris, 21, died
April 6, 2006, when he was on foot patrol with elements
of the 101st Airborne Division in Beiji, when an
improvised explosive device detonated nearby, the Army
said. (AP Photo/United States Army)
Ass-Kissing Imperial Press Gives “The Largest Attack By
Insurgents In Weeks” Four Lines Of Coverage
[A
perfect example of how the Imperial press kisses Bush
regime ass: the “biggest attack in weeks” gets exactly
four lines of coverage.]
4/8/2006 By BUSHRA JUHI,
The Associated Press & By MARIAM FAM, Associated Press
Writer
In
Ramadi, meanwhile, U.S. forces Saturday beat back the
largest attack by insurgents in weeks, using
laser-guided bombs, anti-tank rockets and machine guns
to repel an assault on the main government building,
Marine officers said.
There were no U.S.
casualties, the U.S. said.
A U.S. Air Force F-18
fighter bombed insurgent positions, unleashing
thunderous explosions that shook the city.
Sporadic shooting occurred
around the government building after sunset.
FUTILE
EXERCISE:
BRING
THEM ALL HOME NOW!

U.S. Army Sgt. Scott
Rebarchak, left, of Clarion, Pennsylvania and Spc.
Jeremy Broadway, of Bowdon, Georgia, construct a
checkpoint near the airport in Baghdad, April 4, 2006.
(AP Photo/Jacob Silberberg)
TROOP
NEWS
THIS IS
HOW BUSH BRINGS THE TROOPS HOME;
BRING
THEM ALL HOME NOW, ALIVE

Monday, Aug. 15, 2005. One
of the 14 Marines from the Brook Park, Ohio, based 3rd
Battalion, 25th Marines who were killed in two attacks
in Iraq during the first week of August. Schroeder's
parents Rosemary Palmer and Paul Schroeder follow the
casket. (AP Photo/Amy Sancetta)
“As A
Military Mother, I Know All Too Well Who Supports My Son
And Who Just Spouts Fancy Words And Flaunts A Magnetic
Ribbon That Says So….How About You?”
April 6, 2006
Letter To The Editor
The Press & Herald, Pine
Grove, PA,
By Alycia A. Barr, Pine
Grove
As the
military mother of a young Iraq veteran, I have listened
to our representatives repeatedly deliver speeches
focusing on their genuine belief in providing the best
for our soldiers, both in combat as well as when they
get home.
What
confuses me is the contradiction between what they say
and how they vote, when the results are very often NOT
in support of our troops.
Recently a bill was introduced in the Senate requiring
mandatory funding for veteran's health care. It was
overwhelmingly voted down. Most surprising were the
Senator's names on the "nay" list, some who have
portrayed themselves as pro-soldier advocates like
Santprum, McCain, and Warner, chairman of the Armed
Services Committee.
These
same senators consistently vote to pass every emergency
supplemental put forth by the White House, supposedly to
"support the troops," yet daily reports, from our
soldiers in theater, reflect an ongoing shortage in
their equipment needed.
Case in Point: Out of
about 40,000 Humvees in Iraq/Afghanistan, 13,000 are
Level 1 with the most complete armor package. The
remaining 27,000 are Level 2, armored but have NO top or
bottom armor and NONE over the fuel tank.
Which
vehicle would you want your loved one in and who gets to
make that decision?
Countless resolutions have
been put before the House to protect the health and
wellbeing of our soldiers. H.R.2410, H.R.202, H.R.4184
are three such pieces of legislation. All deal with
troop exposure to Depleted Uranium (DU), which has
proved deadly in this war, as well as the first Gulf
War, and has been found to be the cause of death for
thousands of our returned vets.
Yet, you will not find
Rep. Tim Holden's signature, as a co-sponsor on any of
these bills.
As a matter of fact, Mr.
Holden has not even signed on to H.Res. 543, a
motion-to-discharge, allowing the House to debate the
war, its cost, and Americans' concerns about it.
Why is this so
significant? This would commence a 17 hour discussion,
which is sure to be televised, forcing congressmen to
state their positions so citizens could make informed
decisions in their choices on election day, something
our representatives seemed to be rather hesitant to do.
Why wouldn't you want an
informed public voting?
An amendment by Rep. John
Salazar, to add $650M to the VA health care budget, was
turned down by the house even though Army studies show
the money is needed because the VA is treating more vets
from the Iraq/Afghan conflicts than projected.
