Recommending Reading

We're short on time and Jim's made the decision no highlights.

Instead, we'll offer recommended readings.

Kat's "Mamas & Papas" -- we like music, we love what she wrote. She had other strong entries this week including on Drunk Uncle. We cover that topic in a roundtable that will post shortly.

Trina's "Eggplant Casserole in the Kitchen" which offers more than a recipe (though the core six plan to try the recipe this evening and purchased the vegetables for it last night).

Rebecca's "about that new york times op-ed ..." which asks why, if the paper was once so concerned about US government funded 'good news' stories being planted in the Iraq press, they're allowing a 'good-newser' to contribute an op-ed?

Wally's "THIS JUST IN! BULLY BOY'S WET NURSE LETS HIM DOWN!" on Collie and Bully.

Cedric's "The joint-posts" which explains why all the joint-posts lately (due to working on the November vote).

Wally & Cedric's joint-post "THIS JUST IN! D.C. LOVE GOES SOUR! ON A MUSICAL NOTE!" and "The end of a love affair (humor)" on the painful words from the object of a sucking to the suckup.

Betty's "The Colleague Heist" which is her latest chapter. This is where things start adding up about Betinna's life pre-Thomas Friedman.

Elaine's "Because of Kat, because of boredom with 'tales of every day housewife' . . ." because Elaine's usually a little more detached online. We love it when she lets loose. (And we agree.)

Mike's "Hear that? The sound of a gate closing" because he's never detached and this captures Mike perfectly. (There's another one we'd like to note that also has his grab the bone with the teeth and tear into it approach but we're pressed for time.)

C.I.'s "NYT: Paragraph nine tells you that five US troops died -- they bury it" because there were supposed to be two entries that morning. The way the paper treated the five soldiers was enough to leave you disgusted. And Jim's insisting upon one more, the one that dubs Condi Rice the playground pusher of fear -- Monday's "Iraq Snapshot."

A Note to Our Readers

Hey --
Another Sunday. What have we got?

Highlights? We got 'em:

Music Spotlight: Kat on Michael Franti & Spearhead's Yell Music!
Humor Spotlight: Wally on the Closed Caption Scandal!
Blog Spotlight: Rebecca on the GOP's "Dirty Depends"
C.I. on the little noted death toll
Blog Spotlight: Mike, tired but standing
Blog Spotlight: Elaine on the progress
Ruth's Report
Humor: Bully Boy Press & Cedric's Big Mix cover the Senate Intel Report
Humor Spotlight: Betty's "The Central Proof"
Blog Spotlight: Cedric wonders who was it that was in bed with the Nazis?
Blog Spotlight: Kat walks you through the al-Maliki Shuffle
Blog Spotlight: Rebecca's "the mouse that purred for the bully boy"
Cooking Spotlight: Mac & Cheese in the Kitchen

We thank everyone for their permission to repost. We thank Dallas for the links and sounding board. And we thank the following for their contributions to this edition. The following worked on this edition:

The Third Estate Sunday Review's Dona, Jess, Ty, Ava and, me, Jim;
Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude;
Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man;
Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ils);
Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix;
Mike of Mikey Likes It!;
Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz;
and Wally of The Daily Jot

New content? We got it.

We were going to make this a visual heavy edition (and did in the print edition) but went a different way with the online edition.

"MyTV's Fascist House" -- visual.

"Iraq War Vets hold press conference Sunday 9:30 am in DC at Camp Democracy" -- this was up two hours before the press conference began.

"Last Week In Iraq" -- is it new content? C.I. says no. We say yes. We did a whopping single paragraph, granted. But when Iraq coverage is so little covered . . .

"Listened to while working on this edition: Michae..." -- we forgot to title this in our haste.


"The People Speak September 15-17" -- PSA for an event you should go to if you're in the NYC area. (We relocated to the West coast, we won't be there.)

"No Link between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda -- none" -- we tried to be clear in this, realizing how hard headed some are and how some enable the administration.

"Hint, hint" -- our essay. We have no problem calling The Nation out (and have before) but we focused on it due to its reach (and we noted they did offer some coverage of Iraq this summer and that they wouldn't make our top ten lists of indeymedia resources that forgot about the war). Betty's line in a roundtable gave us the title.

"The Real 9-11 Moment for Bully Boy" -- a reminder in a time of myth.

'RadioNation with Laura Flanders asked: "Are you ready?"' -- are you ready? Do you know what the 'long war' is about and what are you willing to sacrifice? (Juan Gonzalez is on Flanders' show today).

"Editorial: Troops Home Now" -- our relocation touched on the Sammy Powers for one reason, we'd addressed it before. We heard from regular readers, we heard from new readers, we heard from people attempting to address Darfur through peaceful means who agreed with us that the War Hawks on the issue (the ones wanting the US military sent in) are giving the effort a bad name. All the e-mails except one (noted in this editorial) asked us to please address this issue.
So we did.

