Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts

Friday, December 12, 2008

‘America’s Defense Meltdown’

Check it out.   I am saving to read later when I have more time; you might want to take a look and read it - very up to the minute.


at CDI - Center for Defense Information; newly released to and for President-Elect Barack Obama’s consideration.

         "America's Defense Meltdown"?  (pdf)

What’s in "America's Defense Meltdown" is a new anthology that gives President-elect Obama and Congress direction and will guide the United States back onto the path of an effective defense at a cost a nation in recession can afford.
Author(s): Winslow Wheeler


I haven't watched this video yet either at GRIT TV with Laura Flanders website  - it is where I found the info.

Read more

Thursday, November 27, 2008

The End of American Thanksgivings; A Cause for Universal Rejoicing



Nobody celebrates Thanksgiving quite like Americans celebrate Thanksgiving. It is reserved by history and the intent of “the founders” as the supremely white American holiday, the most ghoulish event on the national calendar. No Halloween of the imagination can rival the exterminationist reality that was the genesis, and remains the legacy, of the American Thanksgiving. It is the most loathsome, humanity-insulting day of the year – a pure glorification of racist barbarity.


We at BC are thankful that the day grows nearer when the almost four centuries-old abomination will be deprived of its reason for being: white supremacy. Then we may all eat and drink in peace and gratitude for the blessings of humanity’s deliverance from the rule of evil men.


Thanksgiving is much more than a lie – if it were that simple, an historical correction of the record of events in 1600s Massachusetts would suffice to purge the “flaw” in the national mythology. But Thanksgiving is not just a twisted fable, and the mythology it nurtures is itself inherently evil. The real-life events – subsequently revised – were perfectly understood at the time as the first, definitive triumphs of the genocidal European project in New England. The near-erasure of Native Americans in Massachusetts and, soon thereafter, from most of the remainder of the northern English colonial seaboard was the true mission of the Pilgrim enterprise – Act One of the American Dream. African Slavery commenced contemporaneously – an overlapping and ultimately inseparable

Act Two.
The last Act in the American drama must be the “root and branch” eradication of all vestiges of Act One and Two – America’s seminal crimes and formative projects. Thanksgiving as presently celebrated – that is, as a national political event – is an affront to civilization.


Celebrating the unspeakable
White America embraced Thanksgiving because a majority of that population glories in the fruits, if not the unpleasant details, of genocide and slavery and feels, on the whole, good about their heritage: a cornucopia of privilege and national power. Children are taught to identify with the good fortune of the Pilgrims. It does not much matter that the Native American and African holocausts that flowed from the feast at Plymouth are hidden from the children’s version of the story – kids learn soon enough that Indians were made scarce and Africans became enslaved. But they will also never forget the core message of the holiday: that the Pilgrims were good people, who could not have purposely set such evil in motion. Just as the first Thanksgivings marked the consolidation of the English toehold in what became the United States, the core ideological content of the holiday serves to validate all that has since occurred on these shores – a national consecration of the unspeakable, a balm and benediction for the victors, a blessing of the fruits of murder and kidnapping, and an implicit obligation to continue the seamless historical project in the present day.


The Thanksgiving story is an absolution of the Pilgrims, whose brutal quest for absolute power in the New World is made to seem both religiously motivated and eminently human. Most importantly, the Pilgrims are depicted as victims – of harsh weather and their own naïve yet wholesome visions of a new beginning. In light of this carefully nurtured fable, whatever happened to the Indians, from Plymouth to California and beyond, in the aftermath of the 1621 dinner must be considered a mistake, the result of misunderstandings – at worst, a series of lamentable tragedies. The story provides the essential first frame of the American saga. It is unalloyed racist propaganda, a tale that endures because it served the purposes of a succession of the Pilgrims’ political heirs, in much the same way that Nazi-enhanced mythology of a glorious Aryan/German past advanced another murderous, expansionist mission.
Thanksgiving is quite dangerous – as were the Pilgrims.


Rejoicing in a cemetery


The English settlers, their ostensibly religious venture backed by a trading company, were glad to discover that they had landed in a virtual cemetery in 1620. Corn still sprouted in the abandoned fields of the Wampanoags, but only a remnant of the local population remained around the fabled Rock. In a letter to England, Massachusetts Bay colony founder John Winthrop wrote, "But for the natives in these parts, God hath so pursued them, as for 300 miles space the greatest part of them are swept away by smallpox which still continues among them. So as God hath thereby cleared our title to this place, those who remain in these parts, being in all not 50, have put themselves under our protection."