According to the director of National Gulf War
Resource Center, several Army doctors are being told
(by their commanders) to diagnose combat-stress
reaction instead of PTSD, post traumatic stress
disorder.
"This does two things," he said, "it keeps the
troops deployable," referring to soldiers who have
already completed one or more tours, "and it makes
it hard for them to collect disability claims once
they get out of the military." That brings into
question whether our own military officials support
our troops, wouldn't you say?
The increase spending for
vets, proposed by the president, gives the appearance of
concern.
However, when you realize
that $2.8B of the funds will come from 7.7 million vets
receiving care, it becomes a burden on those who served,
now making a pitiful $27,000 in income per year.
This so called increase
adds an enrollment fee of $250 a year, which does not
exist now, and almost double the amount per prescription
drug, from the current $8.00 to $15.00.
Senator
Larry Craig, chairman of Veterans Affairs Committee
said, "There is a limit to taxpayer's funding," in
reference to this proposal.
To my
knowledge, no vet in or out of battle has ever claimed a
limit to their service to protect taxpayers. Maybe now
would be a good time for them to consider it, being as
we are allowing our congressmen to put limits on our
funding for their sacrifice.
It is relatively easy for
anyone to access information on these legislative
actions, what they entail, who supports them, and who
does not, at: capwiz.com, and through a simple search:
yahoo.com.
Isn't it time we find out
which of our Pennsylvania reps. REALLY do support our
troops and which ones just say they do, BEFORE we cast
our votes to re-instate them for yet another term to
disappoint and deprive our men and women in uniform, who
do not, and have never, hesitated to put their lives on
the line for us?
These congressmen's
actions appear to be contrary to a quote by a renowned
American author and publisher, Elbert Hubbard, who said,
"Live truth instead of professing it.'
As a
military mother, I know all too well who supports my son
and who just spouts fancy words and flaunts a magnetic
ribbon that says so…..how about you?
Do
you have a friend or relative in the service?
Forward this E-MAIL along, or send us the address if
you wish and we’ll send it regularly.
Whether in Iraq or stuck on a base in the USA, this
is extra important for your service friend, too
often cut off from access to encouraging news of
growing resistance to the war, at home and inside
the armed services.
Send requests to address up top.
Three
Marine Officers Relieved Of Command In Massacre Of 15
Iraqi Civilians
April 07, 2006 By Gidget
Fuentes and John Hoellwarth, Army Times staff writers
Three officers, including
an infantry battalion commander and two of his company
commanders, were fired April 7 for “lack of confidence,”
a Corps spokesman said.
Relieved were Lt. Col.
Jeffrey Chessani, who commanded the Camp Pendleton,
Calif.-based 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines; India Company
commander Capt. James Kimber; and Kilo Company commander
Capt. Luke McConnell, said 2nd Lt. Lawton King, a
spokesman for 1st Marine Division at Camp Pendleton.
Officials previously have confirmed that Chessani’s
battalion was under investigation for an alleged Nov. 19
rampage by the battalion’s Kilo Company Marines in the
Iraqi city of Haditha that left 15 civilians dead,
including seven women and three children.
The
decision to relieve the three officers was made by Maj.
Gen. Richard Natonski, 1st Marine Division commander,
“due to lack of confidence in their leadership abilities
stemming from their performance during a recent
deployment to Iraq,” King said.
Lawton did not explicitly
connect the Haditha investigation to the firings but
said the “decision was motivated by multiple incidents
that occurred throughout the entire deployment.”
The firings came one week
after the battalion returned home from Iraq and after
the typical four-day liberty pass upon a deployment’s
end.
The Marine Corps won’t
provide additional details on why the officers were
relieved or whether anyone else has been implicated in
the investigation.
A March 19 Time magazine
article cited reports by local Iraqis that members of
Kilo Company, 3/1, rampaged through the village killing
civilians as they looked for insurgents responsible for
the blast that killed Lance Cpl. Miguel Terrazas, 20, of
El Paso, Texas, who was a member of Kilo, 3/1.
Major
Says Rumsfeld “Messed Up” Guantanamo Trials
[Thanks
to PB who sent this in. He writes: WHAT HASN'T HE
"MESSED UP"?]
Apr 7 By Jane Sutton,
Reuters
Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his appointees set rules
that violate President George W. Bush's order to hold
fair trials for prisoners charged with terrorism in the
Guantanamo tribunals, a military defense lawyer said on
Friday.
"We
can't help it that the secretary of defense and his
delegees have messed this thing up, but they have,"
military lawyer Army Maj. Tom Fleener told the presiding
officer at one of the hearings.
