This is Not A Christian Nation

If for no other reason, Christian is as Christian Does. This nation has behaved in more barbaric ways than Christian.

Nevertheless, as the author points out, the U.S.A. was never means to be Christian nation.

By Cenk Uygar

I am an American.

My name is not Jimmy Johnson, it is not Virgil Goode and it is not John McCain. But I am an American. No more, no less than any of these people.

My name is Cenk Uygur. And I am proud of it. It might sound a little different to your ear, but it doesn't make it any less American. That's the whole point of the country. If I wanted to live in a place where your race, ethnicity or religion mattered, there were plenty of other countries to choose from. I chose to be an American because I believed we were all equals in the eyes of the law.

Apparently, 42 United States Congressmen are not so sure. The House passed a resolution today celebrating the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. The point of the resolution was to show that we are an open country and that a Muslim-American is equal to any other American. That we are all to be celebrated as Americans. Forty-two representatives couldn't get themselves to agree.

These Congressmen did not vote for the resolution, they voted "present" instead. Is this a silent protest? What are they protesting? Do they disagree that we should celebrate all of the cultures in the country? Do they disagree that we should have Muslims in the country at all?

One of them, Rep. Virgil Goode (R-VA) has already said that on the record -- and refuses to apologize. He said we should have less Muslims in Congress and less Muslims in the country at all. His colleagues didn't see fit to correct him. Moveon takes out a newspaper ad questioning one general and Congress goes ballistic. A US Congressman says we should discriminate against a whole group of US citizens and not a peep.

When John McCain said he wanted a Christian president earlier in the week, I didn't pay much attention to it. I think we overemphasize gaffes on the campaign trail. I care how these people are going to lead the country, not how many errors they make while speaking 24/7 on the campaign trail.

By the way, how did a media so obsessed with verbal blunders decide that George W. Bush was the right man for the job - twice? We were told John Kerry misspoke too often. What a topsy-turvy world we live in.

So, I didn't want to get caught up in this game. At this point, I am unfortunately used to people deriding people of the Muslim faith in America anyway. It has become an ugly reality of our country. It's so common that it's taken for granted now.

A couple of days ago, Ann Coulter was on the Today show and she said the real problem with Senator McCain's comment was that he later said he would vote for a Muslim if he agreed with him. How dare he? Doesn't he realize that a patriotic American would never vote for a Muslim? They are the enemy. They are less than other Americans. They are not equal. This is a Christian nation!

You see, that's what bothers me. I am not a religious Muslim at all. In fact, I am agnostic. I don't participate in Ramadan. I don't need a resolution celebrating it. But once you bring it up for a vote, to purposely not vote for it is a clear sign. It is not a slip of the tongue or a miscommunication in the midst of a hectic campaign schedule. It is a deliberate act meant to send a message. And that's what I do care about. It is a sign that we are not welcome.

You think these bigoted, xenophobic Congressmen care whether we practice the tenets of Islam, or how religious we are or what our actual beliefs might be. Of course, not. They just look at us and say those people are not of us.

Well, whether you like it or not, we are Americans. And I will not bow my head. I will not accept being classified as a second class citizen. I will not let you spit on my people and act like we are beneath you because of our ethnicity.

We had Naomi Wolf on our show last week and she was making a point that once the government starts depriving US citizens with names like Yaser Hamdi of their constitutional rights, soon they will come after people with names like Chris Robinson. She meant well by it and she is right. But think about what that says to me. My name is Cenk Uygur. Why shouldn't other Americans be concerned until they come for Chris Robinson? Shouldn't they care if they come for Cenk Uygur, too?

We had Senator John Danforth on the show this week and he said he was disappointed by John McCain's comments. The former Republican Senator and Episcopal priest stated emphatically that we are not a Christian nation. We are a nation that brings all different beliefs together and mixing our government with a specific religion corrupts the government and the religion.

He is right. And think about what it says to all the rest of us when people feel perfectly free to go on television and declare that this is a Christian nation. They are putting out a huge sign saying -- You Are Not Welcome Here. This country is for Christians!

Read the constitution. Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and George Washington did not agree. They were careful to point out that this is not a Christian nation. That unlike every other country in the world at the time, they were going to make America a nation that had free exercise of religion -- any and all religions. They were not going to let any religion rule the country or identify its inhabitants.

Read the constitution. You're wrong. It specifically says that all religions are welcome. The whole point of the country was to escape from religious persecution. No one religion can force its views on all of us, even if that religion is Christianity.

Read the constitution. I am an American. And under no circumstances am I going to let you take that away from me.

This is not a stand to protect me, my religion or my ethnicity. This is a stand to protect the idea of America. This country was supposed to bring all of us together. It was supposed to establish the idea that we are all equals. I still believe in that dream, and I will fight for it. I am an American.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

We Are Under Attack

I understand just how Timothy feels.

October 3, 2007

America is Under Attack from Within!

By Timothy V. Gatto

I want to preface this article with this; I am really not in the mood to write this. Usually something hits me and I run to the keyboard and offer up what’s on my mind, and it gives me a kind of relief that I got it off my chest and whatever I was angry about isn’t eating my guts alive. This is different. For days now I have been in a funk that is just unbelievable. I feel hopeless and betrayed not only by my own government, but also by the people that I encounter in my daily life.

What I want to say here, no, what I have to say here, is that this country, our very way of life and everything we ever stood for, is under attack. It isn’t “Radical Islam” that is attacking the very fabric of our society, it’s the people running our government, our media, and the people in the shadows that run the corporations and the banks, along with the so-called “think tanks” that make policy. We in the United States are under attack from so many different sectors that it is almost impossible to point your finger at anyone that is taking this nation down the sewer of fascism. You have the right wing of the Republican Party, the right wing of the Democratic Party. Then you have Fox and CNN and ABC, MSNBC and a host of other media that won’t step on the toes of their corporate sponsors. Then you have the Federal Reserve that is run by a private corporation that lends the government their own money at interest and a few families that own America grow exponentially richer by the day.

Then you have these groups like this new group “Freedom’s Watch” that is one of the greatest oxymoron’s in history. These are right wing radicals that believe nothing for individual freedom that started their organization with a paltry 200 Million dollars from sources they don’t dare to identify. The people that run this organization are former White House staffers. Freedoms Watch is described in Wikipedia:

Freedom's Watch is an advocacy group in part run and supported by former officials of the Bush administration. [1] The organization states that its goal is "educating individuals about and advancing public policies that protect America’s interests at home and abroad, foster economic prosperity, and strengthen families." [2] The Freedom's Watch website states, "Those who want to quit while victory is possible have dominated the public debate about terror and Iraq since the 2004 election. Freedom's Watch is going to change that."

In case you want to know who is behind them here is a list of executives and donors:
The Washington Post lists the following members and donors for Freedom's Watch:

* Bradley A. Blakeman (president, a former deputy assistant to George W. Bush).
* Ari Fleischer (board member, former Bush press secretary).
* Matthew Brooks (board member, executive director of the Republican Jewish Coalition).
* Mel Sembler (donor, former ambassador to Italy who helped finance the 2000 Florida recount battle).
* John Templeton Jr. (donor, board member of the Templeton Growth Fund and financier of Let Freedom Ring).
* Sheldon Adelson (donor, CEO Las Vegas Sands Corporation and the third-richest American in Forbes magazine's rankings last year).
* Kevin E. Moley (donor, former U.S. ambassador to international organizations in Geneva, and a senior adviser to Dick Cheney during the 2000 campaign).
* Howard Leach (donor, CEO Leach Capital and former ambassador to France who also helped fund the Florida Recount).
* Anthony Gioia (donor, head of Gioia Management and former ambassador to Malta).
* Richard Fox (donor, co-founder of the Republican Jewish Coalition).
 Gary Erlbaum (donor, owner of Greentree Properties).