"TV: Bo provides the B.O. stinking up Fashion House" -- along with the Darfur issue, we got notes regarding the relocation. In fact that was the biggest response to anything other than our editorial "War Got Your Tongue?" and . . . well any TV commentary Ava and C.I. write. That was the big thing last week (Ava and C.I. didn't believe it, they judged their review a piece of ___"). This one, the one they wrote for today's edition is probably our favorite of recent months. (Possibly the year.) It's funny, it's pointed and it's got a point (as you'd expect from them). We didn't write a line. We did send them back for additions by saying, "Wait, now, during the week, you had a great line about . . ." Because they were bouncing lines off one another all week. We think they were trying to be kind in earlier versions. (I, Jim, still think they were much kinder in print than they were trading lines during the week.) But it's hilarious.


And that's it for us this week. See you next week.

--Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess, Ava and C.I.

Editorial: Troops Home Now

Troops Home Now. From where? We'd forgive if you asked that because Iraq fell off the radar this summer and there's been little attempts to pick it up since. As the nation turned against the war in even larger numbers, this summer should have been the time to gain traction. Certainly organizations tried. They even succeeded via word of mouth. Think how that could have been amplified if there had been coverage of the actions?

But there wasn't. Summer 2005, the independent media did appear to care about the war. Cindy Sheehan brought new life into the movement. This summer, she went to Jordan to meet with Iraqis, she fasted for 37 days, she was at the peace confrence in Seattle where war resister Ricky Clousing announced he would be turning himself into the military he'd self-checked out on, she opened up Camp Casey III, she spoke in various towns and cities, she was there when Mark Wilkerson, like Ricky Clousing earlier, announced that he would be turning himself into the military. During all of that, she was in the hospital at least three times. Cindy Sheehan worked her butt off. She's now recovering from surgery and we wish her a speedy recovery and we thank her for all the work she did.

We think it did matter. Even without independent media coverage, it mattered. Imagine how much more could have been accomplished if independent media had shown the slightest bit of interest in any of the above actions. (A few did and they've been noted here and at other community sites.)

Iraq's not an "Issue of the Month."* Independent media would do well to stop treating it as such and stop chasing down whatever issue of the month they were sent. Now we realize they only have four-to-six weeks to decide whether they'll keep that month's issue or return it, but we'd argue if you can't follow more than one story, you need to go off the road/promotion tour and start doing your job.

July's "Issue of the Month" was supposed to be the elections in Mexico and we heard so much about how unfair the elections were from . . . non-Mexicans. Considering how cheap long distance is today, compared to years ago, the failure to bring on actual voters, actual citizens who might have real concerns about the election was frightening. Isn't that what independent media is supposed to do? Provide a voice to the voiceless.

That was how it was going to be. Mexico for the month. Then the Israeli government went into wacko-mode and decided that they could do whatever the hell they wanted (with a wink and nudge from the Bully Boy) and that "Issue of the Month" became the wall-to-wall.

Right now the Sammy Powers movement is trying to make their issue the issue of the month that will crowd out everything else. (And, once again, they're competing with anti-war actions.) Our modern day Carrie Nations are concerned, they swear, with what they've termed 'genocide' but most refer to as "the crisis in Darfur." A self-made expert provides numbers that he 'extrapolates' and everyone runs with them. What is the 'extrapolated' number today? Is it still around 250,000? Or has it reached a million yet? (Give him time, give him time.)

By the United Nations' estimate over 3,000 Iraqis die each day. Want to extrapolate that? That is a crisis. And it's a United States made crisis. We understand the Carrie Nations of today bleed, they bleed for this crisis in Darfur. They don't have the time to spend on ending the war in Iraq (again, a US made crisis) except to carry laughable signs that say, "Bring the Troops Home and Send Them to Darfur."

Here's a thought for the Sammy Powers: The United States has its own crisis right now so take the actions actions to the UN and work on it there. Stop your pleading to the Bully Boy. It makes you look like simps and idiots. He didn't "save" Iraq, he didn't "save Afghanistan," but, as the Doobie Brothers once sang, "What A Fool Believes . . ."

As much as the Sammy Powers and Little Nicky have whined for over three years, surely some other nation can step in. The United States has its own problems. Not just economic or the usual problems that we've grown to expect in this age of lowered expectations, but real problems like an illegal war.

It's a little hard for the Sammy Powers to accept the fact that, all over the world, people are dying. They want to save the world. Well, they want to call for the world to be saved. None of them have gone over to the Sudan to do what they're screaming the Marines should. They want the United States to play "Cops of the World" (with a nod to Phil Ochs) while they play town crier.

They'll probably continue to get a helping hand from the useless ones of independent media. Why? Because they are always eager to latch onto any new 'issue' that they can run into the ground the same way cable news does.

All politics are local. That translates as you expect your streets to be safe, your services to be provided. Then it goes to the state level, then it goes to the national level. When you have a breakdown on the national level, you don't start screaming for the US military to be sent to yet another location. The Sammy Powers have all the zeal of the Cuban-Americans who scream for Fidel Castro's head on a platter. Cuban-Americans. American citizens still trying to even a score with another country. If you're a citizen of the United States and your country's in an illegal war, that should be your first national and international concern.