"If the rules don't
provide for a full and fair trial, then they violate the
president's order."
Fleener was trying to
persuade the presiding officer, Col. Peter Brownback, to
let a Yemeni defendant act as his own attorney on
charges of conspiring to attack civilians and destroy
property.
Tribunal rules set by the
Pentagon require the defendants to have U.S. military
lawyers who are authorized to see secret evidence that
the accused may not be allowed to view. Pentagon
officials have refused to allow self-representation,
which Fleener called a fundamental right in nearly every
court on Earth.
Bahlul refuses to
cooperate with any lawyer appointed by the U.S.
military. He asked to act as his own attorney or to have
a Yemeni lawyer, and declared a boycott when the request
was denied during an earlier hearing. He did not attend
his hearing on Friday at the U.S. naval base in
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Fleener
said Bahlul cannot get a fair trial unless the rules
change. "As the world looks at this system, it's going
to have no legitimacy whatsoever," he said.
Two
other defendants have also asked to act as their own
attorneys. The prosecution agrees they should have that
right, said the chief prosecutor, Col. Moe Davis.
"Give him the opportunity.
If he screws it up, then he had his opportunity," Davis
said of Bahlul.
Defense
lawyers say other Pentagon rules violate Bush's order,
including one that gives only the presiding officer the
right to act essentially as judge, rather than all the
tribunal members sharing that role.
Anti-Gay Bigots Want Wounded Walter Reed Troops To Die
April 7, 2006 Washington
Post
“God
Blew Up The Troops”
A
Kansas church groups says homosexuality is to blame for
troops’ deaths.
Demonstrators from a small, independent Kansas church,
Westboro Baptist, gathered at the main gate of Walter
Reed Army Medical Center to declare that the injured
troops inside the facility will die because this country
tolerates homosexuality.
[There
is most likely not a jury in the country that would
convict one or more outraged citizens who decided to
stomp these assholes into the pavement with sufficient
force that they would be rendered physically incapable
of ever showing up to do this again for the rest of
their unnatural lives, which will, hopefully, be very
short.]
IRAQ
RESISTANCE ROUNDUP
Assorted Resistance Action
NO
FLOWERS TODAY:
SORRY
ABOUT THAT

Iraqis stare at a passing
U.S. Army humvee patrol in the Shula neighborhood of
Baghdad April 7, 2006. (AP Photo/Jacob Silberberg)
4.8.06 AFP & (KUNA) &
Xinhua
Two
Iraqi soldiers were killed and three others wounded in
fierce battle between insurgents and Iraqi security
forces in western Iraq on Saturday, witnesses said.
"Fierce
clashes erupted in the afternoon between Iraqi military
forces and insurgents in the Nazzal neighborhood in
southern Fallujah and in the center area of the city,
killing two soldiers and wounding three others," local
witnesses told Xinhua by telephone.
In
Baquba, two police bomb squad members were wounded when
a roadside bomb went off after they had defused another
similar device.
The
second bomb went off as they were approaching it to
defuse it, police said.
In the southern city of
Karbala, five bullet-riddled bodies of men in Iraqi army
uniforms were received by the local hospital on
Saturday.
Iraqi Police of Kirkuk
said Saturday morning that two Police personnel were
injured when an explosive device blew up on the
Kirkuk-Mosul road.
A police major and his two
sons were wounded when a bomb exploded near his house in
Kirkuk on Friday, police said on Saturday.
Six policemen were wounded
when a roadside bomb detonated near their patrol in
Riyad, 60 km (40 miles) southwest of Kirkuk, police
said.
Four policemen were
wounded when guerrillas ambushed a police patrol in
Baquba.
Freedom fighters ambushed
and killed Iraqi army Lieutenant- Colonel Mohammed
Abdullah Jasim with his bodyguard in Baquba.
An
Iraqi contractor working for the U.S. military was
abducted from the town of Tuz Khurmatu 70 km (40 miles)
south of Kirkuk, police said.
Police found the bodies of
four Iraqi soldiers shot in the head dumped at the side
of a road near the Himreen mountains 120 km (75 miles)
south of the northern oil city of Kirkuk, police said.
The soldiers were captured in Tikrit on Thursday.
Clashes also occurred
between Iraqi troops and insurgents in Karmah.
An Iraqi soldier was
killed Saturday in a fight in Ramadi, U.S. officials
said.
Three Iraqi soldiers were
wounded in a clash with insurgents in Fallujah, about 30
miles east of Ramadi, police said.