Ever diligent to claim their own advantages as God’s will, the Pilgrims thanked their deity for having “pursued” the Indians to mass death. However, it was not divine intervention that wiped out most of the natives around the village of Patuxet but, most likely, smallpox-embedded blankets planted during an English visit or slave raid. Six years before the Pilgrim landing, a ship sailed into Patuxet’s harbor, captained by none other than the famous seaman and mercenary soldier John Smith, former leader of the first successful English colony in the New World, at Jamestown, Virginia. Epidemic and slavery followed in his wake, as Debra Glidden described in IMDiversity.com:


In 1614 the Plymouth Company of England, a joint stock company, hired Captain John Smith to explore land in its behalf. Along what is now the coast of Massachusetts in the territory of the Wampanoag, Smith visited the town of Patuxet according to "The Colonial Horizon," a 1969 book edited by William Goetzinan. Smith renamed the town Plymouth in honor of his employers, but the Wampanoag who inhabited the town continued to call it Patuxet.



The following year Captain Hunt, an English slave trader, arrived at Patuxet. It was common practice for explorers to capture Indians, take them to Europe and sell them into slavery for 220 shillings apiece. That practice was described in a 1622 account of happenings entitled "A Declaration of the State of the Colony and Affairs in Virginia," written by Edward Waterhouse. True to the explorer tradition, Hunt kidnapped a number of Wampanoags to sell into slavery.


Another common practice among European explorers was to give "smallpox blankets" to the Indians. Since smallpox was unknown on this continent prior to the arrival of the Europeans, Native Americans did not have any natural immunity to the disease so smallpox would effectively wipe out entire villages with very little effort required by the Europeans. William Fenton describes how Europeans decimated Native American villages in his 1957 work "American Indian and White relations to 1830." From 1615 to 1619 smallpox ran rampant among the Wampanoags and their neighbors to the north. The Wampanoag lost 70 percent of their population to the epidemic and the Massachusetts lost 90 percent.


Most of the Wampanoag had died from the smallpox epidemic so when the Pilgrims arrived they found well-cleared fields which they claimed for their own. A Puritan colonist, quoted by Harvard University's Perry Miller, praised the plague that had wiped out the Indians for it was "the wonderful preparation of the Lord Jesus Christ, by his providence for his people's abode in the Western world."


Historians have since speculated endlessly on why the woods in the region resembled a park to the disembarking Pilgrims in 1620. The reason should have been obvious: hundreds, if not thousands, of people had lived there just five years before.


In less than three generations the settlers would turn all of New England into a charnel house for Native Americans, and fire the economic engines of slavery throughout English-speaking America. Plymouth Rock is the place where the nightmare truly began.


The uninvited?


It is not at all clear what happened at the first – and only – “integrated” Thanksgiving feast. Only two written accounts of the three-day event exist, and one of them, by Governor William Bradford, was written 20 years after the fact. Was Chief Massasoit invited to bring 90 Indians with him to dine with 52 colonists, most of them women and children? This seems unlikely. A good harvest had provided the settlers with plenty of food, according to their accounts, so the whites didn’t really need the Wampanoag’s offering of five deer. What we do know is that there had been lots of tension between the two groups that fall. John Two-Hawks, who runs the Native Circle web site, gives a sketch of the facts:


“Thanksgiving' did not begin as a great loving relationship between the pilgrims and the Wampanoag, Pequot and Narragansett people. In fact, in October of 1621 when the pilgrim survivors of their first winter in Turtle Island sat down to share the first unofficial 'Thanksgiving' meal, the Indians who were there were not even invited! There was no turkey, squash, cranberry sauce or pumpkin pie. A few days before this alleged feast took place, a company of 'pilgrims' led by Miles Standish actively sought the head of a local Indian chief, and an 11 foot high wall was erected around the entire Plymouth settlement for the very purpose of keeping Indians out!”


It is much more likely that Chief Massasoit either crashed the party, or brought enough men to ensure that he was not kidnapped or harmed by the Pilgrims. Dr. Tingba Apidta, in his “Black Folks’ Guide to Understanding Thanksgiving,” surmises that the settlers “brandished their weaponry” early and got drunk soon thereafter. He notes that “each Pilgrim drank at least a half gallon of beer a day, which they preferred even to water. This daily inebriation led their governor, William Bradford, to comment on his people's ‘notorious sin,’ which included their ‘drunkenness and uncleanliness’ and rampant ‘sodomy.’”



Soon after the feast the brutish Miles Standish “got his bloody prize,” Dr. Apidta writes:


“He went to the Indians, pretended to be a trader, then beheaded an Indian man named Wituwamat. He brought the head to Plymouth, where it was displayed on a wooden spike for many years, according to Gary B. Nash, ‘as a symbol of white power.’ Standish had the Indian man's young brother hanged from the rafters for good measure. From that time on, the whites were known to the Indians of Massachusetts by the name ‘Wotowquenange,’ which in their tongue meant cutthroats and stabbers.”


What is certain is that the first feast was not called a “Thanksgiving” at the time; no further integrated dining occasions were scheduled; and the first, official all-Pilgrim “Thanksgiving” had to wait until 1637, when the whites of New England celebrated the massacre of the Wampanoag’s southern neighbors, the Pequots.