At a time when the military is so over-extended that tours of duty don't end -- but get extended, that recruiters resort to any trick (legal or non according to recent coverage) to sign up anyone (qualified or not -- the screening process let Steven D. Green in), and families suffer from government imposed single-families as a result of the long deployments, we think they're insane to call for the US military (or a US-led NATO mission) to go into Darfur.

If the Sammy Powers care so damn much about Darfur, they need to get over there. If they're willing to send the exhausted and extended US military on yet another mission, they need to get over there right now on their own or they need to sign up for the military. (We're sure the Bully Boy can use each and everyone since he has Iran in his sights.)

The notion that Bully Boy could or would "Save Darfur" is laughable. But maybe the idea popped into the Sammy Powers' heads when they had their pre-rally meeting with the Bully Boy in March? Clergy opposed to the war in Iraq couldn't even meet with the Bully Boy. The Sammy Powers must be pretty tight with the Bully Boy to get face time.

There's a crisis in the Congo, there's a crisis in Nepal. There's a crisis in East Timor, there's a crisis in Zambia, there's a crisis in Zimbabwe . . . Or, to put it in music terms, "There's a jouster and a jester and a man who owns a store. There's a drummer and a dreamer and you know there may be more" (Joni Mitchell's Cactus Tree, off Song to a Seagull).

There is more than one crisis in America. There's an illegal war. There's an Oval Office occupant who doesn't believe in the Constitution (the same occupant the Sammy Powers met with). That's just two, there are many more. Instead of ignoring the very serious troubles of your own country (and who they're caused by), one might try focusing on them. Probably also a good idea to try to stop oversimplifying history and reducing people to cartoon versions of Arabs v. Black and Muslims v. Christians (though we're aware that oversimplification plays well to the Jerry Fawell crowd).

Those calling for military action should damn well be signed up since they're willing to put the lives of others on the line. "Not On Our Watch" scream the modern day Carrie Nations. What watch? Exactly what are they are doing besides screaming that others go fight their battles? Along with being the Carrie Nations of this century, they're also the Barney Fife's of the military-industrial complex. Darfur's crisis goes to Darfur, goes to the Sudan, goes to Africa and goes to the United Nations, that's the hierarchy. Attempts to bypass that and inject US troops into the region either is evidence of the-ends-justify-the-means thinking or gross stupidty.

We thought it was stupid when Nouri al-Maliki promised Lebanon 35 million dollars. If you're asking the United States for monies to prop up your puppet government, at a time when malnutrition is on the rise in your country, you don't turn around and say, "Hey, here's 35 million dollars. Sure it could be spent on Iraqis, the way the US tax payers understood it would be, but hey, I'm a big spender because I have a strong need to impress." By the same token, you don't use the American military as your sanitation workers sent out to clean the world.

American troops have suffered enough and will suffer for years to come (without any adequate health care). The Sammy Powers want to play war? They need to haul their butts over there.
They want to fix the world. You start by fixing your city, fixing your state and fixing your nation. Want a cause? The victims of the tsunami at the end of 2004 are still suffering. That might not have the built-in-drama of Darfur but they've oversimplified that conflict so we're sure they could divide the still suffering victims of the tsunami into mythical categories.

We got a lot of positive feedback when we touched on this issue last week (including e-mails from those working on the issue who support divestment and other means that don't involve deploying the US marines for a US action -- thirty of them suggested that the September rally should include policing of signs so that "Bring the troops Home and Send them to Darfur" type signs were displayed -- as one woman wrote, "I see that, go numb & wonder if I should even continue working on this issue."). We also got one whiner who suggested that, since we've proposed no solution, we had blood on our hands and would regret it for the rest of our lives. We did propose a solution. (And comprehension seems to be a problem for the Sammy Powers since we noted that solution and linked to it in last week's feature.) We proposed it back in April, when Israel was refusing to take in refugees. If people are suffering, all nations need to open their borders to them. It may not be as chest pounding as a Jerry Bruckheimer action flick, but it's a solution. "Bring the troops home and send them to Darfur" is not a solution. This isn't Gladiator and we're not going to cry, "Unleash the hounds of hell!" (meaning the Bully Boy).
A solution. The Sammy Powers are encouraged to think of their own (if 'extrapolating' doesn't take up all their time).

They're not encouraged to hijack peace rallies with their looney "Send the troops to Darfur" signs. Only a person with serious issues could, at this late date, believe that the Bully Boy could execute anything other than a prolonged occupation. Only a person with serious issues could look at the already over burdened military and think the answer is to deploy them elsewhere.
For the younger crowd of Sammy Powers, maybe they don't grasp that when someone signs up for the National Guard, they don't expect to be deployed overseas. Maybe they don't grasp that another war is just what the Bully Boy's itching for since his poll numbers always rise when he starts one and that fact seems to make post-war planning slip right out of the mind.

People are dying all over the world. Many from starvation which doesn't seem to rate a similar "Not On Our Watch!" cry. The younger Sammy Powers may have begun their adult lives knowing only war and the use of the military as the only means of addressing an issue. The older ones should know better. They remind us of the 'vangical speaking in Joni Mitchell's "Dog Eat Dog": "I think we should turn the United States Marines loose on that little island south of Florida and stop that problem. I am preachin' love, I am!"