IF
YOU DON’T LIKE THE RESISTANCE
END
THE OCCUPATION
“The
Iraqis Will Defeat Them, And Push Them Out”
“The
True Iraqis Will Prevail”
“I
Believe Completely In This”
“It Is
Only A Matter Of Time”

(Graphic: London Financial
Times)
All
this pushed people to hate the Americans, feeling
anger against them, which pushed men to resist
them. These are called Insurgents. Meaning;
everyone who does not love them, and does not want
them to remain in Iraq is an insurgent “terrorist.”
March 23rd, 2006 By Faiza
Al-Arji, afamilyinbaghdad.blogspot.com. Translated by
May/Baghdad [Excerpts]
Who are
the insurgents? Everyone asked me?
I tell them: If an
American convoy moved in a region like Al-Ramadi,
Sammara'a, Baquba, or any other, and it was subjected to
a shooting or a roadside bomb incident, they stop, turn
around to the town nearby and close it, besieging it.
Sometimes that town would
be air raided, like what happened in Al-Qaim, Fallujah,
and currently Sammara'a, then all the houses would be
stormed, all the men would be detained, insulted, and
abused, the women and children would be terrorized.
Sometimes families would
be killed, like in the latest stories we read about in
the newspapers, and when these crimes are uncovered, the
comments would be: These are individual transgressions,
like what they said about the Abu Ghareeb pictures, and
that they were individual behaviors, while in truth they
were the normal, daily actions committed against the
Iraqis.
All
this pushed people to hate the Americans, feeling anger
against them, which pushed men to resist them.
These
are called Insurgents. Meaning; everyone who does not
love them, and does not want them to remain in Iraq is
an insurgent “terrorist.”
And whenever they detained
new people, they created anger in the hearts of their
relatives, neighbors, and friends, and thus creating a
new group that hates them, welcoming any violent acts
against them.
This is the actual reality
in the Iraqi towns; anger is increasing in the hearts of
men and women in all towns, these who were besieged,
bombed, and its people dislodged, or those who heard the
stories, and so, there is hatred increasing, and anger.
A will
growing in the hearts of the Iraqis towards the
occupation forces: Get out of our country!
Rumsfeld says, for
example: Those who want to stop the war in Iraq are
those who think like Al-Zarqawi, who do not want
democracy or freedom for the Iraqis.
He says: The Iraqis went
on and voted for the new constitution, which they wrote
by their hands, and the Iraqi security forces are now
capable of rounding up the foreign terrorists in Iraq.
And my comments to that
are:
Those who want to stop the
war want to save millions of innocent civilian souls,
whose lives were destroyed by this war, and who were the
true victims since the blockade till now: towns are
besieged, houses bombed, and civilians die.
Men,
most of whom are innocent, get arrested; they are
imprisoned, insulted, and tortured, their crime is that
they do not like their country to be occupied. This is
their only crime.
Then again- the new
constitution was not written by Iraqis, but Bremmer, the
American governor, wrote its draft, then told the Iraqis
to write it, then vote for it. What is this phony,
deformed democracy?
Is this the democracy for
which they bombed Iraq, and destroyed it, people and
land, in order to apply?
And then again; the new
Iraqi security forces work with the occupation forces in
storming houses, terrorizing families, and insulting
Iraqi men (not the foreigners) and arresting them.
People hate the Iraqi
security men, saying they were mercenaries who agree to
work with the occupation forces in raiding houses and
arresting citizens, these who think only of their
paychecks, (around $400).
People are dying of
hunger, and these are just mercenaries or fools who were
told: you are building the new Iraq, and they believed
this story.
Like
most American soldiers who were told: you are going in a
noble mission to liberate Iraq, and when they got there,
some of them discovered the truth of that mission, and
some remained dumb fools, who think that every Iraqi in
front of them is a terrorist who deserves arrest,
imprisonment, or death.
Who "created" Bin Laden
and provided him with weapons and money to fight the
Soviets in Afghanistan? He was their striking hand and
their favorite man, and when his role was over, they
turned against him, and he became their enemy, and so
they waged their campaign on terrorism, raided
Afghanistan, and destroyed it?
Well
then; who "created" Saddam Hussein, put him on to rule,
encouraged him, provided him with weapons to fight Iran
for 8 years, and destroy Iraq's economy? Who gave him
the chemical weapons, which he threw over the poor
Kurds?
That
same administration, especially Rumsfeld.