Quite a list of Who’s Who in American Fascism. This is just one of the groups that want to make sure that the Progressive/Liberals are shut out of mainstream society. Their website looks like the “Mission Accomplished” banner on the USS Abraham Lincoln when Bush made that ridiculous speech that “Combat operations are over in Iraq”. See it here and tell me if the symbols and colors aren’t right in line with a fascist ideology.
http://freedomswatch.org/ .

Even as we speak the right is spinning tales about Iran in preparation for an attack. One must wonder whom exactly will that attack benefit? Will it benefit the American people when the straits of Hormuz are shut down and gas rises to four bucks a gallon? When are forces are spread so thin and our men are exhausted from fighting one tour after another in a combat zone what exactly do they hope to gain? Meanwhile Bill Kristof and the demonizers on FOX TV spread misinformation at the speed of light while the other networks soft-shoe it so they won’t antagonize their corporate sponsors, the average American that doesn’t read liberal/progressive websites believes that Iran is where Satan reigns supreme.

I recently attended a Move-On meeting right here in the belly of the beast, South Carolina. I met people that are genuinely concerned about the same things that I am concerned about. The only difference between them and I is that I was born and raised in New York and I really don’t give a damn what people think about me. These people at the meeting were afraid to speak to their neighbors and friends about the policies of our government for fear of being ostracized. The Baptists here give sermons about the evils of Islam and our “duty” to combat our enemies. This isn’t endemic to South Carolina, not at all… it’s rampant across the Midwest and the rest of the South to include Texas. This nation is under attack from the extreme right and they are winning.

The most noteworthy thing that I took from the Move-On meeting was that we should not “confront” those against the war, but to speak gently. How do you speak gently to a population that believes we are “helping” the Iraqi people when in fact we are committing genocide there? This is why I didn’t want to write this article. I have been so angry for so long that the anger is starting to turn inward. Unless people get their head out of their ass and start to make some noise, not on Progressive websites, but in the Newspapers, in noisy demonstrations, by boycotts and by telling the truth to their family and neighbors we are going to lose this fight, and believe me when I tell you this is the fight of our lives.

Trying to be civil isn’t the way we are going to shape this nation’s destiny. We are outgunned, and outnumbered, not to mention the fact that we are out-resourced. Just about the only way we are going to turn the tide in this country is by screaming the truth in the ears of anyone that will listen. The time for politeness is over. It’s time that we make our presence visible and meaningful, even if it takes getting arrested over and over again. This is a fight that we cannot lose, for if we lose this fight we lose our freedom and we lose everything that is good about America. Once I was a career soldier in our nation’s Army, now I am a career activist against all that is wrong with our nation. Ten years ago I was left of center. Today I am part of “The Radical Fringe Left”. My views haven’t changed, the nation’s views have changed, I’m the same man, and with the same beliefs I always had. I will work with Move-On, or any other Progressive Americans to change people’s views, one mind at a time. To do anything else is to turn my back on my country, for if ever my country needed me it is now. America needs you too.

That’s the way I see it.




Authors Website: http://liberalpro.blogspot.com

Authors Bio: Former Chairman of the Liberal Party of America, Tim is a retired Army Sergeant. He currently lives in South Carolina. A regular contributor to OpEdNews, he is the author of Kimchee Kronicles and is currently at work on a new novel.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Stewart In A Knockout; Matthews Left Sputtering

(October 03, 2007) -- You may find this hard to believe, but there was a time when TV gasbag Chris Matthews was a respectable hard news reporter. He worked in Washington, D.C. for the San Francisco Examiner from 1987 to around 2000, and also wrote columns for the San Francisco Chronicle and others. But if you have ever bemoaned the turn his career took as an interviewer/talk show host – or if you just hate the inside-the-beltway mentality of many of our leading press and TV pundits – then you would have loved Jon Stewart’s dismantling of Matthews on “The Daily Show” last night.

I have no idea if there is a back story to this epic confrontation beyond Stewart’s known hatred of loudmouth TV bullying (remember his famous attack on “Crossfire” a few years back?). But what was on the screen right in front of our noses was shocking enough, not to mention long overdue. Matthews, growing angry, called it “the book interview from hell” and his "worst interview ever," adding, "You are the worst."

Matthews accused him of "trashing my book." Stewart said he was actually "trashing your philosophy."

The "Hardball" host was there, like so many others before him, simply to hype his new book, “Life’s a Campaign.” Stewart was after him right from the start. He described the book as claiming that “people can use what politicians do in political campaigns to help their lives. ... That strikes me as fundamentally wrong.” Rather than a self-help book it is really a “self-hurt book, if you will," he added. "Aren't campaigns fundamentally contrivances?"

Matthews agreed, but said you could still learn from successful politicians – like them, you sometimes have to “sell yourself” to get a job or manipulate people to get ahead.

"But there has to be some core of soul in there," Stewart replied. "There's nothing in this book about, 'Be good, be competent.'"

Matthews said THAT book had been written before – and it was the Bible. But Stewart, when he is on his game, can be quick and erudite, and now he pointed out that Matthews’ new book had also been written before – and it was Machiavelli’s “The Prince.” Matthews claimed his book was better than "The Prince."

Stewart then twice called Matthews’ book "a recipe for sadness. ... If you live this book, your life will be strategy, and ... you'll be unhappy."

Matthews, finding himself on the receiving end for a change, invited Stewart to “Hardball,” and "we can play this both ways." Stewart replied, “I don't troll," drawing gasps from the audience.

"You are unbelievable," Matthews said. "This is a book interview from hell. This is the worst interview I've ever had in my life. This is the worst. You are the worst." Matthews accused him of being another Zell Miller but Stewart said that, unlike the former senator, he would not challenge Matthew to a duel.

Sputtering for an explanation, Matthews charged that "you are afraid of me" and there must be something in his book “that you fear."

"Like fascism, I fear fascism," Stewart responded.

This was worth waiting a decade for. You can watch the interview here.

Perhaps we should close with a quote from Machiavelli: "Because how one ought to live is so far removed from how one lives....it is necessary for a prince, wanting to maintain himself, to learn how to be able to be not good and to use this and not use it according to necessity." Now, that's playing hardball.

---

Greg Mitchell (gmitchell@editorandpublisher.com) is editor of E&P.


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Demonize This!

Published on Wednesday, October 3, 2007 by CommonDreams.org

by Joyce Marcel

In the grand tradition of the loopy conservative patriarchy, right up there with Ronald Reagan’s 1981 comment, “Trees cause more pollution than automobiles do,” we now have Homeland Security Chairman Michael Chertoff arguing that “illegal migrants really degrade the environment.”

Speaking on Monday in defense of the loathsome Mexican-American border wall, he said, “I’ve seen pictures of human waste, garbage, discarded bottles and other human artifact in pristine areas. And believe me, that is the worst thing you can do to the environment.”

