CIA was focused on American journalist Wolf Blitzer in Israel

WMR has learned from a former top official of the CIA station at the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv that in the late 1970s, a young and "impudent" American correspondent for the Jerusalem Post first came to the attention of the CIA because of his attempts to paint the Camp David peace accords between Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin, brokered by President Jimmy Carter, in a bad light. The correspondent was also seen by the CIA station as being too close to the Israeli intelligence apparatus, mainly because of his simultaneous work on behalf of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), seen by the CIA at the time as a cipher for Israeli intelligence in the United States.

The journalist in question was Wolf Blitzer, who is now CNN's top man for its Washington news bureau. The former CIA officer said that in his dealings with Blitzer, the American journalist always showed an air of "arrogance."

Blitzer's unique role as both a journalist and a public relations man for AIPAC gave him unique insight into the Israel Lobby in Washington since he was an integral part of it. in a March 24, 1993, article in the Jerusalem Post, Blitzer sounded a warning bell about a member of Congress who had been tapped as George H. W. Bush's new Defense Secretary and seemed to be wavering on support for Israel, especially in light of the Jonathan Pollard spy case.

From Blitzer's report we have the following: "A day after Jonathan Jay Pollard was sentenced to life in prison after pleading guilty to spying for Israel, Richard Cheney, then a congressman from Wyoming, and a few other members of the House Intelligence Committee received a high-level classified briefing from the Central Intelligence Agency. Cheney, the new secretary of defence in the Bush administration, emerged from that closed-door session to tell reporters that he did not believe that Pollard was part of any unauthorized Israeli operation. 'I don't think it was a rogue operation,' he said on March 5, 1987. 'I think it was a major, very successful penetration of the U.S. government and our intelligence agencies by the Israeli government.' He said that such behaviour 'doesn't behoove an ally,' adding: 'I don't think we've heard the last of it.'"

Blitzer continued on reporting on Cheney's rant against Israel. ""On the one hand," he [Cheney] said, "Israel pleads a special relationship with the United States, and on the other hand, they run a major intelligence operation against us. There isn't much they couldn't get if they asked for it, but they chose not to do it that way, and I think the Israeli government ought to know that some of us are deeply concerned about that kind of conduct.'"

Blitzer also noted Cheney's support for U.S. arms sales to Arab countries: "On the sensitive matter of U.S. arms sales to Arab countries, including Jordan and Saudi Arabia, he almost always has voted in favour. And most observers here believe that he will almost certainly follow in the footsteps of his Pentagon predecessors in pushing for additional large-scale weapons transfers to moderate Arab countries." And Blitzer bemoaned the fact that Cheney had not had very much interaction with AIPAC, other Jewish lobbying groups, and Jews in general: "Because he represented a very small state with only a handful of Jews, Cheney did not have to deliver many major addresses on Israel. 'He hasn't thought about the subject too much,' one Capitol Hill source said."

Blitzer continues to act as Israel's gatekeeper at CNN, determining what spokespeople will represent the Palestinian and other Arab views on the increasingly propaganda-oriented cable news network.

Israeli spying is a pandemic . . . including in Nevada

The truth about George Joannides and the CIA’s fight to hide it

First, a brief word of apology to Jefferson Morley, whose excellent and meticulously researched book, Our Man in Mexico: Winston Scott and the Hidden History of the CIA was first mentioned here almost exactly one year ago, with the promise of a review to come…like so many other worthy projects, the review ended up on the back burner (the saltmine beckons and is unusually active at present), but it has not been forgotten. In the meantime, Machetera will say this: the book is terrific – engagingly written, carefully corroborated, it is a must-read for anyone curious about the CIA’s long reach in Mexico, particularly during the period in the fall of 1963 when the CIA did and then didn’t know about Lee Harvey Oswald’s visit to Mexico City in his failed search for a Cuban visa. So get the book, now.

Second, José Pertierra has just published an exclusive interview with Morley at Cubadebate. Normally Machetera resists translating articles written by those with a perfect grasp of English, such as that possessed by Pertierra, not least because translation is invariably an imperfect art and she dislikes second-guessing an interview that undoubtedly transpired in English to begin with. But this interview is exceptionally interesting and important, and as yet, no English version has appeared. So in the meantime, with additional apologies to Morley, and to Pertierra, here it is. A bit of a filmed interview with Morley follows the interview.

Jeff Morley: “I’m only asking that the CIA obey the law” - Español

José Pertierra for Cubadebate

English translation: Machetera

Washington – The day that his brother was assassinated, the Attorney General of the United States, Robert F. Kennedy, spoke by telephone with one of the leaders of the terrorist campaign against Cuba, Enrique “Harry” Ruiz-Williams. Kennedy said to him directly: “One of your men did it.” Bobby Kennedy didn’t ask him. He told him. It came from his gut, because he knew those people. That’s how the journalist/researcher Jefferson Morley tells it in an interview he granted Cubadebate.

“The assassination of President John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963 and the dirty war against Cuba organized by the Miami Cubans are intimately linked: they’re battles in the same war, “ said Morley.

“The anecdote about the conversation between Bobby Kennedy and Ruiz-Williams is well founded,” says Morley, “because the prestigious journalist Haynes Johnson was a witness. He was with Ruiz-Williams during the conversation with Kennedy.”

Jefferson Morley has a long career as a well-known journalist in Washington. He worked for 15 years for the Washington Post and has also been published in the New York Review of Books, the Nation, the New Republic, Slate, Rolling Stone and the Los Angeles Times. Recently, he published a biography of the CIA station chief in Mexico, Our Man in Mexico: Winston Scott and the Hidden History of the CIA. Six years ago he filed suit (Morley v. CIA) against the CIA in order to force the Central Intelligence Agency to declassify documents dating from the period between 1962 and 1964, relative to George E. Joannides, a CIA official charged with many of the operations against Cuba in that period. On November 16^th, Judge Richard J. Leon of the U.S. District Court in Washington D.C., will hold a hearing to listen to the arguments of both Morley and the CIA about the possible declassification of these documents.

José Pertierra: Why do you believe the CIA wishes to keep nearly 50 year old documents secret?

Jefferson Morley: Because they may contain something delicate or embarrassing for the CIA. The story that we’re told about Joannides is a show. A lie. According to his own documents which I’ve gone over personally, the story that the CIA tells us now about Joannides doesn’t match reality. The Agency tries to trivialize Joannides’ role in the operations that took place between 1962 and 1964, but history shows us the truth. Furthermore, if the documents being hidden truly do not incriminate the CIA, why do they want them to be hidden? Could it be because Kennedy was killed in 1963? That conditioned reflex to keep this secret hides something.

JP: Who was George E. Joannides?

JM: He was a CIA man whose assignment was to control and direct the Miami Cubans who were in charge of the operations against Cuba at the beginning of the 1960’s. Specifically, he was charged with controlling the Directorio Revolucionario Esudiantil (DRE) [Revolutionary Student Directorate]. The CIA commended him in 1963 for his good work directing the DRE. After the missile crisis in October of 1962, Washington wanted to “reign in” the DRE’s activities, and the CIA put Joannides in charge of that assignment. When the CIA gave him his evaluation in August of 1963, he was congratulated for having “controlled” the DRE.

JP: Who was the DRE?

JM: It was a Cuban organization headquartered in Miami. A CIA analyst told me that the DRE came to be “the most militant of the Miami exile organizations at the beginning of the 1960’s.”

Its leaders were Alberto Muller, Ernesto Travieso and Juan Manual Salvat. Salvat later started a bookstore on Miami’s Calle Ocho, called the Librería Universal [Universal Library]. One of its militants was the young Jorge Mas Canosa, who would later go on to found the Cuban American National Foundation (CANF). The DRE operated from Miami under the direction of a couple of important CIA officers: David Phillips and Howard Hunt.

One of their most well-known violent operations against Cuba took place in August of 1962, when Salvat and a group of DRE militants headed to Cuba from Miami in a small boat and attacked the Hotel Rosita de Hornedo, known after the revolution as the Hotel Sierra Maestra, in Miramar (Havana), at midnight. They attacked the hotel with a cannon, terrorized the guests, and fled. Among the DRE militants who attacked the hotel that night was José Basulto, who would go on to found the Brothers to the Rescue organization in 1995. Basulto told me personally that he was the one who purchased and shot the cannon that was used to attack the Hotel Sierra Maestra that night. He said that he’d bought it in a Miami pawnshop.

(Translator’s note: Morley repudiates the word “terrorized” as it is attributed to him.)

In August of 1963, members of the DRE in New Orleans had a series of encounters with Lee Harvey Oswald. After the assassination of President Kennedy on November 22, 1963, the members of the DRE spread a publicity campaign to insinuate that Castro had assassinated Kennedy, because Oswald was supposedly affiliated with Cuba and the Soviet Union.

JP: George E. Joannides’ official assignment was “Head of psychological warfare for JMWAVE.” What were his responsibilities?

JM: The plan was to affect the psychology of the enemy. To change their perceptions of reality in order to bring about a change in government. The best example is that of Guatemala in 1954, when the CIA orchestrated false news bulletins about an opposition to the Arbenz government, in the Guatemalan jungle. In the end, Arbenz confused fiction for reality and panic set in. Something that never happened to Fidel Castro or Che Guevara. They understood very well the difference between the fiction of psychological war, and reality.