The United Nations has many faults but it was created to address issues like the crisis in Darfur. Civilian control of the military is what this country was built upon and done so to avoid a military junta. By the same token, civilains shouldn't utilize the US military as santitation workers. The relationship goes both ways.

In terms of the media, we're sure the Sammy Powers will succeed. They've already managed to shut down the discussion in independent media with very few exceptions (exceptions include Bonnie Faulkner, CounterPunch, etc.). The Sammy Powers pen articles or appear on programs and do shout outs to one another without ever noting their connections. It's such a carefully manufactured 'spontaneous resistance' (one that, again, gets face time with the Bully Boy). They footnote one another -- their own little echo chamber. And since the same independent media that decries The New York Times, for so many things, accepts as gospel
their reporting on this, the fact that the paper of no record has assigned a fabulist to tag-team with columnist Little Nicky (who never met an evangical aim he couldn't get behind and oversimply), we're sure they'll get even more media traction.

But, the thing is, they've had media traction for over three years now. They've had cover stories and gut wrenching op-eds. Bully Boy's already on their side but the American people don't appear to be. You can pin that on an isolationist streak, if you like, but it's also an internationalist streak that realizes US force doesn't cut it. (Doesn't cut it for a number of reasons.) Some realize that, post-Kosovo, NATO's not the answer. So for all teary, Sally Struthers like heart tugging, the issue's gone nowhere.

Bully Boy's aims are the same as the Sammy Powers when it comes to the Sudan. He may very well act alone. But the American people grasp that US troops have suffered enough. They're not about to end Bully Boy's "long war" just to turn around and redeploy the troops.

Troops Home Now. Not troops home for a 72-hour-layover and then off to Darfur.

[Credit for "Issue of the Month" to Common Ills community member Folding Star. Folding Star used to do the blog A Winding Road -- you can find highlights of that site and an interview with Folding Star via the archives.]

TV: Bo provides the B.O. stinking up Fashion House

MyTV launched last week. It's a Fox offshoot. Unlike Fox (entertainment) proper, Roger Ailes is in charge. Which may mean MyTV is off to a long and rocky start (the way Fox "News" floundered in the ratings for years). The new netlette is building it's schedule around two shows. You read that right. Fashion House and Desire. For thirteen weeks, a story will unfold on each, five nights a week of new episodes and Saturday featuring a 'best of' compilation. At the end of the thirteen weeks, a new storyline will begin.

A lot of hopes are pinned on (and money poured into) these shows. The result? Fashion House stinks. It actually features a cast that's trying to find their roles and floundering for the most part. (The sole stand out is Mike Begovich as the deceitful Lance Miller.) They aren't giving bad performances so much as they're still finding their way. It's a lot of work to produce five new hours of the same show each week.

But the reason the show, whose milieu is the world of high fashion, stinks so is that it revolves around a matriarch, Maria Gianni (and no, we didn't make that name up). Maria's meant to be a major bitch. She's not. And that's because she's portrayed by Bo Derek who puts the deadly B.O. into Fashion House.

Bo's Maria is stealing from her painter son's trust fund, sleeping with a blackmailer and supposedly chewing up everyone and everything around her. On her shoulders hang the entire series and that's why it's headed for the racks of an outlet mall near you immediately -- where you'll still avoid it.

Bo? To clear up a few misunderstandings . . .

There are those who call her a "porn star." Not true. Porn stars usually have to give the appearance that they're having a good time.

There are those who say she's Linda Evans if Evans had remained married to John Derek. Wrong. Evans could have marched straight from The Big Valley over to Casa de Moda and held your attention. Back then, she wouldn't have given a brava performance that scaled new heights, but even as a young woman Linda Evans could act.

There are those who say Bo Derek is an actress. This may be the most laughable claim of all.

Bo is a thing. She has always been a thing. She's apparently satisfied with always being a thing. When John Derek was alive, she was his play thing so possibly it's best, after all, that he's no longer around to see her revert to mere "thing."

On Fashion House, Bo Derek has a really bad habit of darting her eyes all over the place while saying her lines. Some suggest this is due to the fact that, being unable to memorize her lines, she's resorting to cue cards. We considered that possibility but, for it to be true, it would mean Bo could read. We find that as laughable as the book she recently "wrote."


Back in the early 80s, when workouts were all the rage, a women's magazine sought workout tips from Bo.

Bo's advice? Sit ups.

Lay on your back (so far it does sound like Bo), raise your legs in the air (uh-huh), cross them at the ankles then . . . . Bo crossing her legs? We'd sooner believe she could read.

She can't even cross her legs, fully clothed, on Fashion House which is why she's always reclining (she's supposed to be sitting) with one leg tossed here and one tossed there.

When we think of Bo, we think of Hershey bars, nudie scenes and someone suffering from, if not Epstein-Barr virus, then the sort of rolling blackouts that plauged California (thanks to Enron). The woman makes Kim Novak look like Anthony Quinn and Ricky Martin combined. Roger Ailes apparently okayed her in the lead because he's trying to demonstrate that Republicans can act. As Bo's film nadir or zenith (it's difficult to tell with what passes for her career) proclaimed Ghosts Can't Do It. No, and neither can Republican Bo.

