New Stuff

I have a couple new posts on Olyblog, and I posted a note on Facebook about boycotting against states that demonstrate aggression. My blog at OlyBlog can be found at http://olyblog.net/blog/berd and I will post the text of the note from facebook below the fold here.

War is terrorism (mouseover)

This is from Friday the 27th of August 2010 at the Olympia Fellowship of Reconciliation weekly peace vigil at Percival Landing.

move cursor over image for mouseover effect:

War is terrorism with a bigger budget. [view larger]

All war begins with aggression, and aggression is never right. Aggression is always wrong! period.

I also attached this to a letter posted on the White House Facebook page:

Dear President Obama and Administration,

How can peace come to the world when the USA acts with aggression and belligerence in pursuit of policies of dominance?

Aggression is never correct. It's always wrong.

For the well being of all people and the world, the USA needs to change from aggressive policies, to peaceful policies.

Sincerely,
Berd

more photos: http://olyblog.net/some-recent-photos-20100828

From Tacoma

This photo is from Tacoma Washington, near the County City Building. I was there to attend a trial for a friend of mine who was charged with disorderly conduct after blocking a military vehicle.

Parking lot near County City Building
view larger


view larger
In this photo, Mr. Ellsberg is seen in the witness stand, in the court of Pierce County Judge Maggie Ross, where he gave testimony in a trial where the state was prosecuting a war protestor in a case of nonviolent direct action civil resistance.

Ellsberg delivered a brilliant testimonial about his life and experience, ranging from education at Harvard, to service in the Marine Corps, to consulting with the White House and State Department, to releasing the Pentagon Papers, which detailed incriminating documents, that related to the invasion and occupation of Vietnam, by the US government.

The jury delivered a disappointing verdict, finding the defendant guilty, a strike against the claim of necessity.

But it seems to me that the defendant, Patty Imani, who is a care-giver by trade, is a winner anyway, because of her principled and courageous act of conscience in resistance to aggression.

Who Would Jesus Bomb

Who would Jesus bomb?

Christmas Day, 2009

Olympia Fellowship of Reconciliation Peace Vigil

Percival Landing, Olympia, Washington

War is immoral. All war begins with aggression. Aggression is immoral. Military aggression is widely considered immoral, and there are numerous international legally binding treaties established against war of aggression. It is probably unanimous amongst international political bodies that aggression is immoral and illegal. How could it not be? If stealing is illegal, if rape is illegal, if murder is illegal - then how could the most horrendous violence possible - the violence of a war of aggression - ever be considered legal.

Self-defense is one thing. A reasonable and proportional self-defense against immediate attack. But the wars of the United States of America are a different beast. The wars of the USA are not truly self-defense - nor a legitimate protection of "national interest." What the wars of the USA defend is the selfishness and the greed of the USA. The wars are an effort to further international policies of and practices of oppression and exploitation, under which the USA operates. The wars of the USA do not truly defend the national interest. The wars and international policies of the USA defend the corporate interest - the interest of the most influential and powerful (typically multi-national) giant corporations.

War is immoral. For good reason. War is the worst violence known to humanity. War is waste. It is oblivion. War is destruction defined.

People and nations have a right to defend themselves. But people and nations do not have a right - and in fact they betray the rights of all people - when they commit the crime of a war of aggression.

The wars of the USA are aggressive wars - imperialistic wars - wars designed to further the establishment of dominance - of global hegemony.

I believe that the imperialism of the USA, and the giant corporations that are its keepers, is the worst violence known to modern humanity.

But this perspective - these truths - are very effectively kept away from the American people by a revolving door between cultural affectation, and a media structure that feed off of, and create, each other.

There is a horrible myth in today's America, and to a lesser extent in today's world. It is the myth that America is the greatest nation on Earth - when in reality, the very opposite may be true. It may be more true that America is the worst nation on Earth - that America is the world's greatest perpetrator of violence and oppression - even to the point of wars of aggression, conquest and imperialism.

In America, terrible violence is part of mainstream culture. In America, there is a disparity in wealth between rich and poor that is maintained through systematic oppression.