Joannides paid the members of the DRE. He gave them a lot of money. We know that they received $50,000 a month. In today’s currency that’s more than $150,000. It was a lot of money. He was Washington’s man in Miami in charge of the DRE.

The DRE members at that time were the CIA’s favorite Cubans. Under Joannides’ direction, the DRE had four specific tasks:

1. Political action against Cuba.
2. Acquisition of intelligence against Cuba.
3. Distribution of propaganda against Cuba.
4. Distribution of its actions and propaganda toward Latin America.

JP: What is the connection between Lee Harvey Oswald, the individual who is said to have assassinated President Kennedy in November of 1963, and the DRE? What might the CIA documents tell us about that?

JM: Four months before President Kennedy’s assassination, Oswald and members of the DRE met several times in New Orleans. They had an altercation with him in the street. The DRE sent a member to his house, making him seem like a follower of Fidel. They debated about this on the radio and sent the tape of the debate to Joannides; they even wrote to Congress asking for an investigation of Oswald who at that point in time was an innocuous person. You have to remember that at that time, the DRE had specific instructions to ask for the CIA’s authorization before making any kind of public declaration.

Scarcely an hour after Oswald’s arrest on November 22^nd, the DRE leaders published the documentation they’d accumulated against Oswald and in this way influenced the coverage of the assassination by insinuating that a Castro agent had killed the President of the United States.

The Warren Commission, who investigated the assassination, never realized the connection between Joannides’ employees in the DRE and Oswald. Even in 1978, when the House of Representatives Committee on Assassinations hired Joannides as an advisor to its investigation, Joannides didn’t inform the Committee about his role in the events of 1963 and the DRE.

The attorney for the House Committee, Bob Blakey, says that Joannides obstructed the investigation by not divulging the role he played with the DRE.

JP: What are you asking of the CIA with this suit you filed in December of 2003?

JM: I’m only asking that the CIA obey the law. The CIA has told me that it has more than 295 documents that it will not release for reasons of national security. The documents I have show that Joannides traveled to New Orleans to complete tasks that the CIA charged him with in 1963 and 1964. [They show] that the CIA entrusted him with delicate operations throughout 1962-64. We don’t have any information about those operations. Joannides can’t tell us, because he died in 2001. Those are the only documents about what he did in that city with the DRE members. The CIA has the legal obligation to declassify those documents, but it does not want to declassify them. It’s locked them up. I believe that the lockup sources from the CIA department in charge of Latin America. They are hiding something. The CIA tells us that Joannides had nothing to do with the DRE. I know that’s not true. The documents I have in my possession prove that indeed there was that relationship. Why do they make these statements that are so openly false? What are they hiding?

I hope that on November 16^th, Judge Richard J. Leon will support my motion to have the CIA declassify these documents, so that they may be studied. This is the only way for us to know what really happened in those two mysterious CIA operations in which Joannides worked in 1963 and 1964.

JP: The CIA says that if these documents are declassified, the national security of the United States will be endangered. Do you know what the danger is?

JM: There’s no danger. Washington has a mistaken perception about what is truly national security. I’m told that they cannot declassify nearly 50 year old documents for reasons of national security. That’s not true.

I don’t know who killed Kennedy, I don’t pretend to know. What I’m asking is that these documents be declassified which have to do with George E. Joannides during 1962 and 1964, in order to clarify the facts. This is not a threat to the country, and the Freedom of Information Act says that they must be declassified. I am only asking that the CIA obey the law.

Machetera is a member of Tlaxcala, the network of translators for linguistic diversity. This translation may be reprinted as long as the content remains unaltered, and the source, author, and translator are cited.

Palabras para las vísperas

Por Eduardo Galeano

Falta muy poquito para que el pueblo uruguayo elija nuevo gobierno.

Al mismo tiempo, en las mismas urnas, se somete a plebiscito la posibilidad de liberarnos de dos palos metidos en la rueda de la democracia. Uno de esos palos es el que impide el voto por correo de los uruguayos que viven en el extranjero. La ley electoral, ciega de ceguera burocrática, confunde la identidad con el domicilio. Dime dónde vives y te diré quién eres. Los uruguayos de la patria peregrina, en su mayoría jóvenes, no tienen derecho de voto si no pueden pagarse el pasaje. Nuestro país, país de viejos, no sólo ha castigado a los jóvenes, durante años negándoles trabajo y obligándolos al exilio, sino que además les sigue negando el ejercicio del más elemental de los derechos democráticos. Nadie se va porque quiere. Los que se han ido, ¿son traidores? ¿Es traidor uno de cada cinco uruguayos? ¿Traidor o traicionado?

Ojalá los uruguayos acabemos de una vez con esta discriminación que nos mutila.
Y ojalá acabemos también con otra discriminación todavía peor, la ley de impunidad, ley de caducidad de la pretensión punitiva del Estado, bautizada con ese nombre rocambolesco por los especialistas en el arte de no llamar a las cosas por su nombre.

La Corte Suprema de Justicia acaba de dictaminar que esa ley viola la Constitución. Desde mucho tiempo antes se sabía que también viola nuestra dignidad nacional y nuestra vocación democrática. Es una triste herencia de la dictadura militar, que nos ha condenado al pago de sus deudas y al olvido de sus crímenes.

Sin embargo, hace veinte años, esta ley infame fue confirmada por un plebiscito popular. Algunos de los impulsores de aquel plebiscito estamos reincidiendo ahora, y a mucha honra: perdimos, por muy poco pero perdimos, y no nos arrepentimos. Creemos que aquella derrota nuestra fue en gran medida dictada por el miedo, un bombardeo publicitario que identificaba a la justicia con la venganza y anunciaba el apocalipsis, larga sombra de la dictadura que no quería irse; y creemos que nuestro país ha demostrado, en estos primeros años de gobierno del Frente Amplio, que ya no es aquel país que el miedo paralizaba.

Eso creemos, digo, y ojalá no me equivoque.

Ojalá triunfe el sentido común. El sentido común nos dice que la impunidad estimula al delincuente. El golpe de Estado en Honduras no ha hecho más que confirmarlo. ¿Quién puede sorprenderse de que los militares hondureños hayan hecho lo que han venido haciendo desde hace muchos años, con el entrenamiento del Pentágono y el visto bueno de la Casa Blanca?
La lucha contra la impunidad, impunidad de los poderes y los “poderitos”, se está desarrollando en los cuatro puntos cardinales del mundo. Ojalá nosotros podamos contribuir a desenmascarar a los defensores de la impunidad, que hipócritamente ponen el grito en el cielo ante la inseguridad pública, aunque bien saben que los ladrones de gallinas y los navajeros de barrio son buenos alumnos de los banqueros y los generales recompensados por sus hazañas criminales.
Ojalá el próximo domingo confirme nuestra fe en una democracia sin coronitas, ni las coronitas del uniforme militar, ni las coronitas del dinero.

Ojalá podamos envolver esta ley en papel celofán, en un paquete bien atado, con moña y todo, para enviársela de regalo a Silvio Berlusconi. Este gran mago de la impunidad universal, que ha atravesado más de sesenta procesos y no conoce la cárcel ni siquiera de visita, nos agradecerá el obsequio y seguramente sabrá encontrarle alguna utilidad.

Ojalá.

Lo único seguro es que, pase lo que pase, la historia continuará, y continuará el incesante combate entre la libertad y el miedo.

Yo suelo invocar una palabra, una palabra mágica, una palabra abrepuertas, que es, quizá, la más universal de todas. Es la palabra abracadabra, que en hebreo antiguo significa: Envía tu fuego hasta el final. A modo de homenaje a todos los fuegos caminantes, que van abriendo puertas por los caminos del mundo, la repito ahora:

Caminantes de la justicia,
portadores del fuego sagrado,
¡abracadabra, compañeros!


* Versión del discurso pronunciado en el Obelisco de Montevideo, en el cierre de la campaña contra la ley de impunidad, la noche del martes 20.

What Are Pres. Obama, Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman Trying to Hide? Still More Proof of US_Sponsored Bloody Sexual Assault

By Naomi Wolf

For four years now, I have been following the fates of the
hundreds of men who have been and the 200 plus men who still are being
held and the many who have, now the record is clear, been tortured at
Guantanamo Bay. But until this weak I had never actually heard a single
such man's voice -- speaking to me live and in person.
When I went to the prison in June of this year, we journalists
were brought to view the prisoners from afar -- exactly as if they were
dangerous animals in a cage. They called to us, anguishedly, in a voice
that still haunts me. `Can I talk to them?" I asked. Many of them speak
English. No; no, no, was the answer. No one is permitted to talk to
them. Prisoners in the US have many rights to speak; but silencing the
Guantanamo detainees has been -- as all oppressors know -- key to
maintaining opprssion; and key to manipulating US popular opinion. Bill
Kristol, may God forgive him, and Dick Cheney's daughter have
started a new organization to spin the torture at Guantanamo and
elsewhere: `Keep America Safe.' (Or: `Keep Daddy Out of Prison.') But
if the perpetrators are to continue to spin America, the prisoners'
voices have to continue to be silenced.
Even those who empathize with the detainees tend to speak `for'
them -- casting them as faceless victims, who are the sum of their
victimization, just as the opposite `side' casts them as faceless,
voiceless monsters.
The biggest thing that has happened to me for a long time is
that, for the first time since I have begin this journey -- I spoke -- have
been speaking to, listening to -- a former detainee. I have been in
touch with Binyam Mohamed, who is the UK resident who was released from
Guantanamo in February -- after seven years' captivity -- and who last
Friday won a major victory when a British court ruled that the US and
the UK could not continue to conceal from the public the seven
paragraphs that describe horrific torture of Mr Mohamed, in documents
from Guantanamo. He is also suing Boeing for its part in rendering him
to `black sites' where he was also tortured.
Of course, the UK government is appealing the ruling, so we still
can't know what happened to him; but officials have told reporters that
one action that the paragraphs describe is the cutting of genitals with
a razor; waterboarding, this official said drily, is well dowon on the list of atrocities Mr Mohamed suffered.
Why are President Obama, Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman trying so desperately to cover up what the record will show? Because it will be still more horrific evidence of yet more unbelievably violent sexual assault among many cases now on the record -- perpetrated by the US against those men held without charges in their direct custody or in blacksites. To the many confirmed cases of anal rape with objects that prisoners have suffered under the aegis of the US, we will now add attempted genital mutilation.
As Mr Mohamed told the Uk Daily Mail, 'they cut off my clothes with some kind of doctor's scalpel. I was totally naked. I was afraid to ask Marwan [the interrogator] what would happen because it would show fear.