Ah yes. Pristine areas. Being defiled. It’s almost like… dare we say it? Rape? Aieee! Do they want our white women, too?

While it’s hard to take any conservative Republican seriously when he talks about preserving the environment (words that come easily to mind are big oil, destroying the Alaska wilderness, burning coal, nuclear power and auto emissions), this one takes the cake.

I’m not saying that liberals are always the good guys, but why do conservatives need to feel virulent hatred for some other group before they can feel good about themselves?

Is it penis size? Is it an inherent personality trait? Is it massive insecurity? Is it guilt over the enormous damage they’ve caused over the years?

It would be easy to say they’re just narcissists who feel that they’re better than everyone else. (Dick Cheney springs to mind; Bush only feels better than everyone else because he’s a spoiled rotten rich kid, but Cheney’s arrogance is of an entirely different nature and degree.)

It’s true that most tribes, at the dawn of their individual civilizations, call themselves “us” or “the people.” Everyone else becomes “the other,” or possibly “the enemy.” But wasn’t Western civilization supposed to have moved beyond that a long, long time ago?

I first heard the word “demonizing” in regard to what happened - deservedly - to Richard Nixon’s presidency, but hatred has a long and ugly history in America. The many outrages of slavery made it easy to demonize African-Americans. It happens even among the incredibly wealthy. In the Gilded Age, Mrs. Astor built a ballroom that could only hold 400 people, and so “The 400″ became the social elite who excluded all the rest. The Chinese were demonized in the West when they came to build the railroads. In the East, it was the Irish. In my grandparents’ time, Eastern European Jews were demonized. In fact, Jews have been demonized for most of the 5,768 years we’ve been around. (That Jews have turned around and demonized the Palestinians is a topic for another column.)

When I was growing up, Jews and “coloreds” were the targets - remember the iconic photograph of Southern water fountains labeled “white” and “colored?” Perhaps African-Americans, however, have finally escaped their chains. Just recently, Bill O’Reilly visited Sylvia’s, the famous Harlem soul food restaurant, and he couldn’t get over how the patrons were acting. “There wasn’t one person in Sylvia’s who was screaming, ‘M-Fer, I want more iced tea,’” O’Reilly said. “They are just like us now.”

The great chain of demonization continued when, thanks to Betty Friedan, we realized that women weren’t being treated all that well. Soon after? Enter the “feminazi.” And when the conservatives weren’t raging about uppity women -and, although I dislike Hillary Clinton’s politics, I do enjoy watching the conservatives having apoplexy while talking about her - they were ranting about welfare mothers.

Next up to be demonized were homosexuals. The white Christian conservative patriarchy got a lot of brutal mileage out of hating them. However, homophobia, outside of fundamentalist Christian thinking, Congress and, possibly, the U.S. Supreme Court, seems to have calmed down. The gays have become mainstreamed. Instead of wearing thongs, wigs and feathers and parading down Fifth Avenue, they started getting married, raising children, and even joining the Republican party.

Who can be demonized next? Who must the conservatives hate to make themselves feel better and reaffirm their superior status?

Illegal immigrants, that’s who. They are “degrading the environment.” They are corrupting our economy! (In my mind, at least, they may be the only ones holding it up). They’re brown-skinned! They don’t speak English! They may get sick and use our hospitals! They have too many babies! Oh my God! Hate! Hate! Hate!

Eventually, this becomes a zero-sum game because every newly-identified and stigmatized group in America ultimately becomes mainstreamed. (Hasn’t Chertoff seen “Ugly Betty”?)

Demonization has become a national way of life. It’s also become the national way of death. Everybody hates somebody somewhere, to paraphrase Dean Martin. The conservatives demonized Saddam Hussein in order to invade his country. Now they’re in the process of demonizing Mahmoud Ahmadinejad so they can invade his. They can’t really win a war with, or even occupy, these countries. They’re just striking out blindly.

Exporting our hatred has becomes an ugly and bloody American reality that will kill hundreds of thousands and destroy our national soul.

Whether we quote the Lord as he spoke to Moses, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself,” or the Beatles - “All you need is love” - if America doesn’t soon find its heart and extend its hand, the world will demonize us and we will be doomed.

Joyce Marcel is a columnist and journalist living and working in southern Vermont. A collection of her columns, “A Thousand Words or Less,” is available through joycemarcel.com. Write her at joycemarcel@yahoo.com.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Our Bonhoeffer Moment?

Published on Wednesday, October 3, 2007 by CommonDreams.org

Our Bonhoeffer Moment

by Jeff Leys

The Bonhoeffer Moment of nonviolent civil resistance and disobedience to the world war being waged by the United States is clearly at hand. As Congress considers an additional $190 billion to fund the Iraq - Afghanistan war through September 2008 and as the threats of war against Iran become increasingly loud, it is time for us to learn lessons from the German resistance to Hitler, to the Nazi regime and to the war waged by the German nation-state. We must engage in the Long Resistance to this current world war, using every nonviolent means to bring about its end. I was set to be tried on October 2 for an act of nonviolent civil resistance at the U.S. Military Entrance Processing Command. The judge dismissed the charge the day of the trial. Following is the closing statement I prepared for the jury trial in Waukegan, Illinois.

Our Bonhoeffer Moment:

In 1942, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a Lutheran theologian engaged in resistance work to bring about an end to the Nazi regime, penned the following lines in his letter “After Ten Years”. He was in prison and under investigation when he wrote:

“We have been silent witnesses of evil deeds; we have been drenched by many storms; we have learnt the arts of equivocation and pretence; experience has made us suspicious of others and kept us from being truthful and open; intolerable conflicts have worn us down and even made us cynical. Are we still of any use? What we shall need is not geniuses, or cynics, or misanthropes, or clever tacticians, but plain, honest, straightforward men. Will our inward power of resistance be strong enough, and our honesty with ourselves remorseless enough, for us to find our way back to simplicity and straightforwardness?”

Silence.

Silence is golden.

Silence is Death.

Silence in the face of our country waging a world war is complicity in the war; is complicity in the deaths of thousands of U.S. soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi citizens; is complicity in a crime against humanity.

I chose to break the silence at the U.S. Military Entrance Processing Command (MEPCOM) on July 5, 2006. I choose to break the silence today.

I chose to act at MEPCOM last July for a number of reasons. MEPCOM is the command headquarters for the system of Military Entrance Processing Stations. Each person entering the military takes their oath of enlistment at one of these stations. MEPCOM, as the command headquarters of this system, is the focal point of injustice being done to those who serve in our country’s military.

I acted to oppose the injustice of stop-move orders which force service members to extend their tour of duty beyond its scheduled end date.

I acted to oppose the injustice of stop-loss orders which force service members to remain in the military beyond the agreed upon end of enlistment date.

I acted to demand that our country provide the highest quality health care for veterans and their families, as well as for all who live within the U.S.

I acted in solidarity with those members of the military who have chosen to risk prison for refusing to comply with orders to deploy to Iraq to fight in an unjust war.

I acted to demand that our country immediately withdraw from Iraq and recommit itself to rebuilding the Common Good in Iraq and in the United States-funding hospitals, health care clinics, schools, jobs programs and the like rather than funding war, death and destruction.

I acted to engage in a conspiracy of Life with Iraqi citizens suffering over these past 16 years of economic and military warfare and to act in a conspiracy of Life with U.S. soldiers, citizens and others who are engaged in nonviolent action to end the U.S. war in and occupation of Iraq.