Then, they disagreed with
Saddam, and came on to destroy Iraq, occupy it, and
build military bases in it.
If
their enemy was only Saddam Hussein, they were
supposed to oust him, and leave the Iraqis to build
their state they way they see fit, and retain their
army and police force, because the loyalty of those
is to the new Iraqi National government, and there's
no fear from them.
But the occupation forces
interfered, by disbanding the Iraqi Army and Police
Force, installing pro-American leaderships, and forming
a sectarian army, police force, and a sectarian
constitution.
This is what happened;
this is the compulsory intervention to change Iraq's
fate, and draw its future by foreign hands.
This
was the deadly, mistaken point that evoked the anger of
the Iraqis, the Arabs, and the Muslims, and made Iraq
fall a victim to violence, turbulence, and on going
fighting, till now.
The
Iraqis reject the idea of a foreign occupation forces,
or a pro-Bush administration government.
The
Iraqis want to build their country and future in a way
of their choice, they want to invest the fortunes of
their country in a way that would provide happiness and
justice to their people, not to foreign investing
companies that would plunder the wealth, putting the
dollars into the hands of a few, and deny the rest of
the people the good life.
The
Iraqis are brave, intelligent people, ready to fight
till death in defense of right and justice, they do not
like injustice, lying, or to be humiliated by anyone.
Iraq will remain in fire,
until the Iraqi's wishes come true: The departure of the
occupation forces, stopping the building of foreign
military bases, forming a National Unity Government, one
that is honest to its people: not a bunch of monkeys and
mercenaries aided by the occupation army.
It is only a matter of
time.
The
Iraqi's wishes will come true, sooner or later.
And we
will all remember who stood up, and spoke words of
truth, in the times of darkness and injustice.
And who
stood up to speak untrue words, and falsehood.
We will
remember all this, when we liberate Iraq, and build it
anew.
The
true Iraqi is that who lived inside, who suffered from
the wars of Saddam Hussein, and lost his loved ones in
those wars, the true Iraqi suffered from the blockade,
hunger, and poverty, lived through the last war,
witnessed the devastation, ruin, and killing, and
remained independent, far away from politics, sad, dazed
because of what is happening around him.
One who
is trying laboriously to remain alive with his family,
away from violence and murder, one who did not join with
Saddam Hussein or the occupation forces in hurting his
neighbors and his people, who wasn't persuaded by all
the poisons that were broadcasted by the occupation,
when they divided the people, and planted in their minds
the love of revenge, and the acceptance of sectarianism
and racism.
These are the true Iraqis,
whom I am proud of being one of them, sensing them,
talking about their sufferings, and they are the poor,
crushed, overwhelmed millions.
From
among them the leaders of the new Iraq shall emerge,
demanded by the people to save Iraq from what he is
suffering now; from the destruction, ruin, hate, and the
violence planted by the occupation.
The
occupation must get out of Iraq, and with it will go all
those who supported its evil notions in dividing and
shredding Iraq.
They will get out.
The
Iraqis will defeat them, and push them out.
The
brave, smart Iraqis, who do not accept lies, deception,
and injustice.
The
true Iraqis will prevail.
I
believe completely in this.
The
true Iraqis will prevail.
It is
only a matter of time.
FORWARD
OBSERVATIONS
“Honor
Surfaces When You Least Expect It”

“The Truth Is Never Afraid Of Questions”
Iraq Veterans Against The War and Cindy Sheehan prepare
for a press conference, Crawford, Texas 2005
From:
Mike Hastie
Sent:
April 06, 2006
Subject: Honor, surfaces when you least expect it.
To G.I.
Special:
The
most re-occurring dream I have as a result of being in
Vietnam, is going back to Vietnam.
In my
dream, I realize I can't go back, because I now know
that the Vietnam War is a lie.
The
conflict I have to live with, is the self-inflicted
guilt I feel, because I cannot join the soldiers I was
with, who are still in Vietnam.
Recognizing the dream as a conflict, and not me
betraying my fellow soldiers, was liberating, because I
could no longer be a part of the lie.
In the
end, it became a moral sense of duty. Honor, surfaces
when you least expect it.
Mike
Hastie
U.S.
Army Medic
Vietnam
1970-71
Photo and caption from the I-R-A-Q (I Remember
Another Quagmire) portfolio of Mike Hastie, US Army
Medic, Vietnam 1970-71. (For more of his
outstanding work, contact at: (hastiemike@earthlink.net)
T)
Visitor
From Iraq Surprised That U.S. Politicians Do Not “Do
What The People Want”
IRAQI WOMEN'S US TOUR,
Women Say No To War.org [Excerpt]
Dr.