'I tried to put on a brave face. But maybe I was going to be raped. Maybe they'd electrocute me. Maybe castrate me.
'They took the scalpel to my right chest. It was only a small cut. Maybe an inch. Then they cut my left chest.
'One of them took my penis in his hand and began to make cuts. He did it once, and they stood still for maybe a minute, watching my reaction.

'I was in agony, crying, trying desperately to suppress myself, but I was screaming.

'I remember Marwan seemed to smoke half a cigarette, throw it down, and start another. They must have done this 20 to 30 times in maybe two hours.

'There was blood all over. They cut all over my private parts.

'One of them said it would be better just to cut it off, as I would only breed terrorists.'
This, Mohamed says, was repeated many times over the next 15 months.' [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1160238/How-MI5-colluded-torture-Binyam-Mohamed-claims-British-agents-fed-Moroccan-torturers-questions--WORLD-EXCLUSIVE.html#ixzz0Umlk9hLh]
Indeed, Mr Mohamed explained that when he was later
taken into direct US custody, a female
official was sent in daily to photograph his bloodied penis,
saying that the photos were `for Washington' to make sure
his wounds were healing. These photos are almost certainly among the images
that President Obama, Lieberman and Mrs Clinton are seeking to suppress -- and
one more example of the wholesale sexual sadism and violent perversity
-- one more example of detainees being used to generate, essentially,
real-life snuff videos and photographs - that characterized the highly perverse orders
from the White House during this era.
In a Kafkaesque situation that applies to many detainees and
their
lawyers, Mr Mohamed can get into legal trouble if he tells the story of
his own abuse -- and his lawyer, Clive Stafford Smith of the heroic UK
organization Reprieve, was threatened with six months in prison by the
US -- Obama's team -- for writing a letter to President Obama
describing what had happened to his client.
(Right now, thinking about how the truth got out in Soviet
societies before 1989, I am desperately asking lawyers
if I can legally tell these stories through allegory, like Animal Farm.
`Once there as an island...')
In a masterpiece of perversity, the US classified the torture
used against the prisoners -- so that IF THEY TELL THEIR OWN STORIES
they are illegally releasing `classified information.' It is like
someone saying to a woman: I raped you, and now I will classify how I
raped you, so if you tell anyone you were raped -- I can send you to
prison.
You will recall that the Obama administration shocked those of us
working on human rights issues by threatening the UK's intelligence
service with refusing to cooperate in intelligence-sharing about
terrorist threats if the UK did not continue to conceal those seven
paragraphs. President Obama was willing to put the thirty million
innocent UK citizens at grave risk in order to keep secret the slashing
of men's genitals, and other nightmares, at Gitmo. Hillary Clinton, to
her eternal shame, sought to do so again as the trial unfolded. Luckily
the judge was not intimidated by these Mafia-like tactics -- though
Clinton supporters should think about what it means for American
womanhood's self-styled premiere role model to lend her efforts to
concealing and thus colluding in a crime of violent sexual torture.
I tried to find a way to talk to Mr Mohamed because he had known
Mohamed al-Hanashi, the thirty-one-year-old Yemenite detainee, the
prisoners' representative -- the man who knew all the crimes committed
against his fellows -- who was declared an `apparent suicide' in Guantanamo in June, when I was there;
turns out his death is now a criminal investigation. Someone killed
him, and the Obama administration is stonewalling; refusing, despite this secret investigation being a violation of Geneva Conventions, to give out any more
information.

In the course of seeking Mr Mohamed out, I received his email --
and had that odd sense of unreality to see this little piece of
normality; not monster, not `victim' alone; a guy with an email address.
We corresponded; and I had the privilege of reading an op ed
piece

he is writing, which eloquently makes the case that America's actions
in torturing people, and denying them due process, did more to inflate
al Qaida's numbers than any other factor; and that America can regain
hearts and minds around the world by prosecuting rather than concealing
war crimes. He also points out -- fascinatingly to me -- that the US
lumped all kinds of groups that were critical of the US but not
terrorist organizations under the `logo' of Al Qaida -- and terrified
the Muslim world by saying `you are either with us or against us' -
meaning, you could not be anywhere in the middle. This idea bears a
great deal more elucidation.

In the course of setting up the interview, I briefly spoke to Mr
Mohamed by phone; it was a brief, unremarkable conversation about
logistics; but in speaking directly, human to human, for the first
time, I had an existential shock. It is one thing when these names are
abstract; another when you hear a voice, just like the voices of one of
your friends, but with layers and layers of unspeakable sorrow
resonating underneath somehow -- and you realize, like a German
speaking directly to a Jew in 1950: this is one man here on the other
end of the line who was tortured in my name and in the name of my
fellow citizens. I carry this.

I asked if I could interview him about his own story and I felt
the closing-down: he explained that he is unable to tell me what was
done to him, since his case is ongoing, and, I presumed, because of the
issues of classification. This silencing still seemed to me as painful -
painful on both sides -- as other kinds of pain.

Since then I have learned something even more remarkable about Mr
Mohamed: the US offered to release him from Guantanamo years ago --
in exchange for his silence
about what happened to him -- and HE REFUSED the deal. He chose to stay in
rather than leave with his tongue -- and truth -- severed, in the hands
of his captors.

Hearing his voice in the op ed is also remarkable. He describes
his captors as `our kidnappers', for instance, which is, again,
shocking to an American sensibility -- but indeed, that is the literal
truth. He explains that while the torture was devastating, the
experience in many ways made him and his fellow prisoners stronger and
gave them a deeper understanding of the nature of oppression; it's
clear that for him, as for those held in tyrannical situations around
the world, torture gets at the body but nothing an oppressor does can
overtake the soul.

President Obama wants to try some remaining prisoners in real
trials; to release some; and he wants a third category, the devil's own
category -- of people who will be held forever because of `problems
with evidence.' What are the problems with evidence? The problem is
that what was done to them will emerge into light and be so horrific --
slashing of genitals, for instance, which any man would assume is a
prelude to castration -- that a continued coverup and impunity would be
impossible to sustain.

I was honored when Mr Mohamed let me know he had `friended' me on
facebook. I hope his voice, and that of other former prisoners, is
heard again and again, louder and louder, and gets through the media
bubble in the US; ironically, many more interviews with them are
offered in media throughout Europe and around the world. It is we
Americans who are being kept, intellectually, in a soundproof, padded room.
Only our hearing these voices can begin our long arduous path to
redemption. Hearing, listening, facing, grieving -- and owning, as the
Germans had to do, and as others have had to do at other times of
satanic mass hypnosis -- that this, this, is what we have done.

Predator and Reaper UAV operations -- from the inside

WMR has received a number of briefings on the operations of the MQ-1 Predator and the MQ-9 Reaper unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). For the operators of the remotely-piloted vehicles, however, they do not consider the aircraft "unmanned" because they provide 24 hours and seven days a week coverage and there is a large support team behind every Predator and Reaper flight. Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Lance "Sky" King is quick to point out that "we do not fly drones, we fly aircraft."

The Air Force has proudly claimed that it has not had one Predator shot down. Unofficially, however, there are reports of Predators being shot down in Iraq. There are plans afoot to place more than two A6M-114P laser-guided Hellfire supersonic missiles on the Predator, replace the Predator with a new and more foolproof radar-avoiding stealthy version. The present fleet of Predators and Reapers already possess stealth capabilities due to their carbon-fiber skin and very little metal components. An advanced version of the Reaper foresees the capability for in-flight re-fueling. Currently, the larger Reaper, which can carry four Hellfire missiles, can operate with 18 hours of sustained flight. There are plans to increase to eight the number of Hellfires carried by a Reaper.

One drawback of the Predators and Reapers are that they are not all weather. Because of the satellite links to operators at Nellis Air Force base in Nevada, cloud cover poses problems for the satellite links, requiring operations to be conducted from line-of-sight forward ground control centers.

When UAVs were first used by the Air Force in 1995, they only has line-of-sight capabilities, which meant they could operate 100 miles from the ground control station. Beyond line-of-sight capabilities, using satellite links via the Predator Primary Satellite Link (PPSL) for Predator in-flight operations, began in 2001. Hellfires were also first fitted on the Predators in 2001.