Does this form of civilly disobedient action accomplish anything? I don’t know. I believe it does, but I simply don’t know within the context of a world war-the first world war begun by a democracy. For guidance, I look to those German citizens who engaged in resistance work to bring an end to the Nazi regime and to end the world war.

In 1943, German students formed the group the White Rose which advocated for the overthrow of the Nazi regime and for an end to the war. Their simple, yet profound, act was to distribute flyers advancing their positions calling for resistance to Hitler and his regime. Once discovered and arrested, they were executed by the German state. Yet 50 years later, everyone in Germany would come to know of Hans and Sophie Scholl and their comrades in the struggle to end the war and the regime.

In 1945, Dietrich Bonhoeffer and many others were also executed by the German state for engaging in resistance activities to overthrow Hitler. Bonhoeffer, in 1939, had the option of remaining in the U.S. where he would have been able to ride out the war in the safety of academia. Instead he chose to return to Germany to participate in resistance work. Writing as a Christian theologian about his country in which the Church was a willing accomplice in crimes against humanity, Bonhoeffer stated his reason for returning:

“Christians in Germany will face the terrible alternative of either willing the defeat of their nation in order that Christian civilization may survive, or willing the victory of their nation and thereby destroying our civilization. I know which of these alternatives I must choose; but I cannot make this choice in security.”

Bonhoeffer knew what choice he had to make, he made it, and he paid the price for it.

Let this be our Bonhoeffer Moment of resistance to our country’s world war in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere that the guns are being aimed.

The examples of Hans Scholl, Sophie Scholl and Dietrich Bonhoeffer echo down through the years. In 1983, German judges and prosecutors recalled the example set by the German resistance efforts to Hitler and the Nazi regime and crimes against humanity and determined that it was their obligation to act to prevent nuclear genocide from occurring. German judges and prosecutors actively blockaded the U.S. military bases to which Pershing nuclear cruise missiles were being deployed. They acted to uphold international law even though that meant violating national law.

So does an act of entering the U.S. Military Entrance Processing Command do any good? I don’t know. I do know that my action did not stand alone on that day. I do know that others are engaged in active nonviolent civil disobedience to end the Iraq war. Since February 5 of this year, over 700 people have been arrested across the U.S. in actions to end the Iraq war-with many more arrests to come.

I ask you today to join with us in this conspiracy of Life. You have the opportunity today to find me guilty or not guilty. If you believe that the war in Iraq is proper and just, you should find me guilty-regardless of what the law says. If you believe the war in Iraq must be brought to an end today, you should find me not guilty-regardless of what the law says.

The choice is clear and stark. Life or Death. Not guilty or guilty. The future of the war is in your hands today. I urge you to follow your conscience-regardless of the law.

Jeff Leys is Co-Coordinator of Voices for Creative Nonviolence and a national organizer with Seasons of Discontent: A Presidential Occupation Project as well as the Occupation Project. He can be contacted via email, jeffleys@vcnv.org.J

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Banks and Coal and the Environment

Published on Wednesday, October 3, 2007 by Inter Press Service

Citigroup, Bank of America Raked Over Coal

by Abid Aslam

WASHINGTON - U.S. environmentalists seeking to turn up the heat on the coal industry, which they blame for a litany of problems, are targeting two banks they say have taken the lead in financing mines.

Citigroup Inc. and Bank of America Corp. are the targets of a new campaign launched Tuesday by the Rainforest Action Network (RAN).

The effort also is aimed at shoring up U.S. credibility on climate change in future talks with China and India, which lead the world in burning coal, a principal source of the heat-trapping gas carbon dioxide.

“From cradle to grave, coal is dirty,” said Rebecca Tarbotton, the group’s global finance campaign director.

The banks can expect “a ruckus in the streets” and questions from shareholders but plans do not call for consumer boycotts, Tarbotton said.

To press its cause, RAN has teamed up with the Interfaith Council on Corporate Responsibility, an investment network of 275-plus religious institutions, and organisers of Step It Up, a series of nationwide anti-global warming demonstrations, the next of which is planned for Nov. 3.

The banks had no direct comment on the campaign but told IPS they embraced environmental concerns.

“Citi, together with its clients, environmental organisations and other stakeholders, is taking a responsible and strong leadership position on climate change and is on record as supporting comprehensive efforts to move forward on the complicated issue of climate change,” said Citi spokeswoman Valerie Hendy. “Moreover, we have committed 50 billion dollars, more than any other institution, over the next 10 years for climate-friendly efforts.”

The world’s largest bank received top marks from the Carbon Disclosure Project, an independent organisation that works with shareholders and corporations, for its efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions, Hendy added. Citi has promised a 10-percent cut in carbon emissions from its operations by 2011 “and we are investing in climate-friendly enterprises and engaging with our clients on their carbon reduction efforts,” she said.

A Bank of America spokesman said coal remained vital to the U.S. power supply.

“The reality is that, as a country, over 50 percent of the electricity we all consume comes from coal,” said the spokesman, Ernesto Anguilla. “Bank of America is aggressively investing in and financing the development and use of cleaner renewable energies.”

Campaigners said the banks were not doing enough.

Citi’s 50-billion-dollar pledge, made in May, “may seem like a significant commitment [but] it amounts to less than 0.2 percent of the company’s 2.2 trillion dollars in assets,” RAN said.

Last year alone, Citi provided 200 times more financing for “dirty energy” than it did for alternative technologies such as wind, solar, or geothermal power, Tarbotton said.

Likewise, RAN decried as insufficient a recent Bank of America pledge to support eco-friendly businesses and to address climate change. Last year, it added, the firm spent nearly 100 times more money on high-polluting projects than it did on cleaner alternatives.

Electricity generated from coal is the leading cause of global warming in the United States, according to RAN. It also is the largest source of toxic mercury and a top contributor to air pollution, asthma, and ecological destruction.

Coal is abundant: The United States is estimated to have around 200 years’ worth of reserves, mostly under the Appalachian Mountains and in the Southwest. Interest in coal is rising amid increasing demand for energy and pressure to reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil.

Already, plans call for the construction of 150 new coal-fired power plants across the country. Citi and Bank of America rank among the top lenders to companies involved in the expansion, according to RAN.

“This new coal rush would add between 600 million and 1.1 billion tonnes of additional carbon dioxide emissions annually and negate nearly every other effort currently on the table to combat climate change,” the group said, adding that each new power plant would have a lifespan of about 50 years.

If the plans are realised, “in the next five years the U.S. coal power sector will exceed India’s and rival China’s,” said Tarbotton.

In consequence, “the United States will have no credibility in trying to get them to clean up their acts,” added Step It Up founder Bill McKibben.

Coal mining is responsible for thousands of deaths each year and the ruin of entire ecosystems and communities, RAN said in a report released to coincide with the launch of the campaign.

Coal companies say they are working to reduce carbon emissions by developing cleaner, more efficient fuel. Their opponents insist that future energy demand should be met by tapping renewable sources that are clean and in infinite supply. Among these are the wind, sun, tides, and heat trapped under the earth.

“We basically have better options,” said Tarbotton.