The real Thanksgiving Day Massacre


The Pequots today own the Foxwood Casino and Hotel, in Ledyard, Connecticut, with gross gaming revenues of over $9 billion in 2000. This is truly a (very belated) miracle, since the real first Pilgrim Thanksgiving was intended as the Pequot’s epitaph. Sixteen years after the problematical Plymouth feast, the English tried mightily to erase the Pequots from the face of the Earth, and thanked God for the blessing.


Having subdued, intimidated or made mercenaries of most of the tribes of Massachusetts, the English turned their growing force southward, toward the rich Connecticut valley, the Pequot’s sphere of influence. At the point where the Mystic River meets the sea, the combined force of English and allied Indians bypassed the Pequot fort to attack and set ablaze a town full of women, children and old people.


William Bradford, the former Governor of Plymouth and one of the chroniclers of the 1621 feast, was also on hand for the great massacre of 1637:


"Those that escaped the fire were slain with the sword; some hewed to pieces, others run through with their rapiers, so that they were quickly dispatched and very few escaped. It was conceived they thus destroyed about 400 at this time. It was a fearful sight to see them thus frying in the fire...horrible was the stink and scent thereof, but the victory seemed a sweet sacrifice, and they gave the prayers thereof to God, who had wrought so wonderfully for them, thus to enclose their enemies in their hands, and give them so speedy a victory over so proud and insulting an enemy."


The rest of the white folks thought so, too. “This day forth shall be a day of celebration and thanksgiving for subduing the Pequots," read Governor John Winthrop’s proclamation. The authentic Thanksgiving Day was born.



Most historians believe about 700 Pequots were slaughtered at Mystic. Many prisoners were executed, and surviving women and children sold into slavery in the West Indies. Pequot prisoners that escaped execution were parceled out to Indian tribes allied with the English. The Pequot were thought to have been extinguished as a people. According to IndyMedia, “The Pequot tribe numbered 8,000 when the Pilgrims arrived, but disease had brought their numbers down to 1,500 by 1637. The Pequot ‘War’ killed all but a handful of remaining members of the tribe.”


But there were still too many Indians around to suit the whites of New England, who bided their time while their own numbers increased to critical, murderous mass.


Guest’s head on a pole


By the 1670s the colonists, with 8,000 men under arms, felt strong enough to demand that the Pilgrims’ former dinner guests the Wampanoags disarm and submit to the authority of the Crown. After a series of settler provocations in 1675, the Wampanoag struck back, under the leadership of Chief Metacomet, son of Massasoit, called King Philip by the English. Metacomet/Philip, whose wife and son were captured and sold into West Indian slavery, wiped out 13 settlements and killed 600 adult white men before the tide of battle turned. A 1996 issue of the Revolutionary Worker provides an excellent narrative.


In their victory, the settlers launched an all-out genocide against the remaining Native people. The Massachusetts government offered 20 shillings bounty for every Indian scalp, and 40 shillings for every prisoner who could be sold into slavery. Soldiers were allowed to enslave any Indian woman or child under 14 they could capture. The "Praying Indians" who had converted to Christianity and fought on the side of the European troops were accused of shooting into the treetops during battles with "hostiles." They were enslaved or killed. Other "peaceful" Indians of Dartmouth and Dover were invited to negotiate or seek refuge at trading posts – and were sold onto slave ships.


It is not known how many Indians were sold into slavery, but in this campaign, 500 enslaved Indians were shipped from Plymouth alone. Of the 12,000 Indians in the surrounding tribes, probably about half died from battle, massacre and starvation.


After King Philip's War, there were almost no Indians left free in the northern British colonies. A colonist wrote from Manhattan's New York colony: "There is now but few Indians upon the island and those few no ways hurtful. It is to be admired how strangely they have decreased by the hand of God, since the English first settled in these parts." In Massachusetts, the colonists declared a "day of public thanksgiving" in 1676, saying, "there now scarce remains a name or family of them but are either slain, captivated or fled."


Fifty-five years after the original Thanksgiving Day, the Puritans had destroyed the generous Wampanoag and all other neighboring tribes. The Wampanoag chief King Philip was beheaded. His head was stuck on a pole in Plymouth, where the skull still hung on display 24 years later.


This is not thought to be a fit Thanksgiving tale for the children of today, but it’s the real story, well-known to the settler children of New England at the time – the white kids who saw the Wampanoag head on the pole year after year and knew for certain that God loved them best of all, and that every atrocity they might ever commit against a heathen, non-white was blessed.


There’s a good term for the process thus set in motion: nation-building.


Roots of the slave trade


The British North American colonists’ practice of enslaving Indians for labor or direct sale to the West Indies preceded the appearance of the first chained Africans at the dock in Jamestown, Virginia, in 1619. The Jamestown colonists’ human transaction with the Dutch vessel was an unscheduled occurrence. However, once the African slave trade became commercially established, the fates of Indians and Africans in the colonies became inextricably entwined. New England, born of up-close-and-personal, burn-them-in-the-fires-of-hell genocide, led the political and commercial development of the English colonies. The region also led the nascent nation’s descent into a slavery-based society and economy.