There have also been reported icing problems with the Predator and Reaper, which has resulted in them being grounded. The reconnaissance capabilities of the forward camera on the Predator and Reaper, known as the "MTS Ball" or MQ-16 electro-optical/intra-red camera, can read a driver's license from 20,000 plus feet. Infra-red sensors are so sensitive, often the operators have honed on lit cigarettes at night to target people. Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) permits day and night operations in most weather conditions. The infra-red surveillance systems have one drawback at night that does not exist for daytime operations. At night, the color of a vehicle, for example, cannot be determined.

Currently, the Air Force can fly 50 UAVs 24 hours a day. Two-thirds of the remotely-piloted vehicle training squadrons are at Holloman Air Force Base in New Mexico, while the others are at Creech Air Force Base, north of Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada. Four every four UAVs, there are two ground control stations. Reservist training on the UAVs takes place at Ellington Field, Houston, Texas and Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Arizona.

Each Predator and Reaper has a "cockpit" comprised of a pilot on the left, usually a qualified Air Force pilot, and and a sensor operator on the right, usually a senior enlisted person. The pilot controls a throttle stick and a rudder control. The sensor operator controls the camera at the bottom of the aircraft. There is also a moving map display with a Global Positioning System (GPS) overlay.

The pilot's screen permits the pilot to look out from the nose and the bottom of the aircraft. The screen feature is of primary importance during takeoffs and landings. For deployment operations, there is a two second delay in sending instructions to the aircraft from either Nellis or Creech.

The pilot and sensor operator also have access to the Secret Internet Protocol Router Network or "SIPRNET" screen, which allows them to read email and scan Internet websites. A third member of the UAV team is the mission intelligence contol (MIC) operator. The MIC monitors additional screens to gather real-time and other intelligence.

Presently, Predators and Reapers, which are exchanged between the Iraq and Afghanistan theaters, are a high priority for the U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM), Central Command (CENTCOM), and European Command (EUCOM). However, at the present time, 90 percent of all UAVs are dedicated to operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Although the Hellfire missiles are billed by the Air Force as causing "minimal collateral damage," some Air Force personnel pointed out that they do not exclusively use the weaponry or the Predators. It is known that the CIA maintains its own fleet of Predators and that some of the operations were contracted out to the former Blackwater USA, now Xe Security Services. Predators firing Hellfires have been reported to have killed hundreds of civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and possibly, Somalia.

In 2007, there were 112 Hellfire attacks from UAVs, in 2008, the number climbed to 132, and in 2009, so far, there have been 87 missile attacks. The UAVs are a personal favorite of Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

Israeli intelligence active in Nevada

From the Nevada Test Site to the unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) bases at Nellis and Creech Air Force Bases in Nevada, and even into the above top secret Tonopah and Groom Lake (Area 51) test sites, Israeli intelligence has been engaged in a full-court press, mostly targeting Department of Energy, Air Force, and contractor personnel.

Some of the Israeli intelligence presence at Nellis and Creech is semi-official, with a number of contractor personnel having past associations with Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), the Israeli state-owned firm that manufactured the Hunter UAV used by the U.S. Army in the Kosovo war. WMR has learned that IAI contractors and officials have been present at Nellis and Creech Lake, the latter formerly known as the Indian Springs Auxiliary Air Field. The prime contractor for the Predator and Reaper UAVs, which are operated from Nellis and trained on by Air Force personnel at Creech, is General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, a major competitor of IAI that is also teamed on many contracts with Boeing.

In 2005, Moshe Keret, IAI's chief executive officer, was detained by the Israeli fraud investigation unit in an investigation of a kickback arrangement between IAI corporate managers and IAI's foreign agents. The investigation of Keret was dropped in 2007. Elta Electronics Industries in Ashdod, Israel also played a part in the corruption investigation. IAI was also suspected by U.S. intelligence of transferring sensitive technology to China.

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories continues to maintain a presence at the Nevada Test Site. On October 19, 2009, a one-time scientist for Lawrence Livermore, Dr. Stewart David Nozette of Chevy Chase, Maryland, was arrested by the FBI for volunteering to pass classified U.S. defense secrets to an FBI agent posing as an Israeli Mossad agent. Significantly, Nozette, who also worked for the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory NRL), the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), was an "outside consultant" for IAI. Nozette also worked for the George H. W. Bush White House. Nozette held a high-level "Q" security clearance -- which grants access to sensitive U.S. nuclear secrets -- while working for Lawrence Livermore and the Energy Department. The would-be Israeli spy also attempted to pass information on U.S. intelligence satellites.

Nozette also worked for the U.S. Air Force's Phillips Laboratory in Alexandria, Virginia and was considered as expert on the Strategic Defense Initiative or "Star Wars." In 2006, a non-profit organization run by Nozette, the Alliance for Competitive Technology, came under a federal investigation for making false expense claims for work performed for NASA under contract. The non-profit had also done work for DARPA and NRL and similar suspected fraudulent expense claims arose. Nozette had written checks on his non-profit business bank account for three different mortgages, pool cleaning, a Mercedes Benz, and membership dues for the LaJolla, California Tennis Club.

In January 2009, Nozette reportedly flew to an "unnamed" country, not Israel, with two computer thumb drives. He returned to the United States without the drives and immediately became suspect by U.S. counter-intelligence agents. In the past, Nozette had expressed a desire to move to Israel and tell the Israelis about his classified work for the Pentagon and Energy Department.

Adding to the Israeli intelligence and military presence in the Nellis-Nevada Test Site complex is the presence of yet another mall kiosk near Nellis that employs aggressive Israelis who try to hawk "Dead Sea" skin care products to passers-by, many of whom are active duty Air Force personnel at Nellis and Creech and civilian employees and contractors at the Nevada Test Site and Area 51. The kiosk is located on the Las Vegas Boulevard side of the Fashion Show Mall in downtown Las Vegas. In the past, U.S. counter-intelligence agencies have identified these Israeli-operated mall kiosks as intelligence fronts and WMR has reported on their activities in Columbia, Maryland, near the National Security Agency, and the MacArthur Center Mall in downtown Norfolk, Virginia, near the U.S. Naval Base.

Depleted Uranium Weapons: Dead Babies in Iraq and Afghanistan Are No Joke

by Dave Lindorff


The horrors of the US Agent Orange defoliation campaign in Vietnam, about which I wrote on Oct. 15, could ultimately be dwarfed by the horrors caused by the depleted uranium weapons which the US began using in the 1991 Gulf War (300 tons), and which it has used much more extensively--and in more urban, populated areas--in the Iraq War and the now intensifying Afghanistan War.

Depleted uranium, despite its rather benign-sounding name, is not depleted of radioactivity or toxicity. The term “depleted” refers only to its being depleted of the U-235 isotope needed for fission reactions in nuclear reactors. The nuclear waste material from nuclear power plants, DU as it is known, is what is removed from the power plants’ spent fuel rods and is essentially composed of the uranium isotope U-238 as well as U-236 (a product of nuclear reactor fission, not found in nature), as well as other trace radioactive elements. Once simply a nuisance for the industry, that still has no permanent way to dispose of the dangerous stuff, it turns out to be an ideal metal for a number of weapons uses, and has been capitalized on by the Pentagon. 1.7 times heavier than lead, and much harder than steel, and with the added property of burning at a super-hot temperature, DU has proven to be an ideal penetrator for warheads that need to pierce thick armor or dense concrete bunkers made of reinforced concrete and steel. Once through the defenses, it burns at a temperature that incinerates anyone inside (which is why we see the carbonized bodies of bodies in the wreckage of Iraqi tanks hit by US fire). Accordingly it has found its way into 30 mm machine gun ammunition, especially that used by the A-10 Warthog ground-attack fighter planes used extensively in Iraq and Afghanistan (as well as Kosovo). It is also the warhead of choice for Abrams tanks and is also reportedly used in GBU-28 and the later GBU-37 bunker buster bombs, each of which can have 1-2 tons of the stuff in its warhead. DU is also used as ballast in cruise missiles, and this burns up when a missile detonates its conventional explosive. Some cruise missiles are also designed to hit hardened targets and reportedly feature DU warheads, as does the AGM-130 air-to-ground missile, which carries a one-ton penetrating warhead. In addition, depleted uranium is used in large quantities in the armor of tanks and other equipment. This material becomes a toxic source of CU pollution when these vehicles are attacked and burned.

While the Pentagon has continued to claim, against all scientific evidence, that there is no hazard posed by depleted uranium, US troops in Iraq have reportedly been instructed to avoid any sites where these weapons have been used—destroyed Iraqi tanks, exploded bunkers, etc.—and to wear masks if they do have to approach. Many torched vehicles have been brought back to the US, where they have been buried in special sites reserved for dangerously contaminated nuclear materials. (Thousands of tons of DU-contaminated sand from Kuwait, polluted with DU during the US destruction of Iraq’s tank forces in the 1991 war, were removed and shipped to a waste site in Idaho last year with little fanfare.) Suspiciously, international health officials have been prevented or obstructed from doing medical studies of DU sites in Iraq and Afghanistan. But an excellent series of articles several years ago by the Christian Science Monitor described how reporters from that newspaper had visited such sites in Iraq with Geiger-counters and had found them to be extremely “hot” with radioactivity.

The big danger with DU is not as a pure metal, but after it has exploded and burned, when the particles of uranium oxide, which are just as radioactive as the pure isotopes, can be inhaled or ingested. Even the smallest particle of uranium in the body is both deadly poisonous as a chemical, and over time can cause cancer—particularly in the lungs, but also the kidneys, testes and ovaries.