© 2007 Inter Press Service

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Canada Refuses Entry to CODEPINK Cofounder Medea Benjamin and Retired Colonel Ann Wright

WASHINGTON - October 3 – Two well-respected US peace activists, CODEPINK and Global Exchange cofounder Medea Benjamin and retired Colonel and diplomat Ann Wright, were denied entry into Canada today (Wednesday, October 3). The two women were headed to Toronto to discuss peace and security issues at the invitation of the Toronto Stop the War Coalition. At the Buffalo-Niagara Falls Bridge they were detained, questioned and denied entry. They will hold a press conference on Thursday afternoon in front of the Canadian Embassy in Washington DC to ask the Canadian government to reverse its policy of barring peaceful protesters. The women were questioned at Canadian customs about their participation in anti-war efforts and informed that they had an FBI file indicating they had been arrested in acts of non-violent civil disobedience. WHEN: Thursday, October 4th at 1pm WHERE: Canadian Embassy, 501 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Washington DC "In my case, the border guard pulled up a file showing that I had been arrested at the US Mission to the UN where, on International Women's Day, a group of us had tried to deliver a peace petition signed by 152,000 women around the world," says Benjamin. "For this, the Canadians labeled me a criminal and refused to allow me in the country." "The FBI's placing of peace activists on an international criminal database is blatant political intimidation of US citizens opposed to Bush administration policies," says Colonel Wright, who was also Deputy US Ambassador in four countries. "The Canadian government should certainly not accept this FBI database as the criteria for entering the country." Both Wright and Benjamin plan to request their files from the FBI through the Freedom of Information Act and demand that arrests for peaceful, non-violent actions be expunged from international records. "It's outrageous that Canada is turning away peacemakers protesting a war that does not have the support of either US or Canadian citizens," says Benjamin. "In the past, Canada has always welcomed peace activists with open arms. This new policy, obviously a creature of the Bush administration, is shocking and we in the US and Canada must insist that it be overturned. Four members of the Canadian Parliament--Peggy Nash, Libby Davies, Paul Dewar and Peter Julian-- expressed outrage that the peace activists were barred from Canada and vow to change this policy. Interviews available on request.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Rush is Round The Bend

October 3, 2007

Right Wing Media Circles Wagons; Unprecedented!

By Dean Powers

In an unprecedented display of fear, Republican Company spokespeople from across the country and multiple media outlets teamed up to blame Hillary Clinton and George Soros for Rush Limbaugh's defamation of the troops.

The intimidation seems to be working only on coward Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Mary).

Last Wednesday, Limbaugh labeled anti-war veterans "phony soldiers." Amazingly, while Congress set aside their priorities last week to condemn MoveOn.Org for merely begging the question: "General Petraeus or General Betray Us?", this week they're above trifling little condemnations for personal attacks against US soldiers.

The comment was typical. Rush, an orthodox McCarthyist, was incensed after bungling a call from a Republican war veteran who shattered the Republican stereotypes that Limbaugh so carefully promotes. Here is the incident:

LIMBAUGH: Mike in Chicago, welcome to the EIB Network. Hello.

CALLER 1: Hi Rush, how you doing today?

LIMBAUGH: I'm fine sir, thank you.

CALLER 1: Good. Why is it that you always just accuse the Democrats of being against the war and suggest that there are absolutely no Republicans that could possibly be against the war?

LIMBAUGH: Oh, come on!... I don't know a single Republican or conservative, Mike, who wants to pull out of Iraq in defeat.

CALLER 1: Well, I am a Republican, and I've listened to you for a long time, and you're right on a lot of things, but I do believe that we should pull out of Iraq. I don't think it's winnable. And I'm not a Democrat, but I just -- sometimes you've got to cut the losses.

"Whoa!" Rush is thinking. "Damage control! What would happen if my audience finds out that not every Republican is a slave to the dictates of the Republican Company spokespeople?"

After much hemming and hawing, Rush settled on a response: "Mike, you can't possibly be a Republican."

Here beginith the thinking process that landed Rush in hot water. "I'll call Republicans who disagree with me 'phonies.'" It was no great leap of logic for Rush to condemn all anti-war soldiers as phonies mere seconds later when he hosted the second caller--the one who made Rush more famous in the last few days than he's been in years.

CALLER 1: I am definitely a Republican.

LIMBAUGH: You can't be a Republican. You are --

CALLER 1: Oh, I am definitely a Republican. See, I -- I've used to be military, OK? And I am a Republican.

LIMBAUGH: Yeah. Yeah.

CALLER 1: And I do live [inaudible] but --

LIMBAUGH: Right. Right. Right, I know.

CALLER 1: -- you know, really -- I want you to be saying how long it's gonna take.

LIMBAUGH: And I, by the way, used to walk on the moon!

What followed was epic. Limbaugh's "phony soldiers" comments were roundly criticized by distinguished members of Congress and Media Matters. Then Rush responded, and he responded, and he responded. Rush began the day of reconciliation Tuesday by calling for Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to "step down." What? Resign? Has Limbaugh lost his mind?

Rush proceeded to compare his armies of antagonists to Stalinists and Ahmadenijads. He conjured up Gulags and Stasi police. He accused Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi of dancing naked around a bonfire in the woods. He put a flashlight under his chin and told stories about his childhood. He brayed like a pig and galloped around in circles with his hair on fire.

Fox News Republican Company spokespeople Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly, who haven't completely lost their marbles yet, both piled it on--albeit with less rampant signs of paranoia. Both spent excessive, outrageous amounts of time defending Rush.

O'Reilly made Limbaugh the "top story" on his program Monday night. Weaving fact and fiction, O'Reilly created a fairy tale in which poor little Rush was the victim of the big bad bully George Soros.

On Tuesday, Hannity launched into his three hour radio program defending Rush. Hanntiy called Soros and Clinton the "new axis of power." He added, "Their goal is to silence the new medium," a reference to the Right Wing Media.

Also flocking to Limbaugh's defense: Joe Scarborough, Willie Geist, the Arizona Ledger and others.

Claiming respect for the men and women fighting in Iraq is one thing; showing respect is another. Limbaugh escalated his vitriolic attacks against the military today by comparing an Iraq War veteran who took offense at his comments to a suicide bomber.

The veteran, Brian McGough, appeared in radio and TV ads criticizing Limbaugh.

“This is such a blatant use of a valiant combat veteran," Limbaugh said, as if McGough were a vegetable, "lying to him about what I said and then strapping those lies to his belt, sending him out via the media and a TV ad to walk into as many people as he can walk into."

Its contemptible enough to suggest that McGough has phony opinions, but it smacks of ignominious elitism and arrogance for Limbaugh to tread a US soldier into the dirt and shame reserved for the cowards and reptiles that strap bombs to themselves to kill women and children. McGough has a Purple Heart. He was attacked, while fighting for our country, by a suicide bomber.



Authors Bio: Dean Powers is a former intern at The Nation, whose views are not reflected in this piece. The Nation could use support right now, as it is coping with dubious and extraordinary hikes in its postal rates.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Plans For Demoestic Spying...

It just gets worse

New domestic intel plans scariest of all

by Deep Harm

Tue Oct 02, 2007 at 01:56:30 PM PDT

The dictatorship in Mynmar undoubtedly would love to have the new capabilities the Bush administration is developing. In development are programs that will give the NSA control of commercial computer systems and commercial satellite imagery. Spy satellites will be turned inward on the U.S., potentially using them to track citizens via RFID chips in their passports and cell phones. The data collected will be shared among domestic government agencies, from DHS to the Department of Interior, as well as local law enforcement, for a wide range of uses, with no external oversight.