Ironically, an apologist for Virginian slavery made one of the best, early cases for the indictment of New England as the engine of the American slave trade. Unreconstructed secessionist Lewis Dabney’s 1867 book “A Defense of Virginia” traced the slave trade’s origins all the way back to Plymouth Rock:


The planting of the commercial States of North America began with the colony of Puritan Independents at Plymouth, in 1620, which was subsequently enlarged into the State of Massachusetts. The other trading colonies, Rhode Island and Connecticut, as well as New Hampshire (which never had an extensive shipping interest), were offshoots of Massachusetts. They partook of the same characteristics and pursuits; and hence, the example of the parent colony is taken here as a fair representation of them.


The first ship from America, which embarked in the African slave trade, was the Desire, Captain Pierce, of Salem; and this was among the first vessels ever built in the colony. The promptitude with which the "Puritan Fathers" embarked in this business may be comprehended, when it is stated that the Desire sailed upon her voyage in June, 1637. The first feeble and dubious foothold was gained by the white man at Plymouth less than seventeen years before; and as is well known, many years were expended by the struggle of the handful of settlers for existence. So that it may be correctly said, that the commerce of New England was born of the slave trade; as its subsequent prosperity was largely founded upon it. The Desire, proceeding to the Bahamas, with a cargo of "dry fish and strong liquors, the only commodities for those parts," obtained the negroes from two British men-of-war, which had captured them from a Spanish slaver.


Thus, the trade of which the good ship Desire, of Salem, was the harbinger, grew into grand proportions; and for nearly two centuries poured a flood of wealth into New England, as well as no inconsiderable number of slaves. Meanwhile, the other maritime colonies of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, and Connecticut, followed the example of their elder sister emulously; and their commercial history is but a repetition of that of Massachusetts. The towns of Providence, Newport, and New Haven became famous slave trading ports. The magnificent harbor of the second, especially, was the favorite starting-place of the slave ships; and its commerce rivaled, or even exceeded, that of the present commercial metropolis, New York. All the four original States, of course, became slaveholding.


The Revolution that exploded in 1770s New England was undertaken by men thoroughly imbued with the worldview of the Indian-killer and slave-holder. How could they not be? The “country” they claimed as their own was fathered by genocide and mothered by slavery – its true distinction among the commercial nations of the world. And these men were not ashamed, but proud, with vast ambition to spread their exceptional characteristics West and South and wherever their so-far successful project in nation-building might take them – and by the same bloody, savage methods that had served them so well in the past.



At the moment of deepest national crisis following the battle of Gettysburg in 1863, President Abraham Lincoln invoked the national fable that is far more central to the white American personality than Lincoln’s battlefield “Address.” Lincoln seized upon the 1621 feast as the historic “Thanksgiving” – bypassing the official and authentic 1637 precedent – and assigned the dateless, murky event the fourth Thursday in November.


Lincoln surveyed a broken nation, and attempted nation-rebuilding, based on the purest white myth. The same year that he issued the Emancipation Proclamation, he renewed the national commitment to a white manifest destiny that began at Plymouth Rock. Lincoln sought to rekindle a shared national mission that former Confederates and Unionists and white immigrants from Europe could collectively embrace. It was and remains a barbaric and racist national unifier, by definition. Only the most fantastic lies can sanitize the history of the Plymouth Colony of Massachusetts.


”Like a rock”


The Thanksgiving holiday fable is at once a window on the way that many, if not most, white Americans view the world and their place in it, and a pollutant that leaches barbarism into the modern era. The fable attempts to glorify the indefensible, to enshrine an era and mission that represent the nation’s lowest moral denominators. Thanksgiving as framed in the mythology is, consequently, a drag on that which is potentially civilizing in the national character, a crippling, atavistic deformity. Defenders of the holiday will claim that the politically-corrected children’s version promotes brotherhood, but that is an impossibility – a bald excuse to prolong the worship of colonial “forefathers” and to erase the crimes they committed. Those bastards burned the Pequot women and children, and ushered in the multinational business of slavery. These are facts. The myth is an insidious diversion – and worse.


Humanity cannot tolerate a 21st Century superpower, much of whose population perceives the world through the eyes of 17th Century land and flesh bandits. Yet that is the trick that fate has played on the globe. We described the roots of the planetary dilemma in our March 13, 2003 commentary, “Racism & War, Perfect Together.”


The English arrived with criminal intent - and brought wives and children to form new societies predicated on successful plunder. To justify the murderous enterprise, Indians who had initially cooperated with the squatters were transmogrified into "savages" deserving displacement and death. The relentlessly refreshed lie of Indian savagery became a truth in the minds of white Americans, a fact to be acted upon by every succeeding generation of whites. The settlers became a singular people confronting the great "frontier" - a euphemism for centuries of genocidal campaigns against a darker, "savage" people marked for extinction.