In 1979 she was the thing with nipples. (Don't kid yourself, that -- more than the cornrows -- is what made her and what drew eyes to the film's movie poster.) She parlayed that into extreme nudity and, somewhere around the time of Tarzan or Bolero, America saw all she had to offer and then some. If, in watching Fashion House, you feel as though you're watching a made for USA Network movie, you're not remembering wrong. But, we'll note, USA Network has moved beyond those tired movies and we should all wonder why MyTV felt Bo Derek was the thing to jump start their network?

John Derek worked very hard at giving her a passable speaking voice. It just can't register emotion. (For laughs, watch her try to snap and use the word "pompous." She gives it about half the emotions most would give to, "Is it going to rain today?") Nor can her face which, surprisingly considering her relative young age for someone famous in the seventies, is pretty scary. Her appearance isn't aided by the bulky blazers she favors or the granny glasses perched on the end of her nose. Her hairstyle will only remind you of how wonderfully Barbara Eden's aged by comparison. But Bo? The years have not been kind.

When you can't act and the looks are gone, where do you go? Roger Ailes apparently. MyTV will no doubt soon treat us to the acting of others who also faded for good reason. Possibly fellow GOP poster pal Wayne Newton can do a laughable variety show for the netlette?

It's a real shame that Derek was cast in the lead because the other actors have had moments that showed promise. Mike Begovich should actually be able to go on to better things but that probably depends upon whether or not he can evade the stench that surrounds this show. Begovich hasn't hit a wrong note. (The scripts are translations and we'll just note that somethings don't merit translations.) While Bo seems to think the sight of her splayed against a chair or a sofa (legs akimbo) should be more than enough to satisfy TV watchers (didn't do the trick for movie goers), Begovich actually fills the screen and leaves you wanting more (in what's written as a one-note role).

Bo just makes you wonder if the name (not her birth name) was a nickname for "boring." It's not just that Donna Mills, Joan Collins and Ana-Alicia don't have to worry (they don't, their performances remain unchallenged), it's that even Virginia Hawkins need not worry that her place in the primetime soap universe is being challenged. (Hawkins played the Carrington's maid Jeanette on Dynasty and she made more of an impression in a bit part than Derek does as the lead.) On the fourth episode, at the very end, you saw all that was wrong with the show besides lousy writing. In a tight shot, showing only her mouth, Morgan Fairchild brought more life to the show in three minutes than the languid Derek (supposedly playing a bitch) had all week.

If Fairchild's role was more prominent (she's not going to be featured in every episode, in fact, she's in about a sixth of the episodes), we could tell you the show was trash but watch for the life Fairchild and Begovich bring to the proceedings. What we can tell you is that the cast is probably doing about as well as any will (outside of Bo). Every thirteen weeks, each cast will have to leap onto the treadmill and run as fast as they can with no workout coach to advise them. (Direction on this show is sorely lacking.) You might find an actor like Begovich who somehow manages to create an entire character despite all the odds. More likely, you'll find a group like you've got now, actors who are trying their hardest with limited time and no guidance as they try to bring the characters (from scripts that are old and tired) to life.

If you want to see the worst the show can offer (supposedly MyTV plans to stick with this format no matter how low the ratings go -- and the word of mouth on Fashion House may explain why so many commercials for Fox shows and TV Guide -- which Murdoch owns -- fill up the ad space), check out this thirteen week cycle because there will never be a 'performance' like Bo's again. That's because, good or bad, all others will be trying to act.

This is the worst you will see all season. It's so bad, the Golden Raspberries should create a TV award for the woman they've so frequently, and so rightly, 'honored' in the past. We think it's fitting that this netlette is run by Roger Ailes. It's Fox "entertainment" the way Fox "News" is "news."

And it's fitting that their crown jewel should star a woman who has never grasped that polite conversation isn't discussing how vexing it was for her late husband to attempt to film erect penises. We think she's more than a perfect fit for her hero who enjoys farting on underlings because Bo Derek is to acting what George W. Bush is to leadership.

The People Speak September 15-17

We're no longer in NY, the core five of the core six (Jim, Dona, Jess, Ty, Ava and C.I.), but if we were, we'd be attending this event. For those who are in the area or will be in the area:

Please join us for a special workshop presentation of The People
Speak by Rob Urbinati, with Howard Zinn and Anthony Arnove, as part
of the Impact Festival at The Culture Project
Friday, September 15, 7 pm
Saturday, September 16, 7 pm
Sunday, September 17, 3 pm
A stage adaptation of Howard Zinn and Anthony Arnove's acclaimed Voices of a People's History of the United States (Seven Stories
Press), The People Speak is a new play about the United States today,
as seen through the prism of history.
The People Speak brings to life incendiary and inspirational stories
of dissent from U.S. history, past and present.
Directed by Will Pomerantz and Rob Urbinati.
With Sarah Chalmers*, Frank Deal*, Edwin Lee Gibson*, Ami Shukla*,
Caroline Smith, and Thom Rivera*.
Lighting by Garin Marschall, Sound by Jacob Subotnik, and Projections
by Jessie Kindig.
Stage manager: Maeve Sweeney.
(*member of AEA.)
Tickets are only $10 and are on sale online now at:
http://www.impactfestival.org/