Rashad Zidan: "I was astonished to find that the
majority Americans don't agree with Bush's war and I am
pleased to tell my fellow Iraqis about the many
Americans I met who are struggling to stop the war and
put an end to the occupation.
“We
Iraqis believe that in a democracy, such as in the US,
the politicians do what the people want, so most of us
believed that the majority of Americans want to
occupation to continue.
“I was
surprised to find that in the US the politicians are not
listening to the people. This is not the kind of
democracy Iraqis want to see in Iraq."
[But
the U.S. is indeed a democracy, of money. Those with
the money get to choose the government, and of course
are for Empire and wars to perpetuate it. Those without
the money have no say in who is nominated for President,
Senate, the House of Representatives, allowed only the
choice of candidates offered them by the Imperial
Democrats and Republicans. Third party candidates have
so little money they have no hope of changing policy.
[The
only thing the Imperial politicians fear, and sometimes
respond to, are mass movements from below threatening
revolutionary change. The silly “leaders” on the left
who fail to make this clear merely serve the Empire,
despite all their empty rhetoric and even sillier
submersion in reformist electoral politics.
[Ignore
them, do what works, build the movements in the streets
and in the barracks.]
MORE:
“Congress Belongs To The Highest Bidder”
01 April 2006 By Bill
Moyers, The Washington Spectator [Excerpt]
Money is choking our
democracy to death.
Our
elections are bought out from under us and our public
officials are doing the bidding of mercenaries.
So
powerful is the hold of wealth on politics that we
cannot say America is working for all Americans.
The
majority may support such broad social goals as
affordable medical coverage for all, decent wages for
working people, safe working conditions, a secure
retirement, and clean air and water, but there is no
government "of, by, and for the people" to deliver on
those aspirations.
Our system of privately
financed campaigns has shut regular people out of any
meaningful participation in democracy.
Less than one-half of one
percent of all Americans made a political contribution
of $200 or more to a federal candidate in 2004.
When
the average cost of winning a seat in the House of
Representatives has topped $1 million, we can no longer
refer to that chamber as "The People's House." Congress
belongs to the highest bidder.
MORE:
Visitor
From Iraq Finds:
“This
Is The Reality Of Things In America…”
April 06, 2006 By Faiza
Al-Arji, A Family In Baghdad.blogspot.com [Excerpt]
I am still in America, for
about a month now, very tired of traveling around,
moving from state to state, carrying bags, the
uncomfortable sleep during journeys, and the time-lag
between the farther eastern states and the farther
western.
My body is very exhausted,
but the blood stained, sad news from Iraq makes me
forget my aches, and strengthen my resolve to move from
city to city, to talk about the pain and suffering of
the Iraqis, for three years now…
The
decision in this country is in the hands of the wealthy,
who own the money, the banks, and the giant
companies………….
Even
the election system is controlled by money; the
Candidate needs millions of dollars for the election
campaign, meaning- who would care for a Candidate of
principals, humanity, justice, and peace, who shall take
care of him, or finance his campaign?
But
that who is ready to market the ideas of the rich class,
the class that loves wars and investments, will find
someone to spend millions on his campaign, will tell
people all the nice promises and glamorous slogans.
They
will elect him, and when he gets to the chair, and sits
in the position of decision- making, he will carry out
the instructions of the major companies that financed
his campaign, not the poor Americans who elected him…
And so,
people would live in one realm, and the decision maker,
having abandoned them, would live in another…
This is
the reality of things in America…
And the
Iraq war is the most evident example…
OCCUPATION REPORT
This Isn’t A Satire:
Command
Orders Marines To Call On Wives When Husbands Aren’t
Home To Gather Intelligence Data:
“Some
Marines Weren't Convinced The Effort Was Worthwhile”
Census-taking by a foreign authority in Iraq has a
long precedent. [So does killing foreign
occupiers. There’s about 3000 years of precedent
for that.] The British, famously adept record
keepers, were known to take a census soon after they
took control of new foreign territory, which
included Iraq until the middle of last century.
April 9, 2006 By Antonio
Castaneda, The Associated Press
KHANDARI, Iraq: After a nearly 10-year hiatus, census
takers finally returned to this small town just west of
Baghdad.
But
these men hardly resembled their predecessors; instead,
behind the clipboard at each doorstep was a smiling
interpreter and over a dozen heavily armed US Marines.