The necessity of genocide was the operative, working assumption of the expanding American nation. "Manifest Destiny" was born at Plymouth Rock and Jamestown, later to fall (to paraphrase Malcolm) like a rock on Mexico, the Philippines, Haiti, Nicaragua, etc. Little children were taught that the American project was inherently good, Godly, and that those who got in the way were "evil-doers" or just plain subhuman, to be gloriously eliminated. The lie is central to white American identity, embraced by waves of European settlers who never saw a red person.


Only a century ago, American soldiers caused the deaths of possibly a million Filipinos whom they had been sent to “liberate” from Spanish rule. They didn’t even know who they were killing, and so rationalized their behavior by substituting the usual American victims. Colonel Funston, of the Twentieth Kansas Volunteers, explained what got him motivated in the Philippines:


"Our fighting blood was up and we all wanted to kill 'niggers.' This shooting human beings is a 'hot game,' and beats rabbit hunting all to pieces." Another wrote that "the boys go for the enemy as if they were chasing jack-rabbits .... I, for one, hope that Uncle Sam will apply the chastening rod, good, hard, and plenty, and lay it on until they come into the reservation and promise to be good 'Injuns.'"


Our military leaders in Iraq continue to personify the unfitness of Americans to play a major role in the world, much less rule it.



What does this have to do with the Mayflower? Everything. Although possibly against their wishes, the Pilgrims hosted the Wampanoag for three no doubt anxious days. The same men killed and enslaved Wampanoags immediately before and after the feast. They, their newly arrived English comrades and their children roasted hundreds of neighboring Indians alive just 16 years later, and two generations afterwards cleared nearly the whole of New England of its indigenous “savages,” while enthusiastically enriching themselves through the invention of transoceanic, sophisticated means of enslaving millions. The Mayflower’s cultural heirs are programmed to find glory in their own depravity and savagery in their most helpless victims, who can only redeem themselves by accepting the inherent goodness of white Americans.


Thanksgiving encourages these cognitive cripples in their madness, just as it is designed to do.


Things are looking up


We began this essay by saying that “the day grows nearer when the almost four centuries-old abomination will be deprived of its reason for being: white supremacy.” We firmly believe this. The wired world works against the Bushites insane leap to global hegemony, while creating the material basis for (dare we say the words) brother- and sisterhood among humankind. It becomes clear that the fruits of millennia of human genius cannot be captured and packaged for the enrichment of a few for much longer – and certainly not by a cabal that cannot see beyond the bubble of its own, warped history. The dim outlines of a new and more democratic world order can be seen in the often tentative, but sometimes dramatic actions of movements and nations determined to construct a fairer way to live. As the world witnesses the brutality, stupidity and sheer incompetence of the Pirates currently at the helm of the United States, the urgency of a common, alternative human project becomes apparent to all. The “end of history” that the Bushites triumphantly announce is really the end of them, through a process they have accelerated with every deranged action and delusional strategy they have undertaken since 2001.


They are like men in quicksand. White racism as a global scourge will sink with them, and eventually whither to a mere prejudice rather than a world-threatening menace.

We at BC are thankful to be alive in the knowledge that a new world is just over the horizon, close enough to sense, even if we never see it.

We are optimistic about our struggle in the United States – if not, we would never encourage anybody to fight and struggle for anything.

We are thankful for our hope that Barack Obama is the real thing and a genuine social democrat who will with our support and criticism push the envelope in civilized directions.

We are thankful we can renew our confidence in African Americans, citizens of the African World and all other people of good will who will continue to be part of the movement for economic justice, social justice and peace.

 



Any BlackCommentator.com article may be re-printed as long as it is re-printed in its entirety and full credit given to the author and www.BlackCommentator.com . If the re-print is on the Internet we additionally request a link back to the original piece on our Website.

Read more

Wednesday, November 12, 2008

One photo embraces Veteran’s Day

Returning wounded Iraq veteran, and now Director of the Illinois Dept of Veteran’s Affairs, Tammy Duckworth who lost both legs in combat in Iraq war with President Elect, Barack Obama on Veteran’s Day 2008;  ceremony of placing the wreath on Bronze Soldiers Memorial.

Obama Tammy Duckworth Veterans Day 2008

link - more photos and article

Read more

Friday, November 7, 2008

Obama Victory Ushers in More Confident Tone for Iraq - U.S. Settlement

Obama Victory Alters the Tenor of Iraqi Politics, title of article at NY Times;

BAGHDAD — Barack Obama may have been elected only three days ago, but his victory is already beginning to shift the political ground in Iraq and the region.

Iraqi Shiite politicians are indicating that they will move faster toward a new security agreement about American troops, and a Bush administration official said he believed that Iraqis could ratify the agreement as early as the middle of this month.