There are reports of a dramatic increase in the incidence of deformed babies being born in the city of Fallujah, where DU weapons were in wide use during the November 2004 assault on that city by US Marines. The British TV station SKY UK, in a report last month that has received no mention in any mainstream American news organization, found a marked increase in birth defects at local hospitals. Birth defects have also been high for years in the Basra area in the south of Iraq, where DU was used not just during America’s 2003 “shock and awe” attack on Iraq, but also in the 1991 Gulf War.

Deformed baby born in post-US Invasion Iraq: DU's legacy?

Further, a report sent to the UN General Assembly by Dr Nawal Majeed Al-Sammarai, Iraq’s Minister of Women’s Affairs since 2006, stated that in September 2009, Fallujah General Hospital had 170 babies born, 24% of which died within their first week of life. Worse yet, fully 75% of the babies born that month were deformed. This compares to August 2002, six months before the US invasion, when 530 live births were reported with only six dying in the first week, and only one deformity. Clearly something terrible is happening in Fallujah, and many doctors suspect it’s the depleted uranium dust that is permeating the city.

But the real impact of the first heavy use of depleted uranium weaponry in populous urban environments (DU was used widely especially in 2003 in Baghdad, Samara, Mosul and other big Iraqi cities), will come over the years, as the toxic legacy of this latest American war crime begins to show up in rising numbers of cancers, birth defects and other genetic disorders in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Of course, as in the case of Agent Orange in Vietnam, the toxic effects of this latest battlefield use of toxic materials by the US military will also be felt for years to come by the men and women who were sent over to fight America’s latest wars. As with Agent Orange, the Pentagon and the Veterans Affairs Department have been assiduously denying the problem, and have been just as assiduously denying claims by veterans of the Gulf War and the two current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan who claim their cancers and other diseases have anything to do with their exposure to DU.

The record on Agent Orange should lead us to be suspicious of the government’s claims.
The deformed and dead babies in Iraq should make us demand a cleanup of Iraq and Afghanistan, medical aid for the victims, and a ban on all depleted uranium weapons.

From Cynthia McKinney: Report from South Africa, Upcoming Events, Interesting Video Links

Cynthia McKinney: Report from South Africa, Upcoming Events, Interesting Video Links

Hello, as promised, I'll give you a brief report from my visit to Cape Town, South Africa.

First of all, I was hosted by two activists who founded Channel Four News, a hard-hitting, truth-telling, non-special interest news outlet serving Cape Town and all of South Africa. But because of their hard-hitting questions to elected leaders, the post-apartheid era government chose to enact regulations that resulted in their temporary shutdown. Undaunted, they organized a very informative film festival chock full of documentaries recalling the South Africa-Israel connections that beefed up repressive capabilities in both states; the role of Coca Cola during the sanctions era; scenes from Gaza after Israel's Operation Cast Lead; and stories of general Palestinian life with plays, songs, and films. Please click here to hear one of the most moving songs I have heard in a very long time:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H99mzLiBenw

(Note from Anita: for some reason this video would not come up for me and I got a strange YouTube error message: The URL contained a malformed video ID.)

The name of the group is Desert Rose. The woman singing loaned me her makeup because I was without my suitcases, and it turned out that she sang the most heart-wrenching song of the night, Ayala Katz. The song has been banned by certain Rabbinical authorities in South Africa. Please share this song with all of your friends. I listen to it every day.

Much is at stake today in South Africa at a time when criminal charges have been brought against the South African National Police Commissioner and those charges have implications for the country's leading political party; in addition, there are ongoing investigations into arms deals that could lead all the way to top ANC leaders; information is beginning to leak out about secret negotiations between certain elements of the black resistance and the global elite even before ANC took power; and all of this information coming out at this time might indicate that the people's interests were sold out long before the ink was dry on these arms deals. It is good that South Africans are beginning to look critically and more closely at what they (a nd we, the progressive forces in the world) actually won and to investigate whether they voluntarily stopped short of complete victory. Of course, it was the people on the ground, inside South Africa, who bore the
brunt of the struggle and who should reap the benefits of the victory. And they are not, and that's why this line of questioning is more prevalent.

Likewise, for us, prudence dictates that we all now pay very close attention to what is happening in the "post-racial" economy of the U.S. I am absolutely certain that there are lessons in the South African experience for us today.

Just before I arrived in Cape Town, approximately 60,000 textile workers had been on strike all over the country since September 15th. Before that, South Africa had seen general strikes called by municipal workers (over 150,000), construction workers, doctors, and taxi drivers.

I've just been told that the second electricity price hikes have been announced in order to pay for the 2010 World Cup infrastructure needs. If you'll recall, the 2006 World Cup was stolen from South Africa by one racist voter on the Committee who refused to follow his country's instructions and vote for South Africa and instead voted for Germany and the World Cup governing body, FIFA, allowed the vote to stand, so the 2006 World Cup went to Germany, instead. Well, 2010 is South Africa.

And are they building stadium after stadium! And they're beautiful. But the problem is that apartheid-era economic divisions remain and they are stark. On one side of the mountain are the pristine manses, but they have to be served by the blacks, who still live in squalor, so on the other side of the mountain is the most putrid poverty one could witness. Unfortunately, ANC leadership went along with changing the face of the political apartheid regime while allowing the gross, mean, ugly economic apartheid to remain rigidly in place. Land reform, one of the more obvious disparities, is not even on the agenda, I was told.

At the Film Festival, I debuted a short documentary on the murder of Oscar Grant in Oakland, California. This documentary shows the occupation of black and brown neighborhoods by a militarized, local law enforcement apparatus that parallels, in many ways, the current experiences of neighborhoods of color in post-apartheid South Africa, and of Palestinians on their own occupied land.

The film was done by Operation Small Axe (from the Bob Marley song) and it
is narrated by Pacifica's and the San Francisco Bay View Newspaper's own J. R. Valrey, known in the Bay Area as the Minister of Information. The film was very well received by the South African audience who told me that their experience is exactly like that experienced by the young people of the Bay Area, up to and including the murder of Oscar Grant, as chronicled in the film. The South African audience could not believe that they were watching actual footage of a young man's murder.

After seeing what I've seen in Cape Town, it appears to me that the World Cup in South Africa will be just like the Olympics were in Atlanta: the public treasury was expended for the benefit of the fat cats and political insiders who managed most of the private reward. In Atlanta, the citizens were lucky if they got street lights and sidewalks from the deal. Gentrification, a nice way of saying ethnic cleansing, was accelerated and black homeowners were pushed out of the central city--much by design. And along with them went much of their powerful political punch.

A blockbuster book is about to be written by one of South Africa's leading journalists, whom I was able to meet, about the still-brewing arms scandal where, upon inauguration of the post-apartheid government, $5 billion was spent on arms with BAE Systems, rather than on the people. The only thing is that the deal was sealed with what authorities call "financially incentivising" politicians to the tune of C2A3100 million.

And remember, just last year, Mark Thatcher, Margaret Thatcher's son pleaded guilty to gun running and coup plotting in oil-rich West Africa, in a story that Channel Four News played a central role in breaking and developing.

So, I was with this same Channel Four News outfit that was so chock-full of information about post-apartheid South Africa, from the triumphs to the disappointments of the people. It was sad as I rode through the many townships of the Cape Town area and saw sewage running through the streets, no land for any type of community gardening or farming, not even trees for a brief respite from the sun, or from which to pluck a piece of fruit.

As we made our way to Robben Island, the famous prison of South Africa's most famous political prisoners, I could see and hear Steve Biko, Chris Hani, Robert Sobukwe in my mind; my hosts told of their apartheid-era exploits--everyone played a role in the liberation of South Africa, but everyone must now also play a role in its stewardship and the management of the reward a nd the people's resources.

I'll go back to South Africa, I want to spend even more time with my hosts, and learn more about their struggle, experience the incredible vistas, and find ways to apply their knowledge to the problems confronting us inside this country today.

Probably, the most important lesson from Cape Town and Paris is this: We a re a part of a global movement for truth and justice. And we cannot be stopped.

If we want Policy instead of Speeches by Cynthia McKinney

Vers La Verité Speech in Paris by Cynthia McKinney

President Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize was not the only news yesterday. And in my opinion, it’s not even the biggest news. It’s not even the saddest news. But it does provide us with some critical information as we move forward. The three-part question for us, tonight however, is “What are we moving forward TO; is that the place we want to go; and if not, what do we do about it?

In other words, “What is our vision for the future and how do we define success?”

I have been and am still in deep pain over the institutional homicide of my aunt and in my grief, I’ve considered giving up.

But then, I wiped the tears from my eyes long enough to remember communities of people that I’ve been blessed enough to get to know, from Toronto, Canada to Cape Town, South Africa; from Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia to Valdosta, Georgia, there are people struggling through their own pain, their own deep personal disappointments to reach a better place—not just for themselves, but for the global community of man. And I know deep in my own heart, as broken as it is, that I cannot give up. My brain tells me that the struggle for truth, justice, peace, and dignity is too important to lose because of heartbreak.

The one thing that probably best defines everyone in this room are our search for and activities on behalf of principles that are bigger than ourselves. We want our governments to tell us the truth; we want them to deliver justice; we want our global community to live in peace; and we want respect for the dignity of all humankind.

So if these are the ingredients of our vision, what tools do we need to produce the desired result?