The administration's latest 'proposals' are scarier than older proposals because some give up any pretense of collecting information only for counterterrorism purposes, and because now government not only will look and listen, but will actively control access to systems - the same kinds of systems that proved vital to citizens in Myanmar as they sought to resist a brutal, dictatorial regime.

When Buddhist monks and other citizens gathered to protest abuses of Mynamar's military regime, bloggers reported on developments to the world via cellphones and the internet. When Myanmar's police and military attacked the dissidents, human rights groups documented the atrocities through images obtained from commercial satellites. Efforts by the Myanmar government to control those technologies have been only partially successful. New Bush administration projects, combined with existing projects, have the potential to shut down similar sytems in the United States, possibly more completely. Here they are:

1. NSA 'Protection' for Commercial Computer Networks

This is an NSA project that gives it control of commercial computer networks, ostensibly to protect the systems from hackers.

The Baltimore Sun reports that "the plan calls for the NSA to work with the Department of Homeland Security and other federal agencies to monitor....networks to prevent unauthorized intrusion, according to those with knowledge of what is known internally as the "Cyber Initiative."

What are these "networks?" Apparently, any internet or intranet used by a business designated (or self-designated) as "critical infrastructure." That is a vast and poorly defined category.

As usual, DNI Mike McConnell is said to be coordinating the "initiative," which DHS will operate with personnel from NSA and other intelligence agencies.

"If you're going to do cybersecurity, you have to spy on Americans to secure Americans," said a former government official familiar with NSA operations. "It would be a very major step."

According to the Sun, per a "senior intelligence official," "the NSA's new domestic role would require a revision of the agency's charter." So, why is this "initiative" underway, apparently without Congressional authorization to change the scope of its authority?

2. Domestic Geospatial Intelligence

This is project turns the gaze of spy satellites and other surveillance assets inward, collecting "geospatial intelligence" (images and a varitety of data) of the United States and sharing that information with a long list of domestic government agencies, from FEMA to the Department of the Interior to local law enforcement. Not mentioned in the press, but inherent in satellite technology is the ablity to use RFID chips as tracking devices.

The project would be run by a new office in DHS called the National Applications Office (NAO). NAO was already well underway when NSA and DHS officials testified about the scheme to a House Committee, which promptly ordered it put on "hold," until members could learn more about the program's privacy protections. From the hearing testimony I heard, there are no meaningful protections; just a small internal oversight office and no external oversight.

Government Computer News summarizes the program this way:

"The NAO marks a dramatic expansion of prior domestic use of satellite imagery that raises very significant constitutional, legal and organizational issues," the [Congressional] representatives wrote.

3. Control of Commercial Satellite Imagery

A project for NSA control of public access to all imagery of the United States - commercial, foreign or otherwise.

An American intelligence boss has hinted at curbs on commercial satellite imagery to prevent its use by enemies of the USA

.

So writes The Register, a U.K. publication. Quoting from an AP story, The Register attributes the following comment to Vice Admiral Robert Murrett, director of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), the agency in charge of U.S. government satellite imagery.

"I think we may need to have some control over things that are disseminated. I don't know if that means buying up all the imagery or not. I think there are probably some other ways you could do it," he said.

Well, there's always bullying, the method of choice in the Bush administration. The Register theorizes:

Just what other ways these might be - especially in the case of non-US organisations disseminating images from non-US satellites - was not made clear. Diplomatic pressure or international law could often be brought to bear, no doubt; and if a future US government felt the need were urgent enough it could resort to electronic/information warfare or even shooting down troublesome satellites, like the Chinese.

4. NSA development of computer malware

This project, developing computer worms more fiendish than anything previously known, sounds like a companion project for NSA's scheme to control commercial networks.

A project aimed at developing defences against malware that attacks unpatched vulnerabilities involved tests on samples developed by the NSA. The ultra-secretive US spy agency supplied network testing firm Iometrix with eight worms as part of its plans to develop what it describes as the industry's first Zero-day Attack Test Platform. (ChannelRegister)

But...

Other security experts were more skeptical about whether it was taking the right approach. "You don't need to write viruses to test security technologies. There's no shortage of new malware. Also you examine existing stuff and study techniques," said Graham Cluley, senior technology consultant at Sophos. (ChannelRegister

5. Increasing use of RFID, GPS and other tracking technology
[This section has been edited to reflect comments]

Projects like the domestic geospatial project have the potential to become even more invasive as radio frequency identification (RFID), GPS and other tracking technology is incorporated into objects citizens typically carry with them, everything from cellphones to ID badges. As Wikipedia explains:

Most RFID tags contain at least two parts. One is an integrated circuit for storing and processing information, modulating and demodulating a (RF) signal and can also be used for other specialized functions. The second is an antenna for receiving and transmitting the signal.

That transmitting antenna allows the RFID potentially one day to be tracked by satellites, drones or air craft, in some cases, in real time.

The use of RFID chips in U.S. passports is already underway, another so-called counterterrorism measure. But, the chipped passports already have been hacked. Nevertheless, DHS is determined to continue with the project.

6. Congress' "Protect America" wiretapping law

The full impact of the "Protect America Act," Congress' hurried August revision (at the administration's urging) of U.S. wiretapping law, is just now becoming known. Wired Magazine offers this summary:

In short, the law gives the Administration the power to order the nation's communication service providers -- which range from Gmail, AOL IM, Twitter, Skype, traditional phone companies, ISPs, internet backbone providers, Federal Express, and social networks -- to create possibly permanent spying outposts for the federal government.

These outposts need only to have a "significant" purpose of spying on foreigners, would be nearly immune to challenge by lawsuit, and have no court supervision over their extent or implementation.

Abuses of the outposts will be monitored only by the Justice Department, which has already been found to have underreported abuses of other surveillance powers to Congress.

We must not forget, either, those border fences and mass detention facilities; or Operation FALCON.

Where's the oversight?

Some will argue that all of these capabilities are necessary and appropriate in a world of terrorism. But, it is not necessary to also eliminate external oversight mechanisms, as this administration habitually does.

Take for example, the Department of Homeland Security, where some of the new projects will be based. The Homeland Security Act gives the Secretary, DHS, authority to override the Inspector General to shut down investigations and withhold information from being released outside the agency. To get away with that, the Act had to amend the Inspector General General Act. Also, per the HSA, the Secretary, DHS, answers only to the President, and there is no provision for judicial review of the Secretary's decisions. Read it and weep.

Consider that, under President George W. Bush, an alarming number of inspectors general are themselves under investigation.

Like the eight U.S. attorneys whose firings have captured the attention of Congress, several inspectors general have recently drawn the administration's fire for putting principle before politics. (The head of the General Services Administration went so far as to call its inspector general a "terrorist.") So now is a good time for Congress to consider changes in the law to make it easier for principle to prevail. (LATimes

Clearly, some reform is needed. So, why is Bush threatening to veto a Congressional bill that would strengthen the Inspector General Act - the primary mechanism for internal oversight of federal agencies?

Conclusion

Supporters of domestic intelligence projects argue that honest people don't fear oversight; criminals do. But, honest people should fear 'oversight' by anyone who rejects oversight themselves. The light of justice must shine equally upon everyone, or it shines for no one. The lack of meaningful oversight is sufficient cause to ban all such programs.