or
http://www.ovationtix.com/trs/pr/1917

and also are available now in person at The Culture Project's box
office. The Box Office does not take ticket orders over the phone,
only in person. If you have a question about ticketing, please call
212.253.9983.
45 Bleecker Box Office Hours:
Sunday 12pm-4pm
Monday 2pm-6:30pm
Tuesday 2pm-9pm
Wednesday 2pm-9pm
Thursday 2pm-9pm
Friday 2pm-9pm
Saturday 12pm-4pm
Directions to the Culture Project:
All three workshop performances will be downstairs at The Culture
Project's Bleecker Street theater. The Culture Project is located at
45 Bleecker Street.
Three different subway lines bring you within walking distance to the
theater:
* Take the 6 train to Bleecker Street.
* Take the F/V/B/D train to Broadway/Lafayette, and walk one block
north to Bleecker Street.
* Take the N/R train to 8th Street, and walk south to Bleecker
Street, and one block east to Lafayette; or take the N/R train to
Prince Street, and walk north to Bleecker Street, and east to
Lafayette.
Bus Lines include the M1, M5, M6, M21, and M103.
For more on The Culture Project, visit:
http://www.cultureproject.org

For more on the festival, visit:
http://www.impactfestival.org/

For more on Voices of a People's History of the United States, visit:
http://www.sevenstories.com/Book/index.cfm?GCOI=58322100666900

Note that Sunday's event begins at 3:00 pm, not at seven as C.I. noted last week (and we've got up here). C.I. says that's fine and it's a reason to mention the event again in an Iraq snapshot this week. (The snapshot because it appears at other community sites in full.)

No Link between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda -- none

In the United States, AP was first out of the gate with: "A senate intelligence committee report says there's no evidence Saddam Hussein had a relationship with terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi or his al-Qaida associates before the Iraq war." CBS and AP quote US Senator John D. Rockefeller stating of the report: "Ultimately, I think you will find that administration officials made repeated prewar statements that were not supported by underlying intelligence" and that it shows "the administration pursued a deceptive strategy abusing intelligence reporting that the intelligence community had already warned was uncorroborated, unreliable and in some critical circumstances fabricated."
Reuters notes that US Senator Carl Levin has pointed to the Bully Boy's statement on August 21st and attempted (yet again) to make an unfounded link. Levin: "The president's statement, made just two weeks ago, is flat-out false."
Though the press wants to play Levin's statement as an allegation, public record shows Bully Boy stated: "I square it because imagine a world in which you had Saddam Hussein, who had the capacity to make a weapon of mass destruction, who was paying suiciders to kill innocent life, who had relations with Zarqawi." As Levin pointed out, that "is flat-out false."

The above is from The Common Ills and it ran Friday. In a Saturday New York Times article, Mark Mazzetti pinned the moment of the well publicized link between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda false as being in 2005 (from a 2005 CIA report). Here's Mazzetti slapping some whitewash on the fence:

But one report did contradict the administration's assertion made before the war and since, that ties between Mr. Zarqawi and Mr. Hussein's government provided evidence of a close relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda.As recently as Aug. 21 Presdeint Bush said at a news conference that Mr. Hussein "had relations with Zarqawi." But a C.I.A. report completed in October 2005 concluded instead that Mr. Hussein's government "did not have a relationship, harbor or even turn a blind eye toward Zarqwi and his associates," according to the new Senate findings.

In the land of the real, Jonathan Weisman's "Iraq's Alleged Al-Qaeda Ties Were Disputed Before War" (Washington Post):

But, as [Olympia] Snowe emphasized in her statement, the report concluded that information provided by an INC source was cited in that estimate and in Secretary of State Colin L. Powell's February 2003 speech to the United Nations as corroborating evidence about Iraq's mobile biological weapons program. Those citations came despite two April 2002 CIA assessments, a May 2002 Defense Intelligence Agency fabrication notice and a July 2002 National Intelligence Council warning -- all saying the INC source may have been coached by the exile group into fabricating the information.

Yes, Mazzetti, the 2005 CIA report did contradict the lies of the administration but so did "two April 2002 CIA assessments, a May 2002 Defense Intelligence Agency fabrication notice and a July 2002 National Intelligence Council warning". It does make a difference when the lie was refuted and it was refuted as early as 2002. It makes a difference (and Pat Roberts' claim that it's information 'everyone' already knows reminds us of a pseudo-liberals same excuse for not covering the Downing Street Memos). Colin Powell admits to a "blot" on his record but it wasn't his fault. He did the best he could, he told America. From Ava & C.I.'s "TV Review: Barbara and Colin remake The Way We Were:"

Has a less convincing scene ever been performed?Possibly. Such as when Powell informs Walters that the fault lies with the intelligence community -- with those who knew but didn't come forward. Unfortunately for Powell, FAIR'sSteven R. Weisman (in "Powell Calls His U.N. Speech a Lasting Blot on His Record ") steered everyone to a Los Angels Times' article from July 15, 2004 which reported:
Days before Secretary of State Colin L. Powell was to present the case for war with Iraq to the United Nations, State Department analysts found dozens of factual problems in drafts of his speech, according to new documents contained in the Senate report on intelligence failures released last week.Two memos included with the Senate report listed objections that State Department experts lodged as they reviewed successive drafts of the Powell speech. Although many of the claims considered inflated or unsupported were removed through painstaking debate by Powell and intelligence officials, the speech he ultimately presented contained material that was in dispute among State Department experts.