Well, first of all, the desired result has to have definition.

I mentioned in one of my messages to a dear friend in response to the Nobel award to President Barack Obama that we needed to keep our eyes on the prize and then I erased it because I don’t think we’ve sufficiently defined what the prize is.

So there must be a small, cohesive, international group of rock-solid people feverishly working to redefine for all who want to be active, and a part of our vision, just what the prize is. And this “prize,” our vision, must be repeated and explained often so people can differentiate our vision, from their reality.

Here is where language becomes important. If we want policy instead of speeches, then this must be repeated early and often because what I’m alarmed by is that in the absence of us providing real definition, and there are reasons for that, people are beginning to think that a speech IS policy.

But, as I said earlier, there was a lot of news yesterday. Some of it even more important than the Nobel Peace Prize Award, but the award certainly overshadowed all other stories.

And I’m always searching for context. Because, as the U.S. military puts it, “perception management” is important. And we must understand the context of what happens and when it happens, in order to understand why.

I always say that we must see the invisible, hear the unspoken, and read the unwritten. That’s what some of the organizers of Vers La Verité were professionally trained to do, before they became whistleblowers, and now our leaders.

Now, what were some of those other interesting news items?

Well, at a Native American Lodge located next to Senator John McCain’s ranch, two people died and several others were hospitalized following a hazardous materials situation at the Sweat Lodge, which is like a spiritual retreat led by Native Americans. I’ve even been invited to participate in one upon my return to the U.S.

Now, I find this interesting and a story that should be followed up on and I will be doing that because I want to make sure there’s no bigger story hidden in an important cultural ritual of the Native Americans who are victims of a genocide in North America that continues to this day.

On the day that the Nobel Prize was announced, we also learned that the U.S. bunker buster bomb will be ready in a few more months.

This is the bomb that holds over 5,000 pounds of explosives and is designed to penetrate hardened facilities, including those underground. Some brilliant people in the U.S. even want to put nuclear tips on bunker buster bombs. However, in announcing the near deployment of the project that pays McDonnell Douglas to adapt the B-2 bomber so it can deliver the Boeing-made bomb to its intended target, the Pentagon press secretary said, "The reality is that the world we live in is one in which there are people who seek to build weapons of mass destruction and they seek to do so in a clandestine fashion." The article noted that the Obama Administration had not ruled out military action against Iran.

Another story noted that hours after winning the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize, President Obama met with his military advisors about troop levels in Afghanistan. The troop increase requested by the U.S. Commander ranged, it is reported, from 10,000 to 60,000—although the top number isn’t listed in that news report. One has to go to another news item to see the true top number. At any rate, it seems that the choices confronting U.S. and European leaders is whether to increase the current 68,000 U.S. boots on the ground in Afghanistan or to merely increase the number of drone attacks. Decreasing death and destruction and bringing our young men and women home is not on the Nobel Peace Prize winner’s agenda for discussion.

The last article of note is about a restaurant in west Georgia that is using the “N-word” on its marquee to describe President Obama. It reminds me of the Atlanta area restaurant that put on its marquee that I was Buckwheat with Boobs. Now, those of you who are from the U.S. will know what that means and the depth of insult that was intended. The article notes that I’ve made this restaurant’s marquee, too. Both restaurant owners claim to not be racists and to be protected by free speech.

My point in including this particular news item is that we still have so far to go just in terms of our human relations. It is imperative that we do what we can to spread our message and our vision and reach those who can be reached.

Which brings me to who can be reached.

Those with enough discernment to know that what is being pronounced from on high is not their reality. And rather than accept or discount the contradictions, we want them to join us and struggle for a better reality for everybody.

I am saddened beyond belief that on the day of the Peace Prize award, a struggling democracy in Honduras was besieged with U.S. supplied weapons and U.S.-trained paramilitaries and snipers in support of coup leaders over the democratically-elected people’s leaders. In fact, the latest dispatch from Honduras is that many of the snipers and paramilitaries—now descending on Honduras from all over Latin America—were trained in my home state of Georgia.

More and more people are experiencing cognitive dissonance and rightly so. Our leaders and respected organizations are lying to us! One friend and former Congressional Staffer of mine puts it this way: we need a democratic military instead of a militarized democracy.

The United States, with the help of its European and Asian allies maintains over 700 bases around the world. The number is increasing under President Obama.

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said that we must combat racism, poverty, and militarism. Our movement cannot struggle against militarism and fail to address racism. We must be comprehensive and to racism, militarism, and poverty, we must now add gaining control of a media that will allow us to communicate to a broader community and not just within our small spheres, and regaining control of education so that people are not so dumbed down that they actually believe that war is peace, slavery is freedom, ignorance is strength, and lies are truth.

And if we are right, then others will join us. They will share with us their dreams and their passions and we will help to empower them.

Global resistance combined with local action, organization, vision, commitment, and resources will allow us to have significant victories in the future.

Vers La Verité understands that the foundation of all of this action, attainment of the prize, can only happen with truth as our foundation.

It’s already a brave new world, let’s get busy and make it ours!!!

Tidbits from the CIA's very own copies of "Counter Spy" [and a little Brazilian history]

Although the CIA abhorred the circulation of "Counter Spy," the magazine started in 1973 by renegade CIA agent Philip Agee, the agency's archives are replete with hundreds of copies of pages snipped from the controversial magazine, published until 1984. The impetus for the 1981 Intelligence Identities Protection Act, which later came to the forefront in the controversy over the Bush White House's "outing" of the covert identity of Valerie Plame, Wilson, was attributed to the alleged disclosures of CIA agents' identities in "Counter Spy."

"Counter Spy" from April/May 1979 contains a reference to a CIA agent who was instrumental in setting up a training program for centralized police forces around the world. He was Byron Engle, who trained police in Japan after World War II and, more interestingly, established a police advisory board in Turkey. Engle used the State Department to launder CIA funds for the police training program. The "State Department" program resulted in none other than FBI director J. Edgar Hoover complaining that the State Department training program was "just one more CIA cover."

In 1961, after Joao Goulart, a progressive and pro-unionist, was elected president of Brazil, Engel and his assistant, CIA officer Lauren J. ("Jack") Goin, oversaw the steady stream of CIA and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) official cover agents into Brazil. Goin had worked with Engel is setting up the CIA's police advisory team in Turkey and Goin helped establish a similar CIA training advisory team in Indonesia.

The CIA destabilization force in Brazil was reacting to Goulart's battle with the International Monetary Fund over its demand that Goulart emaciate Brazil's financial strength and comply with the demands of global bankers. The U.S. began to cut off Goulart's government from financial assistance while at the same time boosting aid to conservative state governors in Guanabara and Sao Paulo.

After Goulart redistributed privately-held land to the poor and nationalized oil refineries, the Brazilian military and its CIA overseers struck. Goulart was overthrown in a military coup on April 1, 1964, which, for Brazilians is as ever etched in their memories as is September 11, 1973 for Chileans, the day the CIA helped engineer the coup against populist President Salvador Allende.

Goulart was replaced by General Humberto Castello Branco, a veteran of the Allied invasion of Italy in 1945 and the Rome roommate of a U.S. Army Lieut. Colonel named Vernon Walters, who would later become the CIA's top coup master and Deputy Director of the CIA under Richard Nixon. In 1964, as the coup plans in Brazil got underway, Walters was, conveniently, the U.S. military attache in Brazil.

Three U.S. banks used as CIA money launderers -- First National City Bank, the Bank of Chicago, and the Royal Bank of Canada -- were discovered to have illegally pumped $20 million into Brazil to fund the election campaigns of anti-Goulart political candidates.

After the coup against Goulart, the CIA ensured the expansion of "death squads" in Brazil. Torture of political opponents of the regime also became widespread.

In what now appears to be a precursor for recent torture techniques employed in Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib, and other American gulags, "Counter Spy" describes what are now familiar torture techniques taught to Latin American special forces and intelligence agents at Fort Gulick, Canal Zone's School of the Americas and the Special Wafare School at Fort Bragg, North Carolina as early as 1961:

"A common torture routine consisted of a preliminary beating by a flat wooden paddle with holes drilled through it called a palmatoria. This would be followed by a more concentrated application of electric wires to the genitals designed to elicit information from the victim. If this method failed, the prisoner was subjected to another round with the palmatoria -- often for six hours at a time. Today, Brazil's terror technology has advanced beyond the electric prod and the wooden paddle. Testimony from political prisoners verified by the Brazilian Congress of Lawyers lists among the newest innovations a refrigerated cubicle called as geladeira. Nude prisoners are boxed in a geladeira for several days at a time, receiving frequent dousing of ice-cold water. All the time, loudspeakers emit deafening sounds. One prisoner described this as a 'machine to drive people crazy.'"

In a case of poetic justice, one of those targeted for harassment and imprisonment by the Brazilian junta and the CIA was the head of the Greater Sao Paulo metal, mechanical, and electrical workers' union, one Luis Inacio Lula da Silva, the current President of Brazil who managed to wrest the 2016 Summer Olympics for Brazil even after the personal intercession before the International Olympic Committee on behalf of Chicago of one-time CIA operative and Business International Corporation front man Barack Obama.

As the late Paul Harvey used to say, ". . . and now you know . . . the rest of the story."