In America, some people make profit when bombs are dropped. People profit when wars are waged. People profit from all sorts of harmful, destructive and violent economic (and anti-economic) activities!

So, really, I ask you to please answer this question: who would Jesus bomb?

Democrats and Republicans: Good Cop / Bad Cop?

I just wrote this in an email response to a group of people who were sharing their support for the Democrats. Damnit. It's time for truth-telling. Corporatism is hurting people, it is hurting the planet. We can do better. A better world is possible...

So read this:

Hi,

I don't know where all of your political leanings are, so I hope not to offend. But I have had it. And it's time for truth-telling.

I am pulling for Ralph Nader.

Obama and McCain are too similar in their corporatism (willingness to drill for oil, go to war against Iran, prolong American empire.)

I've had enough.

I won't be badgered or kowtowed toward the lesser of two evils. Yes. It can rightly be argued that Democrats do less harm than Republicans. Democrats are the lesser of two evils (at least from the liberal perspective). That's how they (both D and R) stay in power.

Divide and Conquer.

Sow fear and watch the masses flock.

Gore Vidal said in 1981 that two parties are really just two wings of the same party. It's still true 27 years later.

We need something better. We deserve something better.

Let Nader Debate (link to campaign issues).

I am disappointed in Obama. I even served as a precinct delegate for him at the local County Democratic Convention/ Caucus.

But I am disillusioned after his recent bows to American foreign policy belligerence.

I might vote for Obama if it close between him and McCain here in Washington State (and given the pathetic condition of the establishment mainstream media - which is, in itself, just another symptom of the big business corporate power two party duopoly - that's a possibility.)

[added here: I might vote for Obama out of sheer pragmatism. But even my belief that the solutions - the path to a better world - might be attainable via baby steps is in doubt. The Democrats are not speaking truth to power. And we need the truth. I support Ralph Nader.]

I support Ralph Nader and it will be just another example of the sham government and political system if challengers like him, and Cynthia McKinney, are disallowed from participating in the election (open debates in particular) as legitimate and credible candidates.

With Love,
bert

Bush Adminsitration Special Interests v. Public Interest

The war of choice on Iraq, perpetrated by members of the Bush Administration, is a good example of special (private) interests taking over the public realm of government.

Instead of using tax dollars to fund a humane and sustainable energy policy, the White House (hi-jacked by oil industry executives) used the public infrastructure and tax dollars of the American People towards acts of aggression.

Instead of funding research and development into alternative technologies, into programs that would promote conservation and efficiency, the Bush Administration has launched the country into a many years war that will cost, when all is said and done, well over $2 Trillion. The monetary losses are nothing in comparison to the true economic and human costs: Millions of people have been killed or lost loved ones, and are suffering as a result of the wrongful and unnecessary war.

Damn. For the love of humanity and the planet, we must enforce accountability over our government. Of, by and for the people - may those words eventually ring true.

The situation is dire. It's severe. We need to take action because the planet is in distress. People are in distress. Species continue to go extinct at alarming rates. For the sake of the well-being of future generations... Please, ask of yourself what you can do, even if it just a small part, to effect change for the better.

For example, you could go all out and behave in a consistently nonviolent manner on a day-to-day basis - choosing to act only in ways that truly serve life.

Or you could try something decidedly more modest - say, driving strictly at or under the (posted or otherwise) speed limit, in an effort to conserve gasoline, and reduce pollution and violence associated with emissions and extraction (conserving gas also supports the troops).

Okay. Have Fun. Brainstorm. Breathe. Love. Be well.

Port of Tacoma PMR Activities

I just posted an update about Port Militarization Resistance Activities in Tacoma to Olyblog.net. Check it out: olyblog.net/update-tacoma-pmr-activities

I also wrote something for the community blog at the Tacoma News Tribune: community.thenewstribune.com/node/41847

We have the power to stop the illegal aggression of our government.

Support for the Troops

I support the Troops. I support the Truth. Bush Lied. The war is illegal...