“Before, the Iraqis were thinking that if they sign the pact, there will be no respect for the schedule of troop withdrawal by Dec. 31, 2011,” said Hadi al-Ameri, a powerful member of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, a major Shiite party. “If Republicans were still there, there would be no respect for this timetable. This is a positive step to have the same theory about the timetable as Mr. Obama.”

Mr. Obama has said that he favors a 16-month schedule for withdrawing combat brigades, a timetable about twice as fast as that provided for in the draft American and Iraqi accord.

and this;

Over all, however, there was a new tone of optimism. “The atmosphere is positive with the American attempt to preserve the sovereignty of the Iraqi nation,” the government’s spokesman, Ali al-Dabbagh, told the news channel Al Arabiya. He praised the inclusion of a new provision stating that Americans would not launch attacks on Iraq’s neighbors from Iraqi soil.

The Americans also added language to make explicit what kinds of troops would remain after the withdrawal in 2011, said a Bush administration official knowledgeable about the security pact. Those still in Iraq would be primarily trainers and air traffic controllers, the official said.

“There’s going to be a significant presence, but they are not going to be ‘combat’ forces,” said the administration official. The official said that the most recent talks with Iraqis had given American negotiators confidence that a final agreement was close.

Mr. Ameri, who is chairman of the security committee of Iraq’s Parliament, said that Iraqi politicians did appreciate the Bush administration’s commitment to Iraq. Signing the agreement while President Bush was still in office would be “a minimum sign of appreciation,” Mr. Ameri said.

Read more

Will Smith on Obama ‘Oprah I'm an action hero, I can't be crying on your show,"

I’m a Will Smith fan, I just like the guy. I  like his approach and attitude and I like his movies,  and yes, he he makes me laugh.  Video of him on Oprah show after the elections results in President-Elect Barack Obama.  Watch the video at this link.

Read more

Obama: 'New Mission in Iraq: Ending the War'

Following through on his campaign promises, President Elect, Barack Obama and Vice President Elect, Joe Biden already have a strong sense of how they plan to end the war in Iraq. 

Read the entire article by Jason Leopold  at The Public Record.

also read it firsthand at and follow along at Barack Obama’s newly launched online ‘transition’ website change.gov – office of the President-Elect.

The president-elect said one of his first policy directives after he is sworn into office will be giving military commanders and the Secretary of Defense "a new mission in Iraq: ending the war."

On the SOFA; which needs to be worked out between the U.S. and Iraq by Dec 31, 2008 since that is when the United Nations mandate that allows foreign soldiers to operate in country expires 

"Under the Obama-Biden plan, a residual force will remain in Iraq and in the region to conduct targeted counter-terrorism missions against al Qaeda in Iraq and to protect American diplomatic and civilian personnel," his proposal says. "They will not build permanent bases in Iraq, but will continue efforts to train and support the Iraqi security forces as long as Iraqi leaders move toward political reconciliation and away from sectarianism."

The Obama team also said that a Status of Forces Agreement Bush is currently negotiating with the Iraqi government must be approved by Congress or must include input from Obama and his foreign policy advisers before being signed.


“The Bush administration must submit the agreement to Congress or allow the next administration to negotiate an agreement that has bipartisan support here at home and makes absolutely clear that the U.S. will not maintain permanent bases in Iraq," according to Obama’s transition website.


"Obama and Biden believe any Status of Forces Agreement, or any strategic framework agreement, should be negotiated in the context of a broader commitment by the U.S. to begin withdrawing its troops and forswearing permanent bases," states the proposal. "Obama and Biden also believe that any security accord must be subject to Congressional approval. It is unacceptable that the Iraqi government will present the agreement to the Iraqi parliament for approval—yet the Bush administration will not do the same with the U.S. Congress.”

Read more

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

American Prayer - Dave Stewart (Barack Obama Music Video)

Inspiring and Hopeful.  And just a few days away now from becoming a much needed change in our political reality. 

Read more

Sunday, October 19, 2008

Photo of mother at gravesite referenced by Colin Powell endorsement of Barack Obama

Photobucket


The photo Colin Powell referenced in his endorsement of Barack Obama.  The photo of mother at her son's gravesite, a young man, 20 years old, killed in Iraq, awarded Bronze Star and Purple Heart.  Emblem on his gravesite is not the Christian cross, the Jewish Star of David, but the Muslim Crescent and Star.  Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan, Cpl., U.S. Army, Operation Iraqi Freedom, was an American who was 14 at the time of 911.  He waited until he was of age to enlist in military to serve his country (United States of America) and he gave his life for his country...the United States of America.  

excerpt from the transcript of Colin Powell endorsement speech on Meet The Press today


I feel strongly about this particular point because of a picture I saw in a magazine.  It was a photo essay about troops who are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.  And one picture at the tail end of this photo essay was of a mother in Arlington Cemetery, and she had her head on the headstone of her son's grave.  And as the picture focused in, you could see the writing on the headstone.  And it gave his awards--Purple Heart, Bronze Star--showed that he died in Iraq, gave his date of birth, date of death.  He was 20 years old. And then, at the very top of the headstone, it didn't have a Christian cross, it didn't have the Star of David, it had crescent and a star of the Islamic faith.  And his name was Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan, and he was an American. He was born in New Jersey.  He was 14 years old at the time of 9/11, and he waited until he can go serve his country, and he gave his life.  Now, we have got to stop polarizing ourself in this way.  And John McCain is as nondiscriminatory as anyone I know.  But I'm troubled about the fact that, within the party, we have these kinds of expressions.