Columbus Day celebrates the Native American Holocaust

Columbus Day celebrates the Native American Holocaust

Italian Mercenary initiated the American Holocaust of 65 Million

The trail of tears and celebrating an American Holocaust

During a news conference at the UN General Assembly session last month, Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez spoke of an emerging "American Indian" style of socialism in Latin America. Chavez hailed fellow Latin American presidents who are of native American stock, including Evo Morales of Bolivia, who Chavez called a "proud Aymara."

Matched against the newly-emerging native American power movements in Latin America is the fact that the United States continues to celebrate a holiday in honor of an Italian mercenary in the employment of the Spanish crown whose mercantilist brigands brought forth in the Western Hemisphere a six hundred year Holocaust that saw the genocide of 65 million native Americans through warfare, premeditated slaughter, disease, and famine. Columbus's arrival also presaged the destruction of the 500 native American nations that graced the Western Hemisphere from the Arctic Circle to Tierra del Fuego.

The peculiar celebration of Christopher Columbus's arrival in the "New World" is generally billed as a celebration of Italian-Americans in the United States. However, for native Americans, it is a celebration of colonialism, mercantilism, imperialism, and racism. If there is a need to celebrate Italian contributions to America, why not celebrate Frank Sinatra Day? Certainly, his musical contributions, unlike the pestilence and colonial greed introduced by Columbus, did not lead to the wholesale slaughter of an entire race of people.

Or, at the very least, October 12 could be a dual-holiday, Columbus Day for those who want to celebrate the exploits of a genocidaire, and, as it is celebrated in Venezuela, a "Day of Indigenous Resistance," for those who want to remember the holocaust of the native Americans. For Africans, Columbus is remembered as a Portuguese slave trader who pimped out his services to the Portuguese.

Today, the United States "celebrates" the native Americans by naming its sports teams "Washington Redskins" (Andrew Jackson, who graces the twenty dollar bill, and his Indian fighters skinned native American males from the waist down and fashioned pants from their skin, i.e. "redskin pants") and "Cleveland Indians" (with a racist logo of bucked tooth native American). For some Americans, native American reservations are now gambling meccas. Jailed GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who employed every shyster business tactic he could think of to maximize his profits from lobbying for Indian gaming and casinos, called his native American clients "monkeys" (his name for the Choctaw tribal council), "troglodytes," "morons," and "mofos."

The sovereignty of native American nations, enshrined by the treaties various U.S. Presidents sign with the tribal nations, has been perverted by a group of "mishpucka" gangsters intent on abusing the sovereignty of the tribes to foster gambling, as its associated vices of booze, cigarette and drug smuggling, and prostitution.

President Chavez told the press in New York that he once served, as a Venezuelan military officer, with a mission sent to Guatemala. There, he witnessed the local Guatemalan special forces, the School of the Americas-trained Kaibiles, boasting of their massacres of the native Mayan Indians. Chavez said he then realized that those were "my people" being killed by the Guatemalan military. Chavez said he vowed that the native Americans people would no longer be subjected to such brutality and as President of Venezuela, Chavez has made common cause with those Latin American leaders and groups that are fighting the neo-imperialism directed against the native peoples of the Western Hemisphere. And it is no coincidence that the only country in the Americas that is named after Columbus is Colombia, a narco-fascist-run nation that will soon host seven U.S. military bases, courtesy of Nobel Peace Prize winner Barack Obama.

On this day, there should be a presidential ceremony at a site on the Washington Mall that honors the Holocaust. Not the museum at the west end of the Mall, the European Holocaust Museum, but the one at the east end of the mall, the Native American Museum. Those who visit the Native American Museum will hear a recording describing the holocaust of 65 million native Americans. It is the Holocaust that no one wants to talk about -- it is holocaust denial in the extreme.

But now, back to the real America. Everyone go out and take advantage of those Columbus Day sales. After all, it is a fitting way to celebrate someone who was doing the blood-soaked bidding of the Spanish mercantilists and capitalists of his day.

LBJ aided and abetted Israel's uranium enrichment program

Archived CIA files, woefully incomplete because of the political selectivity involved with the Freedom of Information and National Archives and Records Administration Acts, do contain enough information that highlights the participation of the administration of President Lyndon Johnson in the illegal acquisition by Israel of enriched uranium from the United States for Israel's nuclear weapons program.

Apparently, the CIA got around the political problems associated with maintaining detailed records on Israel's nuclear proliferation by keeping open source articles on the Israeli espionage activities. One of the archived documents is a Washington Postarticle written by Charles Babcock, dated June 5, 1986, titled "U.S. an Intelligence Target of the Israelis, Officials Say."

The article details the operations of Mossad operative Raphael ("Rafi") Eitan in illegally procuring 200 pounds of enriched uranium -- enough uranium for six nuclear fission bombs -- from a company called NUMEC -- Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation -- in Apollo, Pennsylvania in September 1968. Eitan and three other Mossad operatives traveled to NUMEC's plant and arranged with its owner, an American Zionist nuclear scientist named Zalman M. Shapiro, to have the enriched uranium shipped to Israel clandestinely. Shapiro denied the charges that he gave the uranium to the Israelis and the FBI closed the case, code named "Operation Divert," without charges ever being filed.

The Post article, however, points to a declassified FBI document that points to "Raphael Eitan, chemist, Ministry of Defense, Israel, born 11/23/26 in Israel," was part of the four-man Mossad team that went to the NUMEC facility in September 1968. The actual visit was on September 10, 1968 and it was approved by the Atomic Energy Commission. The team also included Avraham Hermoni, the scientific counselor at the Israeli embassy in Washington, and two officials of Israel's Department of Electronics, which was part of the Israeli Ministry of Science and Development. The Pittsburgh Tribune-Reviewidentified the other two Israelis as Ephraim Beigon and Abraham Bendor, aka Avraham Shalom. Bendor later became the head of Shin Bet, Israel's domestic intelligence service. In addition, Ephraim Lahav, the science minister-counsellor of the Israeli embassy in Washington, made several trips to NUMEC in the 1960s. One of NUMEC's metallurgists was Bernard Cinai, aka Baruch Cinai, an Israeli citizen. NUMEC's illegal nuclear proliferation network extended from Israel and the United States to Britain, France, Japan, Spain, Belgium, and Germany. NUMEC and Israel ran a front operation called Isotopes and Radiation Enterprises (ISORAD). Some NUMEC engineers ended up working for Westinghouse Electric and were interviewed by FBI agents about the missing uranium.

Federal law enforcement sources told the Postthat Hermoni attended a meeting at Shapiro's house in November 1968 at which 11 American scientists were present. In June 1969, FBI counter-intelligence agents witnessed Shapiro meeting with another Israeli embassy science attache at Pittsburgh airport. Shapiro's home and work phones were tapped by FBI agents and he was trailed by FBI agents at every move. Attorney General Ramsey Clark authorized electronic surveillance of Shapiro based on the evidence compiled of his dealings with Mossad. Shapiro used an encrypted telephone provided by Mossad to communicate with Mossad agents in New York.

The only sanctions taken against NUMEC was a $930,000 fine it received from the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) for losing the enriched uranium. However, it was clear that FBI director J. Edgar Hoover, who usually held ultimate sway over domestic espionage matters, wanted to indict Shapiro, who later became the head of the Pittsburgh chapter of the Zionist Organization of America, but was overruled by the Atomic Energy Commission and the Johnson and Nixon White Houses. However, there is also evidence of a strange turn-around in Hoover's feelings about NUMEC and Shapiro. The AEC sent a letter to Hoover in the late 1960s asking whether Shapiro should register as a foreign agent. The FBI director replied that Shapiro was not required to do so. However, after the Justice Department ordered the FBI to back down from its investigation of Israeli nuclear smuggling and the role NUMEC played in it in 1972, Hoover reportedly became very offended at the FBI being called off the case. Hoover died suddenly after his the rift with the Justice Department.

The FBI tried to interview Navy Admiral Hyman Rickover, the father of the U.S. nuclear submarine, over his dealings with NUMEC and his awarding the firm lucrative Navy contracts. Rickover refused any interviews with FBI agents over his association with the firm. The Navy's contracts with NUMEC saw the transfer of weapons-grade uranium from Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee to the Apollo plant ostensibly for the production of fuel rods for U.S. nuclear submarines.

In 1974, after the Israeli penetration of America's nuclear weapons program had reached critical mass, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force General George "Scratchy" Brown, stated to a Duke University audience that Jews had too much control over America's banks, newspapers and elected officials and that Israel was a "burden" to the Department of Defense. One nettlesome individual Brown had to deal with was Israeli Colonel Yosef Langotsky, the assistant army attache at the Israeli embassy in Washington. Langotsky was known to the FBI as a Mossad spy and he often was caught in secure areas of the Pentagon trying to recruit agents, most of them American Jewish employees of the Defense Department, into serving Israeli intelligence. Langotsky was eventually refused access to the Pentagon and he was recalled by the Tel Aviv authorities in 1979. Brown's comments about Jews were: "they own, you know, the banks in this country. The newspapers. Just look at where the Jewish money is." President Gerald Ford refused to fire Brown, although Ford was under immense pressure to do so, and Brown continued to serve into President Jimmy Carter's administration. Carter also resisted Jewish pressure to fire Brown. Brown retired on June 21, 1978 and died some six months later in December 1978 from a fast-acting form of cancer.