For the
Marines slipping through muddy streets during a steady
morning drizzle, their mission was not part of a
nationwide survey but instead a local attempt to gain
basic information about residents in about 200 homes in
a newly assigned neighbourhood.
As in most parts of Iraq,
the Americans here lack basic information about the
population. Nothing resembling a phonebook is available,
street addresses are incomprehensible, and purported
demographic data is nothing more than anyone's best
guess. Worthwhile tips are scarce.
“If we know who lives
where, we can start connecting the dots,” said 2nd Lt.
David Samuel of New York, assigned to the 1st Battalion,
1st Regiment.
The nine-question census
form was meant to help build a neighbourhood profile by
answering basic questions such as the number of people
who live in each home and which mosque the residents
worshipped in.
An
Iraqi-American translator asked the questions, often to
wives whose husbands were away at work.
The Marines, sidestepping
piles of trash in the streets, walked door-to-door,
followed by wild dogs and bands of neighbourhood
children asking for candies. They periodically looked
up to catch glimpses of Apache attack helicopters
streaking through the gray sky.
GPS coordinates were taken
outside each home, an attempt to make up for a dearth of
street signs in most parts of Iraq, including this town.
US raids on suspect targets often mistakenly lead to
neighbour's homes and sometimes result in full searches
of neighbourhood blocks.
Some
Marines weren't convinced the effort was worthwhile.
[Some Marines don’t have their head up their ass, like
whatever genius thought this useless bullshit up. And
there are a whole lot of Marines who don’t think being
in Iraq for one minute is “worthwhile.”]
“The
way Iraqis travel about, (the census) is just a
roundabout number,” said Staff Sgt. Tommy Vaughn of
Ceres, California, referring to the local Iraqi custom
of visiting extended family for weeks at a time. “My
hopes aren't too bright.”
US troops have also
started regularly distributing surveys to Iraqis across
the country asking for their opinions on the state of
the country. Marines said the responses had help them
understand how tactics could be altered to improve
relations. [The
responses are called IEDs, and they do not require
filling in a survey. Their message about how to
“improve relations” is simple: get the fuck out of our
country and go home. Duh.]
Census-taking by a foreign authority in Iraq has a long
precedent. [So does killing foreign occupiers. There’s
about 3000 years of precedent for that.]
The
British, famously adept record keepers, were known to
take a census soon after they took control of new
foreign territory, which included Iraq until the middle
of last century.
U.S.
OCCUPATION RECRUITING DRIVE IN HIGH GEAR;
RECRUITING FOR THE ARMED RESISTANCE THAT IS

Foreign fighters from the
U.S. army of occupation search Iraqi citizens in Baghdad
April 4, 2006. REUTERS/Ceerwan Aziz
[Fair
is fair. Let’s bring 150,000 Iraqis over here to the
USA. They can kill people at checkpoints, bust into
their houses with force and violence, overthrow the
government, put a new one in office they like better and
call it “sovereign,” and “detain” anybody who doesn’t
like it in some prison without any charges being filed
against them, or any trial.]
[Those
Iraqis are sure a bunch of backward primitives. They
actually resent this help, have the absurd notion that
it’s bad their country is occupied by a foreign military
dictatorship, and consider it their patriotic duty to
fight and kill the soldiers sent to grab their country.
What a bunch of silly people. How fortunate they are to
live under a military dictatorship run by George Bush.
Why, how could anybody not love that? You’d want that
in your home town, right?]
NEED SOME
TRUTH? CHECK OUT TRAVELING SOLDIER
Telling the truth - about the occupation or the
criminals running the government in Washington - is
the first reason for Traveling Soldier. But we want
to do more than tell the truth; we want to report on
the resistance - whether it's in the streets of
Baghdad, New York, or inside the armed forces. Our
goal is for Traveling Soldier to become the thread
that ties working-class people inside the armed
services together. We want this newsletter to be a
weapon to help you organize resistance within the
armed forces. If you like what you've read, we hope
that you'll join with us in building a network of
active duty organizers.
http://www.traveling-soldier.org/
And join
with Iraq War vets in the call to end the occupation
and bring our troops home now! (www.ivaw.net)
Petrol
Pumps Run Dry In A City That Stinks Of Oil
April 7, 2006 London Times
Iraqi
motorists in Kirkuk are forced to join queues hundreds
of cars long and prepare for a 20-hour wait before
reaching gasoline pumps.
“Those
Ungrateful Iraqis!”