It does matter when the truth was known. That's when the lie begins. It's very generous of Mazzetti to cover for Colin Powell (and others) by focusing on the 2005 CIA report. It's not reality but who expects much reality from The New York Times? There was no link. The administration lied and that includes Saint Blotty Colin Powell. Ignoring reality may be a hobby of the paper of no record's, but that's no way to inform the people.

The CBS Evening News managed to note Colin Powell, even if The Times can't:

Its statements like this one, made Feb. 5, 2003, by then-Secretary of State Colin Powell that have become so controversial, implying Iraq was linked to terror attacks.
"Iraq today harbors a deadly terrorist network headed by abu Musab al-Zarqawi, an associated collaborator of Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda lieutenants," Powell said.
But after 2 1/2 years of reviewing pre-war intelligence behind closed doors, the lead Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, Sen. John Rockefeller of West Virginia, who voted for the Iraq War, says the Bush administration pulled the wool over everyone's eyes.

That's truth. Colin Powell told Barbara Walters that he'd like to be remembered as "A good public servant somebody who truly believes in his country. . . . Somebody who cared, somebody who served." Ava and C.I. replied:

Yeah well, Nixon wanted to be remembered a certain way as well. Liar's the way many remember him now. Liar's the way many will remember Colin Powell. Belief in your country doesn't allow you to lie to your country. Belief in your Bully Boy does. That's something this adminstration fails to grasp. They all think they're working for the Bully Boy. Powell makes statements to that effect. He's full of many things including his "service" to the Bully Boy.The administration is supposed to be working for the country. Presidents come and go. The nation is what is supposed to matter. Belief in your country would mean you tell the peoplethe truth.
Somebody who served?
He didn't serve the country. He betrayed it. He didn't live up to his office. He didn't live up to the public trust. He didn't live up to the principles of democracy. He lied. He lied. He lied.
We won't put the glossy spin on it that Walters did. We're not looking at Powell through the blind eyes of love.

There was no link. The "blot" is a "stain" (a blood stain) and the lie was a lie. No link.

Hint, hint

On the cover of the November 28, 2005 issue, The Nation front paged their editorial "Democrats and the War" (the cover caption reads: "There can no longer be any doubt: The American war in Iraq -- an unprovoked, unnecessary, unlawful invasion that has turned into a colonial-style occupation -- is a moral and political catastrophe. It has also become the single greatest threat to America's national security.... The Nation will not support any candidate for national office who does not make a speedy end to the American war in Iraq a major issue of his or her campaign.") A brave cover. 2005.







The three covers to the side are from the injustice that preceeded and followed Hurricane Katrina (using Judith N. Shklar's defintion, the hurricane itself was a tragedy, the reality before and after was an injustice). The first is the January 2, 2006 issue which contains three articles on Katrina (Ari Kelman, Susan Straight and Billy Sothern). The second is the April 10, 2006 issue which contains two articles on Katrina (Mike Davis and Seth Tobocman). The third cover is the September 18, 2006 issue which contains four article (Adolph Reed Jr., Michael Tisserand, Chris Kromm and Gary Young) and an editorial.

Three covers in nine months? Well it was an injustice. It's worth covering. But where is Iraq? "Who Is Killing New Orleans?"? How about: "Who Is Killing Ramadi?"

In the most recent Katrina cover issue, Gary Younge writes "New Orleans Forsaken." We think Iraq's been forsaken.


We think the peace movement's been largely ignored (don't offer that campus 'activism' issue to any of us, we'll hold our noses and wave you away). We're glad Tom Hayden wrote of the trip to Jordan to meet with Iraqis (including parliamentarians) but that was a "web exclusive." As the weekly political magazine with the largest circulation (of any on the political spectrum), we wonder if readers of the print edition might have benefitted from hearing of that trip?

RadioNation with Laura Flanders is partnered with the magazine and certainly Flanders has done her share this summer (as has Matthew Rothschild with Progressive Radio). But that's audio. Any of Flanders' opening monlogues from the first segments of the show could have been transcribed and, featured online or in print, would have helped Iraq stay in the public eye.

But that didn't happen (either the transcribing of Flanders' passionate, factual speeches or the keeping Iraq in the public eye). What did happen was that a great deal transpired this summer.