The projects underway by the Bush administration (largely with Congressional consent) are like the walls of a prefab fortress being lowered into place while citizens stand in the center. When the last wall has settled, we may for a time feel safe. But, with the structure already in place, a criminal administration need only turn the key in the door, locking in citizens faster than they could react to stop it.

Thus, a fortress becomes a prison. Thus, a free country becomes a Myanmar.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Our Government Is Robbing Us Blind, AGAIN

Get the damn money back, even if the guilty has to live under a bridge.

Report: Millions Wasted on Gov't Travel

By HOPE YEN

WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal employees wasted at least $146 million over a one-year period in business- or first-class airline tickets bought in violation of travel policies, congressional investigators say.

A draft report by the Government Accountability Office, obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press, is the first to examine travel abuse across the federal government following reports of extensive misuse of premium-class travel by Pentagon and State Department employees.

The review of travel spending by more than a dozen agencies from July 1, 2005, to June 30, 2006, found 67 percent of premium-class travel by executives or their employees, worth at least $146 million, was unauthorized or otherwise unjustified.

Among the worst offenders: the State Department, whose employees typically fly abroad on official business.

Many of the cases involved high-ranking senior officials or political appointees who claimed exceptions to federal travel rules by citing old medical records or questionable approval from a subordinate employee.

Investigators found that senior officials often flew business- or first-class because they felt entitled to the perk.

The higher airfare for traveling in one of the premium classes resulted in expenses often five to 10 times more than what was authorized under government travel rules.

"With the serious fiscal challenges facing the federal government, agencies must maximize their ability to manage and safeguard valuable taxpayers' dollars," investigators wrote, suggesting agencies recoup the extra cost from those who abuse travel policies.

Under federal rules, government employees generally must fly coach for both domestic and international travel unless the flight takes 14 hours or longer. A few exceptions apply when the employee receives agency approval based on a medical condition, security concerns, lack of availability of coach seats or when required "because of agency mission."

Government investigators found that employees openly flouted the rules and agencies did little to check their abuses. Among the waste cited:

_An Agriculture Department executive took 25 premium-class flights costing $163,000 and said the extra expense had been authorized by a subordinate. In 10 of those trips, the traveler claimed exceptional circumstances to justify the pricier travel to western Europe, even though agency policy forbids premium-class travel unless the flight time is longer than 14 hours.

_Thirty-two State Department employees flew from Washington to Liberia in premium class over a six-month period. Five of those travelers did not have authorization for premium class; three had duplicate tickets and no evidence that the duplicates were refunded; and 17 were not properly justified, as their trips did not meet the 14-hour rule. These flights cost $293,000 and comparable coach-class tickets would have cost $124,000 — a difference of $169,000.

_At the Pentagon, a political appointee took 15 premium-class flights and cited a medical condition as justification for the $105,000 in expenses. However, the only evidence of a medical condition was a note signed by a fellow Pentagon employee, not a physician, attesting to surgery from several years earlier. The Pentagon did not have a doctor's certification from the employee as required by agency policy.

_Nine Justice Department employees charged the agency $35,000 for premium-class air tickets to Frankfurt, Germany, claiming the flight time was over 14 hours. Investigators found the employees added a separate flight to their calculations to reach the 14-hour total, a practice not allowed under government travel rules. Also, two of the flights were not authorized.

The GAO, Congress' investigative and auditing arm, said it was referring all cases it found of improper and abusive travel to the respective agencies and inspector general's offices for possible administrative action and repayment of the difference between premium-class and coach-class travel.

The report comes as some lawmakers are pressing to strengthen government sunshine laws by requiring agency disclosure of business-class travel to Congress. Currently, business-class travel accounts for 96 percent of the premium travel claimed by federal employees.

"No one disputes the fact that government officials need to travel, as not all work can be done behind a desk. Nor should all premium-class travel be eliminated. But the rules are there for a reason and the federal government should enforce them," said Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn.

Coleman noted that after a 2003 GAO report uncovered abuses in Pentagon travel, the department tightened policies and has since dramatically reduced its use of premium travel.

"We simply need the necessary oversight mechanisms in place to ensure that taxpayers' dollars are spent properly," he said.

The latest GAO report noted that several government entities are not subject to government rules on premium-class travel — among them, the U.S. Postal Service, Federal Reserve and Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. — opening up more opportunities for unnecessary waste.

Those entities often allow members of their board of governors to travel business or first class for shorter flights overseas and sometimes domestically. In one case, a deputy director of FDIC flew business class from Washington to London and back at a cost of $7,200, while a coach- class ticket would have cost $800.

On the Net:

• Government Accountability Office: http://www.gao.gov

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Our Government Is Robbing Us Blind, AGAIN

Get the damn money back, even if the guilty has to live under a bridge.

Report: Millions Wasted on Gov't Travel

By HOPE YEN

WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal employees wasted at least $146 million over a one-year period in business- or first-class airline tickets bought in violation of travel policies, congressional investigators say.

A draft report by the Government Accountability Office, obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press, is the first to examine travel abuse across the federal government following reports of extensive misuse of premium-class travel by Pentagon and State Department employees.

The review of travel spending by more than a dozen agencies from July 1, 2005, to June 30, 2006, found 67 percent of premium-class travel by executives or their employees, worth at least $146 million, was unauthorized or otherwise unjustified.

Among the worst offenders: the State Department, whose employees typically fly abroad on official business.

Many of the cases involved high-ranking senior officials or political appointees who claimed exceptions to federal travel rules by citing old medical records or questionable approval from a subordinate employee.

Investigators found that senior officials often flew business- or first-class because they felt entitled to the perk.

The higher airfare for traveling in one of the premium classes resulted in expenses often five to 10 times more than what was authorized under government travel rules.

"With the serious fiscal challenges facing the federal government, agencies must maximize their ability to manage and safeguard valuable taxpayers' dollars," investigators wrote, suggesting agencies recoup the extra cost from those who abuse travel policies.

Under federal rules, government employees generally must fly coach for both domestic and international travel unless the flight takes 14 hours or longer. A few exceptions apply when the employee receives agency approval based on a medical condition, security concerns, lack of availability of coach seats or when required "because of agency mission."

Government investigators found that employees openly flouted the rules and agencies did little to check their abuses. Among the waste cited:

_An Agriculture Department executive took 25 premium-class flights costing $163,000 and said the extra expense had been authorized by a subordinate. In 10 of those trips, the traveler claimed exceptional circumstances to justify the pricier travel to western Europe, even though agency policy forbids premium-class travel unless the flight time is longer than 14 hours.

_Thirty-two State Department employees flew from Washington to Liberia in premium class over a six-month period. Five of those travelers did not have authorization for premium class; three had duplicate tickets and no evidence that the duplicates were refunded; and 17 were not properly justified, as their trips did not meet the 14-hour rule. These flights cost $293,000 and comparable coach-class tickets would have cost $124,000 — a difference of $169,000.

_At the Pentagon, a political appointee took 15 premium-class flights and cited a medical condition as justification for the $105,000 in expenses. However, the only evidence of a medical condition was a note signed by a fellow Pentagon employee, not a physician, attesting to surgery from several years earlier. The Pentagon did not have a doctor's certification from the employee as required by agency policy.

_Nine Justice Department employees charged the agency $35,000 for premium-class air tickets to Frankfurt, Germany, claiming the flight time was over 14 hours. Investigators found the employees added a separate flight to their calculations to reach the 14-hour total, a practice not allowed under government travel rules. Also, two of the flights were not authorized.