I support the soldiers of the US Military. The truth is that President Bush lied when he drove America to war based on falsely manufactured (so-called) evidence of imminent threat of attack from Iraq. Iraq did not threaten the USA (nor any other country.) The war was a pre-meditated offensive attack. A war of choice, and thusly it is illegal.

I support the action of Port Militarization Resistance. PMR seeks to oppose the militarization of our public ports, and the militarization of society as our ports are used - as the ports enable - an aggressive foreign policy of global dominance, and acts of aggression.

www.olypmr.org

Let's not put the military personnel, soldiers and troops in harm's way without justifiable cause of self-defense.

Media Complicit in Propagandizing Lies that Led to War

This is a deeply perilous hour in the history of our nation and people, when major news networks conspire and lie in order to sell a bill of goods that leads to war and the unnecessary deaths and suffering of millions of innocent people. Major network news media have enabled governmental acts of aggression. It's criminal! I hope that those with appropriate resources and influences will take appropriate actions to hold the perpetrators of this "media-mis-information - crime-against-humanity" - accountable.

[For the lawyers, law-makers, and law enforcement officials out there: it's called "aiding and abetting". en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accomplice]

go to original
Truthout Original
McClellan and His Media Collaborators

Friday 30 May 2008

by: Jeff Cohen, t r u t h o u t | Perspective

[photo caption: Scott McClellan's "war collaborators" in the corporate media. Referred to by McClellan in his new memoir, "What Happened," as "deferential, complicit enablers" of the Bush administration's war propaganda.
(Photo: CBS News)]

main article:
No sooner had Bush's ex-press secretary (now author) Scott McClellan accused President Bush and his former collaborators of misleading our country into Iraq than the squeals of protest turned into a mighty roar. I'm not talking about the vitriol directed at him by former White House colleagues like Karl Rove and Ari Fleischer. I'm talking about McClellan's other war collaborators: the movers and shakers in corporate media. The people McClellan refers to in his book as "deferential, complicit enablers" of Bush administration war propaganda.

One after another, news stars defended themselves with the tired old myth that no one doubted the Iraq WMD (weapons of mass destruction) claims at the time. The yarn about hindsight being 20/20 was served up more times than a Reverend Wright clip on Fox News.

Katie Couric, whose coverage on CBS of the Iraq troop surge has been almost fawning, was one of the few stars to be candid about preinvasion coverage, saying days ago, "I think it's one of the most embarrassing chapters in American journalism." She spoke of "pressure" from corporate management, not just Team Bush, to "really squash any dissent." Then a co-host of NBC "Today," she says network brass criticized her for challenging the administration.

NBC execs apparently didn't complain when - two weeks into the invasion - Couric thanked a Navy commander for coming on the show, adding, "And I just want you to know, I think Navy SEALs rock!"

This is a glorious moment for the American public. We can finally see those who abandoned reporting for cheerleading and flag-waving and cheap ratings having to squirm over their role in sending other parents' kids into Iraq. I say "other parents' kids" because I never met any bigwig among those I worked with in TV news who had kids in the armed forces.

Given how TV networks danced to the White House tune sung by the Roves and Fleischers and McClellans in the first years of W's reign, it's fitting that it took the words of a longtime Bush insider to force their self-examination over Iraq. Top media figures had shunned years of well-documented criticism of their Iraq failure as religiously as they shunned war critics in 2003.

Speaking of religious, it wasn't until two days ago that retired NBC warhorse Tom Brokaw was able to admit on-air that Bush's push toward invasion was "more theology than anything else." On day one of the war, it was anchor Brokaw who turned to an Admiral and declared, "One of the things that we don't want to do is destroy the infrastructure of Iraq, because in a few days we're going to own that country."

Asked this week about the charge that media transmitted war propaganda, Brokaw blamed the White House and its "unbelievable ability to control the flow of information at any time, but especially during the time that they're preparing to go to war." This is an old canard: The worst censors prewar were not governments, but major outlets that chose to exclude and smear dissenting experts.