Video of Colin Powell's endorsement speech of Barack Obama at Meet the Press today.



There is much to be mined from Colin Powell's speech that might resonate more strongly with others.  Colin Powell, with this reference, eloquenty elevated a truth and reality of the constancy of our country's relationship to the Iraq war.  I wanted to take a moment to share in elegance that truth, that reality, amidst all the background noise of the Presidential campaign.


It is not useful for me to editorialize or restate using my lesser words that which Colin Powell has brought into perspective with his own words.  I hope, readers, you will take time to listen to Colin Powell and hear the words for yourselves.

Read more

Monday, March 3, 2008

Hillary Cllinton Owns Iraq War; Video March 6, 2003 - in her own words

Having a first hand investment in needing to know why the 2 in our family were deployed to Iraq, I tend not to forget that Hillary Clinton voted for the Resolution to invade Iraq. Hear her in her own words in the video below.

Okay, so that was five years ago and many who voted for invading Iraq now suffer with buyer's remorse. Not Hillary Clinton though. She has not, to my knowledge, taken responsibility for the incredulous damage caused by the collective 'yes' votes from Congress to invade and occupy Iraq; her own yes vote included.

She has done a good job of pointing to the Bush Administration and justifiably, but when she uses that ploy to point the finger away from herself, I don't find it an act of courage, nor do I find it ethical, nor do I appreciate it as necessary politicking ... in this case politicking with the lives of our loved ones, and with the lives of Iraqi families who had little to do with the event of 911. I find Hillary's tactics as more of the same in that it is politics as usual, and I believe those who have and will die by the votes and actions of our politicians deserve more humane political
consideration.

One of the very reasons why I am more inclined to want to see what Barack Obama has to offer in leading this country back from the brink, is because I've already seen what Hillary Clinton has to offer. The respect I have held for John McCain remains, and it is in the past tense now for his military service to our country for which he will always deserve respect. He seems though, to have lost his way along the course of the years. There is no such thing as winning or victory in Iraq, and to hold out for that end is beyond foolhardy.

The Bush Administration will always deserve the core brunt of disdain for what they have done in Iraq and thereby rendered our standing in the world as foolishly impudent. The American citizens who weren't sent to fight in combat are feeling the effects of the trade offs in the cost of the Iraq war costing a destabilized economy at home.

See the video below, and into the video at the 6:30 time mark begin Hillary's comments. Hat tip to the Daily Kos diary where this video is posted and please read more there. I felt very compelled to bring the video here to this blog because our family has such a personal stake.

Read more

Sunday, February 24, 2008

Iraq War Vet, Bobby Wise, Speaks on why he supports Obama

You haven't heard these reasons before, and it assuredly speaks to the passion I know to be true among our troops. Please wait while the video loads



see more here
Read more

Tuesday, February 13, 2007

As a military family , I take exception to use of 'wasted lives' - Barack Obama or anyone else

Barack Obama using the words 'Wasted lives' is the news item today, or at least in my attention field today. Now I full well understand that this can be what media uses to make political hay one way or another. And I understand that when I generate conversation around it, I get to be a tool for one side or the other - blah, blah, blah. I write to a principle beyond that though; or at least it goes beyond political ammunition for me.

Whether Barack Obama said it, or my veteran neighbor said it, or my friend said it, or my family said it, or a stranger said it - it is a poor choice of words, in my opinion, when used as descriptive of soldiers killed in combat. Why use the words, I continue to ask myself, when other choices are more apt descriptions to say that a 'war action' has unnecessarily cut short the lives of so many young people? But 'wasted' lives? No. Up to the point that their lives are cut short in combat deployments, it is a poor definition to describe their lives as wasted. The waste lies with the Administration and politicians who tend to view the lives of our servicemen and women as expendible waste when initiating war actions.

If it was my son or daughter's life cut short in a combat deployment in Iraq (or Afghanistan), I would not be consoled thinking their life 'wasted' and I would be inconsolable that their life was cut short in a wasted war action initiated by a callous Administration. When my son-in-law and nephew are sent on their second deployments to Iraq this year, my worry threshold begins to climb again, having already anxiously awaited the outcome for them from their first deployment in Iraq.