Camp Casey III opened and closed and good thing for the Associated Press because otherwise there wouldn't have been significant national coverage. Ehren Watada was the subject of an article when he first publicly refused to deploy to Iraq (becoming the first officer to publicly refuse). His Article 32 hearing, heard testiomony Thursday August 17th? Not mentioned. Considering that Ann Wright, Denis Halliday and Francis A. Boyle testified, we'd assume at least one of them would have something to write about it. Possibly Bob Watada and Carolyn Ho (Ehren Watada's parents) also have some thoughts they'd like to share with Nation readers? Mark Wilkerson and Ricky Clousing have gone from AWOL to turning themselves in. Anita Anderson says Darrell Anderson is turning himself in at the end of the month. (Anita Anderson is Darrell Anderson's mother.) War resisters Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey are awaiting word on their appeals (to stay in Canada and not be forced to return to the United States). Camp Democracy is ongoing. International Peace Day is September 21st. CODEPINK's Troops Home Fast action continues and continues to grow. It passed the two-month point last week. Military Familes Speak Out conducted Operation House Call. The World Can't Wait has been active (and has an October 5th action of mass resistance coming up). That's just some of what's been going on in North America.

In Iraq? Iraq's fallen to pieces. Nancy A. Youssef broke the news that the US military was keeping a body count in June (in "U.S.: Civilian deaths feeding insurgency" -- the topic was also covered in Aaron Glantz' "Pentagon: Tell Us How Many Civilians You've Killed" or Juliana Lara Resende's "50,000 Dead, But Who's Counting?"). The US military fatality count passed the 2600 mark in August. (And are nearing the 2700 mark now -- 2667 currently.) (Again, thanks to AP for being one of the few outlets to note the 2600 passage.) The Senate Intel Report demonstrates lies before the war, immediately after and as recently as August 21st of this year. The US troop level has not gone down but has risen (with over 140,000 US troops now in Iraq). Troops whose tour of duty was supposed to be ending got extended. (Military Families Speak Out was quite vocal on this.) The 'crackdown' has been a joke and if the security of Baghdad is important, we'd argue that the parliament didn't need to take the month of August off. There has been no winning of hearts and minds (in fact Falluja was again bullied last week: Reuters reports the US is clashing with people in Falluja and "U.S. troops used loudspeakers to demand people turn in 'insurgents' or face a 'large military operation'." ) The morgues are overflowing and new ones being built. The UN estimated 100 Iraqis are dying a day. The Pentagon recently stated 800 are dying a week. The 'brain drain' continues. The suffering continues and, yes, the war drags on.

But the coverage?

If we were making a list of independent media outlets that forgot Iraq this summer, The Nation wouldn't be at the top of our lists or even in the top ten. It has been far less silent than many other outlets. (Who, frankly, make themselves look ridiculous when they, for instance, criticize what the mainstream chooses to cover after ignoring Iraq all summer long.) But we're focusing on The Nation for four reasons.

First, we all subscribe or purchase the magazine.

Second, it is the weekly political magazine with the highest circulation (left, right, center or somewhere in between, none have a higher circulation than The Nation).

Third, to no one's surprise except our independent media 'brave' voices, Bully Boy is attempting to turn the conversation away from Iraq because he knows his party can't win in November on Iraq. This is apparently some surprise to those deciding what gets covered in independent media, but it's not a surprise to any thinking person. The polling all summer long has consistently noted the Bully Boy's weakness on Iraq and the continued increase in those opposed to the war. So Bully Boy can consider himself blessed that independent media was so eager to drop the coverage of Iraq.

Fourth? "There can no longer be any doubt: The American war in Iraq -- an unprovoked, unnecessary, unlawful invasion that has turned into a colonial style occupation -- is a marl and political catastrophe. It has also become the singel greatest threat to America's national security." Who wrote that? The editors of The Nation. So let's see some action. Let's see some coverage that makes the cover. It is wonderful that Ms. magazine devote their winter 2006 issue to the war. But where's The Nation? Food's an important issue (the focus of a recent edition). So is Iraq. The war hasn't stopped, so why did the coverage? (We're speaking of independent media as a whole -- The Nation did cover war related issues this summer.)

As the largest weekly, the magazine has influence and power. As Betty said two weeks ago of the food issue, "I think it's great that The Nation devoted an issue to it -- and look forward to an issue devoted to Iraq, hint, hint . . ."

The Real 9-11 Moment for Bully Boy

As the myth-series begins airing on ABC tonight, we should all remember the real 9-11 moment for Bully Boy. It occurred in a Flordia classroom. Though he's laughably claimed at times to have seen the first plane hit the Twin Towers on TV, the reality is that he did know one of the towers had been hit before he went into the classroom. While in the classroom, the second plane hit the other tower. Andrew Card whispered the news into his ear.

And 'Mr. Action,' 'The Decider'? He decided to sit in the classrom and do nothing. Well look at the pictures of My Pet Goat. Though he'd be fully of Bully Boy talk by the end of the day, when action should have been taken (for his safety, the school's safety and to provide the country with leadership) he did nothing.

The Memory Hole puts the time on the above photo at 4:45 (minutes: seconds). It continues. You can see it by clicking here. This was how Bully Boy responded to 9-11. By sitting in a classroom and doing nothing.

Later in the day, he would fly all over the country -- not to offer comfort or leadership, but to play Bunny-Fu-Fu skipping around the nation in fear.

Something to remember as ABC offers it's distorted view of 'profiles in courage.'

For more on this, in addition to The Memory Hole, you can read Wally's commentary.