An investigation of Israeli nuclear proliferation by Representative Morris Udall's (D-AZ) House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs yielded little success. In December 1978, Shapiro told Udall under oath, "Let me state emphatically that I have never participated in any theft or diversion of special nuclear material." Udall, who ran for President in 1976, was diagnosed with Parkinson's disease the year following his investigation of Israel's nuclear materials smuggling from the United States. The disease forced Udall to resign from Congress in 1991 and he died in 1998.

It was after Representative John Murtha (D-PA) asked for an investigation of the radioactive pollution caused by NUMEC, Atlantic Richfield, and Babcok & Wilson Co. at the Apollo plutonium and uranium plant in 2002, that the corporate media began investigating Murtha's connections with lobbyists. Representative Steny Hoyer (D-MD), whose sister served as executive director of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), edged out Murtha for House Majority Leader after the Democrats took over control of the House in 2006. Murtha was also targeted in the FBI "Abscam" investigation, which used a convicted con-man named Melvin Weinberg to target a number of Democrats, including Senator Harrison Williams (D-NJ), who believed they were dealing with an Arab sheikh who was actually an impostor. Many, including federal judges, believed the Abscam investigation had a certain "odor" about it and was a case of prosecutorial misconduct.

Israel's illegal acquisition of U.S. nuclear technology was aided and abetted by President Lyndon B. Johnson and his CIA director Richard Helms. The chief of the CIA's Science and Technology directorate, Carl Duckett, planned to draft a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) in 1969 detailing Israel's development of an atomic bomb in 1968. Duckett told the Post that Johnson told Helms not to publish the NIE. According to the Post, Duckett said Johnson told Helms "Don't tell anyone else, even Dean Rusk and Robert McNamara." Rusk and McNamara were Johnson's Secretaries of State and Defense, respectively. The CIA reportedly had secretly placed "sniffing" devices at Dimona that provided intelligence that proved Israel was developing nuclear weapons. The CIA also kept a wary eye on the smaller Israeli nuclear research facility at Nahal Soreq on the Mediterranean coast, although the site was often used by Israeli propagandists to show to the world that Israel's nuclear ambitions were purely peaceful. Soreq NRC was a branch of Shapiro's and the Israeli government's ISORAD. Duckett and his team had asked the AEC in a 1969 to estimate how many nuclear bombs Israel could make if it possessed all the missing uranium from NUMEC.

Ever since the Johnson administration, every U.S. president has followed a policy of "don't ask, don't tell" when it comes to Israel's nuclear weapons. An acknowledgement by the United States of Israel's nuclear arsenal would not only spur demands for Israel to open its program to international inspection but also focus on the covert methods by which Israel obtained the materials for its nuclear program. However, on a few occasions, U.S. intelligence and military documents have pointed to Israel's nuclear weapons program. The Post article cites a CIA document that was "inadvertently" made public in 1974. The document states: "We believe Israel already had produced nuclear weapons. Our judgment is based on Israeli acquisition of large quantities of uranium, partly by clandestine means."

One of the reasons that Israel is preventing Israeli nuclear scientist Mordechai Vanunu from emigrating from Israel is the knowledge the scientist undoubtedly possesses of Israel's clandestine nuclear technology acquisition program, including its work with apartheid South Africa and Taiwan in developing nuclear weapons outside the framework of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Vanunu was kidnapped by Mossad agents in Rome and tried and sentenced him in a secret tribunal in Israel for providing photographs of Israeli's Dimona nuclear weapons site to the Sunday Times of London. Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion had claimed the facility was a "textile factory." Vanunu, who worked at Dimona, was sentenced to 18 years in solitary confinement. Vanunu now leads a Kafkaesque existence in Israel and although he converted to Christianity from Judaism in 1985, Vanunu, a native of Morocco, is prevented from leaving Israel for Australia or the United States.

A longtime CIA operative told WMR that, ideally, the United States should offer to swap convicted Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard for Vanunu. Ironically, Pollard's Israeli control officer during his espionage for Israel while working for U.S. Naval Intelligence, was Eitan, who later became the head of an Israeli government owned chemical company. Eitan now leads the Gil pensioners' party in the Israeli Knesset. The failure to offer Pollard for Vanunu by successive U.S. administrations points to the power that Israel has over the U.S. decision-making process. In this case, what is good for America is not good for Israel and the loyalty of the Israel Lobby in Washington genuflects to what is good for Israel.

During Pollard's espionage for Israel in the 1980s, the FBI identified California businessman Richard K. Smyth in a scheme to ship 810 "krytrons," electronic triggers for nuclear weapons, to Israel. Smyth fled the United States after his federal indictment in May 1985. Babcock & Wilson Company, which took over the Apollo plant from NUMEC, continued to report the loss of enriched uranium.

Shapiro eventually went to work for Westinghouse's nuclear fuel division and he served as a consultant to the CIA.

With the revelations about the cooperation between the Turkish "Deep State" and Israeli in nuclear proliferation networks brought to light by former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds, as well as what is known about the CIA brass plate counter-proliferation operations of Brewster Jennings and Associates and Valerie Plame Wilson, there is no reason to believe that Israel has stopped its aggressive acquisition of nuclear materials and technology from the United States and other countries. Shapiro's and the Israeli government's ISORAD later inked a fuel contract with a Turkish entity called Global Fluids International SA. ISORAD has also developed links with the Chinese and Indian nuclear programs. The Post article maintained in the CIA archives quotes John Davitt, the head of the Justice Department's internal security section until 1980, as saying that Israeli intelligence was "more active than anyone but the KGB . . . They were targeted on the United States about half the time and on Arab countries about half the time."

Documented evidence that individuals with AIPAC, the Defense Technology Security Administration (DTSA), and the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), as well as successive "science advisers" at the Israeli embassy in Washington and the Israeli Consulate General in New York have been involved in espionage activities in the United States indicates that not much has changed since Davitt identified the Israeli intelligence threat during his time at the Justice Department.

The Shame and Cowardice of the Chickenhawk

by Bob Wallace



The usual definition of a chickenhawk is someone who supports war but actively avoids fighting. Whenever I think of one, what comes to my mind are Young Republicans, but also leftists, who are just as bad if not worse.

A writer, whose name unfortunately completely escapes me, said the aforementioned definition is not totally accurate. A better one is that a chickenhawk is someone who believes supporting war is a sign of his personal bravery and patriotism, and is convinced that those who oppose war, for whatever principled and thoughtful reasons, are always cowards and traitors.

Still, chickenhawks are cowards. Why, then, can they not see what they are?

There is only one reason: They deceive themselves as to what they truly are. They idealize themselves as proud, brave and patriotic, while others, more clear-sighted, see them for what they are: cowards who will do nothing except stand on the sidelines and yell, "Okay, throw the ball here! Now throw it over there!"

When people refuse to see their bad qualities (what Jung called their Shadows), there is only one thing they can do to protect their self-delusion: project those qualities on other people. Here is an example: when leftists talk about "hate" (which they do all the time), they are projecting their own unacknowledged hate onto other people.

Chickenhawks are the same: They cannot acknowledge their own cowardice, so they must project it onto others. Those Others, to the chickenhawk, are the cowards and traitors, not the chickenhawk.

Yet, the chickenhawk must know, somewhere deep inside, that he is a coward, and so has to be ashamed of himself. How does he cover up his shame? With pride. Pride on top, hiding shame underneath.

The first time I ran across that formulation of pride covering shame was in John le Carre's novel, The Spy Who Came in from the Cold, when he wrote of Leamas' "protective arrogance concealing shame."

Plato once wrote, "The cause of all sins in every case lies in the person's excessive love of self." I wouldn't call what he's writing about "self love." Excessive pride, arrogance, grandiosity, yes, but not self-love.

The social researcher James Gilligan, who spent 35 years dealing with prisoners, wrote, "Shame . . . motivates not confession but concealment of whatever one feels ashamed of." Guilt, he writes, can on the other hand lead to confession and penance.

He also writes, “…people who feel ashamed typically attempt to diminish that painful feeling both by assuming attitudes of arrogance, self-importance, and boastfulness.”

We'll never see confession and penance from chickenhawks, because they have no guilt. And it's a lot easier to admit guilt than shame. And chickenhawks' shame and cowardice is something they will not, cannot, admit. So they project it onto others: “You should be ashamed of yourself for being a coward who’s not supporting our country and its wars.”

I believe the average chickenhawk must be exceptionally narcissistic, which is correctly defined as splitting things into all-good and all-bad – idealization and devaluation. The chickenhawk has to see himself as all good (brave and patriotic), so his own unacknowledged badness (his cowardice) has to be projected onto others.

The late M. Scott Peck, a psychiatrist, called this kind of projection “the genesis of human evil.” If he’s correct, and I believe he is, then what chickenhawks are doing, in their self-deception, their unacknowledged cowardice, their arrogance and grandiosity, and their scapegoating of the innocent, is evil.

I sometimes wonder if chickenhawks ever think about how they would handle combat. I think they'd do what a soldier friend of mine saw another soldier do: brag to everyone how tough and brave he was (pride), but when the first shot was fired, he turned and ran (shaming himself).

It's probably a good thing chickenhawks aren't in the military: their cowardice and incompetence would probably get innocent soldiers killed. No, not probably. Would.

There's an old saying -- and I have no idea where it's from -- that the best warriors are the least war-like. I will nod and agree with it.

Why in the world anyone listens to chickenhawks is beyond me. Would anyone in his right mind listen to any coward about anything? All of them should be laughed at and ridiculed into silence -- because the one thing no coward can stand is to be laughed at.