04/07/06 By Rosa Brooks,
Los Angeles Times [Excerpt]
AT LAST, there's consensus
on who's to blame for the mess in Iraq: the Iraqis!
From
the beginning, there were ominous signs that the Iraqis
weren't going to play the game right. More than a few
neocon hearts were broken by the Iraqi refusal to greet
us with flowers and champagne as we marched into
Baghdad, and the snub still hurts.
Just
this week, Daniel Pipes, president of the Middle East
Forum and an unrepentant hawk, complained about "the
ingratitude of the Iraqis for the extraordinary favor we
gave them: to release them from the bondage of Saddam
Hussein's tyranny."
What really rankles most
politicos these days is the Iraqis' refusal to get
cracking on the formation of a multiethnic government.
Four months after the elections, Iraqi factions still
haven't come up with a power-sharing arrangement that
satisfies all constituencies.
In Baghdad on Monday for a
joint appearance with British Foreign Secretary Jack
Straw, Condoleezza Rice suggested that we've now given
the Iraqis all the help a liberated people can
reasonably expect: We "have forces on the ground and
have sacrificed here," she told reporters, so we have "a
right to expect that this process will keep moving
forward."
Chiming in, Straw called
on the Iraqis to shape up and select a prime minister,
pronto: "The Americans have lost over 2,000 people.
We've lost over 100.. And billions - billions - of
United States dollars, hundreds of millions of British
pound sterlings have come into this country. We do
have, I think, a right to say that we've got to be able
to deal with Mr. A or Mr. B or Mr. C. We can't deal with
Mr. Nobody."
The
"after all we've done for you!" theme is more than a
little jarring, coming as it does from the architects of
the war.
The
Iraqis didn't beg us to invade their country. We
invaded Iraq for reasons quite unrelated to the welfare
of the Iraqi people (and, it turned out, for reasons
unrelated to the welfare of the American people as
well).
[Cute
spin, but she’s 100% wrong. The Iraqi politicians doing
the stalling are the collaborator traitors who came to
political power thanks to the occupation. And live on
occupation money. Without the U.S. occupation force to
prop them up and keep the little pets safe in the Green
Zone, they’d be dog meat in 24 hours. So they are
indeed ungrateful.]
MORE:
The
Occupation Government:
“A
Collection Of Charlatans And Quislings”
What still holds them all together and remains the
only glue preventing Iraq from splitting into three
separate states, is the self-interested greed of the
warlords who have been installed by the American
forces. None of them want to kill the golden goose
that allows them to cash in on billions of dollars
in Iraqi oil revenues and U.S. aid.
April 6, 2006 By Robert
Dreyfuss, Tomdispatch.com [Excerpt]
Led by
Khalilzad, the United States has definitively broken
with Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari, the hopelessly
incompetent religious fanatic that Washington helped
bring back to Iraq in the first place, installing him as
puppet prime minister of the interim government created
(after months of back-stabbing and deal-making) in the
aftermath of the January 2005 elections.
The full-court press by
the Americans is showing signs of having an effect, and
Jaafari will eventually probably accede to U.S. pressure
and step down.
But whoever takes over,
the government of Iraq will remain weak, divided, and
isolated inside Baghdad's well-fortified Green Zone.
It is
and, until the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, will remain a
collection of charlatans and quislings, leavened with
separatist warlords such as the Barzanis and Talabanis
of Kurdistan and Abdel Aziz al-Hakim of the Supreme
Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI).
What
still holds them all together and remains the only glue
preventing Iraq from splitting into three separate
states, is the self-interested greed of the warlords who
have been installed by the American forces. None of
them want to kill the golden goose that allows them to
cash in on billions of dollars in Iraqi oil revenues and
U.S. aid.
Second,
the imperial treatment of Jaafari by the ambassador has
shocked and stunned Iraqis, opponents and supporters
alike.
His public humiliation has
been a blatant exercise of sheer American muscle, and it
happened on the front pages of Iraq's newspapers. It
makes a mockery of President Bush's alleged commitment
to democracy.
Paradoxically, since
Jaafari -- whose alliance with rebel cleric and warlord
Muqtada al-Sadr remains strong -- can now claim to have
resisted American pressure, it will ultimately
strengthen his political standing, since any Iraqi
politician who opposes the United States becomes
instantly popular.
By the
same token, whoever might now accept the job of prime
minister, as Jaafari's replacement, will take office
under the shadow of the U.S. occupation that installed
him, giving that new leader zero credibility.
Power
in Iraq comes not from acquiescing to American might,
but from resisting it.