The GAO, Congress' investigative and auditing arm, said it was referring all cases it found of improper and abusive travel to the respective agencies and inspector general's offices for possible administrative action and repayment of the difference between premium-class and coach-class travel.

The report comes as some lawmakers are pressing to strengthen government sunshine laws by requiring agency disclosure of business-class travel to Congress. Currently, business-class travel accounts for 96 percent of the premium travel claimed by federal employees.

"No one disputes the fact that government officials need to travel, as not all work can be done behind a desk. Nor should all premium-class travel be eliminated. But the rules are there for a reason and the federal government should enforce them," said Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn.

Coleman noted that after a 2003 GAO report uncovered abuses in Pentagon travel, the department tightened policies and has since dramatically reduced its use of premium travel.

"We simply need the necessary oversight mechanisms in place to ensure that taxpayers' dollars are spent properly," he said.

The latest GAO report noted that several government entities are not subject to government rules on premium-class travel — among them, the U.S. Postal Service, Federal Reserve and Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. — opening up more opportunities for unnecessary waste.

Those entities often allow members of their board of governors to travel business or first class for shorter flights overseas and sometimes domestically. In one case, a deputy director of FDIC flew business class from Washington to London and back at a cost of $7,200, while a coach- class ticket would have cost $800.

On the Net:

• Government Accountability Office: http://www.gao.gov

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Lee Dynamics, General Petraeus and Bribery?

Decide for yourselves but, at the very least, it seems that General Petraeus should have been more aware of what was going on in his own command.

August 31, 2007

U.S. Says Company Bribed Officers for Work in Iraq

By ERIC SCHMITT and JAMES GLANZ

WASHINGTON, Aug. 30 — An American-owned company operating from Kuwait paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes to American contracting officers in efforts to win more than $11 million in contracts, the government says in court documents.

The Army last month suspended the company, Lee Dynamics International, from doing business with the government, and the case now appears to be at the center of a contracting fraud scandal that prompted Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates to dispatch the Pentagon inspector general to Iraq to investigate.

Court documents filed in the case say the Army took action because the company was suspected of paying hundreds of thousands in bribes to Army officers to secure contracts to build, operate and maintain warehouses in Iraq that stored weapons, uniforms, vehicles and other matériel for Iraqi forces in 2004 and 2005.

A lawyer for the company denied the accusations.

One of the officers, Maj. Gloria D. Davis, a contracting official in Kuwait, shot and killed herself in Baghdad in December 2006. Government officials say the suicide occurred a day after she admitted to an Army investigator that she had accepted at least $225,000 in bribes from the company. The United States has begun proceedings to seize Major Davis’s assets, a move her heirs are contesting.

The company has been known as American Logistics Services.

Details of the case have come to light because the company contested the Army’s decision, on July 9, to suspend it from obtaining contracts. That forced the government to disclose details in court papers, including a seven-page statement by an Army investigator.

Howell Roger Riggs, a lawyer or the company, denied the accusations and said the company was appealing to have the suspension lifted. Mr. Riggs acknowledged that the company was under a Justice Department investigation but said that no charges had been filed against the company or its officials.

“This is based solely on a declaration that is unsubstantiated and uncorroborated,” Mr. Riggs said in a telephone interview. “If they want to come forward with hard evidence and accusations, we’ll deal with it at that time.”

The case is now part of a broader investigation in which the Army has a high-level team reviewing 18,000 contracts valued at more than $3 billion that the Kuwait office has awarded over four years.

The Army has suspended 22 companies and individuals, at least temporarily, from pursuing government work because of contract fraud investigations in Iraq, Kuwait and Afghanistan, an Army spokesman said Thursday. A total of 18 companies and individuals are barred for a definite period from government work. Seven more face debarment.

The court papers make clear that investigators have concluded that Lee Dynamics paid large bribes to numerous United States officials in Iraq and Kuwait. Major Davis is one official cited. Another is an Army officer, identified in the investigator’s report as “Person B,” because he is now cooperating with the investigation. He acknowledged receiving $50,000 in cash bribes from the company, the court papers said. Two people with direct knowledge of the investigation or the contracting office in Iraq at the time said “Person B” was Lt. Col. Kevin A. Davis, who worked with an officer who has emerged as a focus of the investigation in the weapons case in Iraq.

That officer, Lt. Col. Levonda Joey Selph, was at the heart of the effort to strengthen the fledgling Iraqi security forces in 2004 and 2005. She worked closely with Gen. David H. Petraeus, who commanded the effort at the time. The general is now the top commander in Iraq. There is no indication that investigators have uncovered any wrongdoing by General Petraeus.

In a brief phone conversation Thursday, Colonel Selph confirmed the connection between her and Colonel Davis in Iraq. “I worked for Kevin Davis,” Colonel Selph said. She said she wanted to consult her lawyer before speaking further and did not respond to subsequent messages.

A woman identifying herself as Kevin Davis’s wife said on the phone that he was out of town and not available for comment. She said that he had gone to work for Lee Dynamics after retiringfrom the army. It is not believed he is related to Gloria Davis.

As the case expands, investigators are looking at the possibility that it has connections to what had appeared to be a separate major corruption scandal. Last week, Maj. John Cockerham, a former Army contracting officer in Kuwait, and his wife and his sister were indicted on charges that they accepted up to $9.6 million in bribes for defense contracts in Iraq and Kuwait.

Court documents, say Major Davis also served as a contracting officer at Camp Arifjan, Kuwait, from in 2003 and 2004 and awarded millions of dollars in contracts to American Logistics and its affiliate companies, raising the question of whether the cases are related.

Lee Dynamics appears to be emblematic of scores of companies formed since the Iraqi government fell to take advantage of billions of dollars in contracts to clothe, feed and arm American troops in Kuwait and to sustain Iraq security forces in Iraq.

According to a July 9 statement by Larry S. Moreland, an agent with the Army’s Criminal Investigation Command, the company’s founder, George H. Lee, and an unnamed person formed American Logistics Services, a Kuwait-based company, to provide logistical support to the military.

In 2004, the company was awarded $11.7 million in contracts to build, operate and maintain several warehouses in Iraq. The court papers contend that as a result of bribes, the company illegally received advance information about the contracts.

In May 2005, the document said, Mr. Lee and his son, Justin W. Lee, shifted assets and contracts to Lee Dynamics, and its contract to maintain the warehouses was renewed in July 2005 even though its performance had been abysmal, said two American officials who were in the country at the time.

That month, after Major Davis moved to the Pentagon, Lee Dynamics was awarded a $12 million warehousing contract. Before the award, Major Davis told George Lee that his company would receive a “glowing report” during the bidding, court documents in the government’s case to seize Major Davis’s assets say.

Between August 2005 and April 2006, the company transferred more than $220,900 in three separate deposits to bank accounts controlled by Major Davis, according to the court filings.

According to its Web site, Lee Dynamics’ warehouses in Taji, Umm Qasr, Ramadi, Mosul and Tikrit, all in Iraq, “have received, stored and issued a large part of the more than a billion dollars worth of materials and equipment that has been ordered for the reconstruction of Iraq.”

Eric Schmitt reported from Washington, and James Glanz from Baghdad. Margot Williams contributed reporting from New York.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.