Wolf Blitzer, whose persona on CNN is that of a carnival barker, defended his network's coverage: "I think we were pretty strong. But certainly, with hindsight, we could have done an even better job." Coverage might have been better if CNN news chief Eason Jordan hadn't gotten a Pentagon "thumbs-up" on the retired generals they featured. Or if Jordan hadn't gone on the air to dismiss a dissenting WMD expert: "Scott Ritter's chameleon-like behavior has really bewildered a lot of people.... US officials no longer give Scott Ritter much credibility."

ABC anchor Charlie Gibson, the closest thing to a Fox News anchor at a big three network, took offense at McClellan: "I think the media did a pretty good job." He claimed "there was a lot of skepticism raised" about Colin Powell's prewar UN speech. Media critic Glenn Greenwald called Gibson's claim "one of the falsest statements ever uttered on TV" - and made his point using Gibson's unskeptical Powell coverage at the time.

In February 2003, there was huge mainstream media skepticism about Powell's UN speech ... overseas. But US TV networks banished antiwar perspectives in the crucial two weeks surrounding that error-filled speech. FAIR studied all on-camera sources on the nightly ABC, CBS, NBC and PBS newscasts: Less than 1 percent - 3 out of 393 sources - were antiwar. Only 6 percent were skeptical sources. This at a time when 60 percent of Americans in polls wanted more time for diplomacy and inspections.

I worked 10-hour days inside MSNBC's newsroom during this period as senior producer of Phil Donahue's primetime show (canceled three weeks before the war while the network's most-watched program). Trust me: too much skepticism over war claims was a punishable offense. I and all other Donahue producers were repeatedly ordered by top management to book panels that favored the pro-invasion side. I watched a fellow producer get chewed out for booking a 50-50 show.

At MSNBC, I heard Scott Ritter smeared - on-air and off - as a paid mouthpiece of Saddam Hussein. After we had war skeptic and former US Attorney General Ramsey Clark on the show, we learned he was on some sort of network blacklist.

When MSNBC terminated Donahue, it was expected we'd be replaced by a nightly show hosted by Jesse Ventura. But that show never really launched. Ventura says it was because he, like Donahue, opposed the Iraq invasion; he was paid millions for not appearing. Another MSNBC star, Ashleigh Banfield, was demoted and then lost her job after criticizing the first weeks of "very sanitized" war coverage. With every muzzling, self-censorship tended to proliferate.

I'm no defender of Scott McClellan. Some may say he has blood on his hands - and that he hasn't earned any kind of redemption.

But, as someone who still burns with anger over what I witnessed inside TV news during that crucial historical moment, I'm trying my best to enjoy this falling out among thieves and liars.


Jeff Cohen is the founder of FAIR, and author of the new book, "Cable News Confidential: My Misadventures in Corporate Media."

Jail to the Chief

Upon suspicion of serious crimes, like murder or robbing a bank, suspects - in the USA - are customarily sought for apprehension and (when apprehended) confined until a trial can be convened so that they can either be proven guilty, or declared innocent, based on evidence presented in a court of law.

Why the case is different when an acting President of the USA is suspected of grievously breaking the most serious laws that govern our nation, and indeed the world, is very frustrating.

Upon suspicion of breaking the nation's highest laws in a most heinous and grievous manner; on suspicion of committing the most serious criminal offenses possible, namely aggression (a war crime with all of its consequential violence, death and destruction): this is a call to Jail the Chief!


photo © Robin Dude All Rights Reserved.

Colonel Ann Wright on Iraq

Former Army Colonel Ann Wright resigned her position as a career diplomat with the US State Department when the USA, under the dictate of the Bush Administration, launched an illegal, immoral and unnecessary war (motivated by desire of global dominance) against Iraq.

She was in Olympia Thursday, April 17th and I had a chance to attend her presentation. She is the author of a recently released book, published by Koa Books. It's titled, Dissent, Voices of Conscience: Government insiders speak out against the war in Iraq.

Read more about her book and her visit: olyblog.net/colonel-ann-wright-iraq