I truly never thought when they deployed in OIF 2003-2004 that by 2007 the U.S. would still be occupying Iraq or that our military troops would be serving in second, third or more deployments. Yet, it is so, and the two in our family, who, incidentally, do have families of their own, will face additional deployments to Iraq. Of course, I earnestly pray for their safe return, but as for all military families who face deployments, family talk has to get to the place of 'what if' he/she doesn't return or returns so severely injured as to be life-changing? That is the reality for military families and troops.

I cite a conversation shared in my daughter's family recently on just this matter. The parents are deciding on their daughter's college entry potential, now that she is in high school. Since Dad will be deploying again to Iraq this year, Mom needs to decide where to best put in the 'waiting time' - at the base where he is stationed; coming home to have family support close at hand; and what about disrupting high school for oldest daughter? It won't be as tough a disruption for the two younger children in elementary school as it will be for their older sister in high school.

As my daughter shares a bit of their decision making with me, I incorrectly come to an erroneous conclusion that it sounds like the decision is being left to my high school granddaughter and I tell my daughter that is perhaps extraordinary guilt to inadvertantly place on her daughter. How will she live with the consequences when Dad deploys to Iraq without feeling some guilt that her decision about where to live and attend high school had something to do with whether he lives, dies, or any other of the potential consequences. Me, an old caseworker, knows children will harbor guilt that they are somehow responsible, often even when the parents allay such untruths, knows the world of children is more often fraught with a child's sense of being responsible for what happens to their parents.

I need not have worried, nor incorrectly interpreted their family conversations. My daughter shares with me how their conversation went. Dad says to high schooler 'We want your input in the decision making. We want you to know that it doesn't matter what base or where the family lives, I'm going to deploy to Iraq anyway and you have some choice about where you want to go to high school. That part of the decision is not going to impact my having to deploy to Iraq, so you don't need to worry about what is going to be best for me or Mom but what is going to be best for you."

How many families share such conversations in the normal course of their lives? Military families do share such conversations since it is left to the troops and military families to carry the burden of this 'war' in Iraq. Perhaps I become over sensitive to the language, words and meanings as the general populations attempt to try to address the changing political climate about the war in Iraq. And I know I am particularly sensitive to the insensitivities of politicians, having met with some to advocate for an end to Iraq war and bringing the troops home....now. Of course, I've been saying 'now' since 2004 and it is now 2007, so the word starts to sound hollow to my own ears...

Not to put too much onus on Senator Barack Obama, in his poor choice of the words 'wasted lives' to describe something which I'm sure he meant other than what it sounded like, I have heard others use that phrase and I find myself reacting just as strongly when I hear it from others. Others who actually have perhaps more of a right to define it than I do - veterans, veterans of Vietnam, veterans of previous wars - to be specific. 'Wasted Lives', I realize isn't intended to say the individual's life was a waste - rather that their lives were spent and cut short in an unnecessary war. But, I still contend, that the families whose lives have to go on, can hardly be comforted by the use of words 'wasted lives' .

I contend that great care be given in choice and use of words to describe those whose lives have been cut short as other than 'wasted lives' for their lives mattered and even if this Administration, in it's callous disregard, does not believe that to be so - those lives mattered and deserve honoring, memorializing, rememberance as the individual lives they lived. Not some category catch phrase to promote a viewpoint as to the value of the war of the moment - be it Vietnam, where my young husband was deployed and could have become one of 'those wasted lives' or Iraq, where my son-in-law and nephew could still become one of 'those wasted lives'...... how dare people reference our loved ones lives as 'wasted lives' and how lazy not to find more appropriate language to make a more clear description of opposition to a war.

Among some of the peace activist people with which I find myself in what is frequently an uneasy collaboration, I am sometimes startled by what feels like 'coarse' choice of descriptive words to further perhaps their message even at the expense of my message - which is often times, as a military family, not the same as their message. And, I also do find, among some of the peace activist groups, some people among them are not so peaceful and more interested in activism at all costs. even if it runs roughshod over the very people who carry the weight of this war on their shoulders and live it daily - troops and military families who love and support them. Even when their words indicate support for the families and troops, their message and actions convey otherwise. I don't like leaving it to peace activists or politicians to frame on my behalf my message, and I find treasure in the people willing to listen, adjust word useage and language.

Usage of the words wasted lives' to describe a war initiated and sustained by politicians -- yes, it's a big deal to me.

Apologies accepted Barack Obama

quoting from article;

He told reporters that even as the words came out he knew he had misspoken.

"It is not at all what I intended to say, and I would absolutely apologize if any (military families) felt that in some ways it had diminished the enormous courage and sacrifice that they'd shown."


and in a round about way, I guess a thank you could be in order for accidentally creating a forum of discussion which is part of the dialogue on Iraq war. Now, if you will kindly Vote the Power of the Purse ..... bring them home, it would be even more meaningful ... to me.
Read more

Hydrangea

Hydrangea

Dahlia

Dahlia

spring color bowl

spring color bowl

  © Blog Design by Simply Fabulous Blogger Templates

Back to TOP