Duty to Warn
A Tale of Three Men: Pete, Norman, and Bill
More from the Take Back America Conference
I've already written about the energy and passion of the presenters and honorees at the Take Back America (TBA) conference. Some even made their appearance on celluloid, rather than in person. Although Pete Seeger was not actually at the conference, we were well aware of his influence and his example. "Pete Seeger - the Power of Song" is a movie I had been eager to see ever since I first heard about it. I didn't realize that the conference's honoree, Norman Lear, was the co-producer. Because I was late to the session, I also missed Lear's opening remarks and the very beginning of the film. So I got to see it without any editorial commentary. It didn't take long to realize that Pete Seeger was and is the embodiment of that very same energy, passion and love of country that characterized the conference. In fact, it was quite easy to see what drove Norman Lear to make this documentary. The two men have a lot in common.
More from the Take Back America Conference
I've already written about the energy and passion of the presenters and honorees at the Take Back America (TBA) conference. Some even made their appearance on celluloid, rather than in person. Although Pete Seeger was not actually at the conference, we were well aware of his influence and his example. "Pete Seeger - the Power of Song" is a movie I had been eager to see ever since I first heard about it. I didn't realize that the conference's honoree, Norman Lear, was the co-producer. Because I was late to the session, I also missed Lear's opening remarks and the very beginning of the film. So I got to see it without any editorial commentary. It didn't take long to realize that Pete Seeger was and is the embodiment of that very same energy, passion and love of country that characterized the conference. In fact, it was quite easy to see what drove Norman Lear to make this documentary. The two men have a lot in common.
March 28, 2008– Antioch College alumni working through the College Revival Fund, Inc. (CRF), restated their unwavering support for Nonstop Antioch today, in response to news that the University Board of Trustees had rejected a significant and viable offer by a group of major donors and educational leaders that would have enabled Antioch College to continue operating past the University's June 30, 2008 date of closure.
Ellen Borgersen, Acting President of the CRF, said today in a statement: "The suspicion that the University Board of Trustees was negotiating in bad faith and not interested in saving the College has, unfortunately, been confirmed. Over the past four months, the Antioch College Continuation Corporation (AC3) labored mightily to put together an offer that would be a win-win solution for the University and the College, as well as for the community and for everyone who believes in what Antioch stands for."
Ellen Borgersen, Acting President of the CRF, said today in a statement: "The suspicion that the University Board of Trustees was negotiating in bad faith and not interested in saving the College has, unfortunately, been confirmed. Over the past four months, the Antioch College Continuation Corporation (AC3) labored mightily to put together an offer that would be a win-win solution for the University and the College, as well as for the community and for everyone who believes in what Antioch stands for."
The White House’s chief information officer said the Bush administration should not be compelled to search for millions of emails on individual computers and hard drives that may have been lost between 2003 and 2005 because it would be too expensive and require hundreds of hours of work, according to a filing the White House made with a federal court late Friday.
Friday’s court filing by the White House came in response to an order issued by U.S. Magistrate Judge John Facciola last week demanding that the White House show cause why it should not be ordered to create and preserve a “forensic copy” of emails from individual hard drives. Facciola entered the order in part because the White House admitted that it did not preserve back-up tapes prior to October 2003.
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and George Washington University’s National Security Archive sued the Bush administration last year alleging the White House violated the Presidential Records Act by not archiving emails sent and received between 2003 and 2005.
Friday’s court filing by the White House came in response to an order issued by U.S. Magistrate Judge John Facciola last week demanding that the White House show cause why it should not be ordered to create and preserve a “forensic copy” of emails from individual hard drives. Facciola entered the order in part because the White House admitted that it did not preserve back-up tapes prior to October 2003.
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and George Washington University’s National Security Archive sued the Bush administration last year alleging the White House violated the Presidential Records Act by not archiving emails sent and received between 2003 and 2005.
The press continues to report poorly on the congressional fight with President Bush over Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (or FISA) legislation. Immunity for Telecom Companies is an effort of the secretive Bush administration to hide explosive information from the public.
Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Co) and others have withstood enormous pressure from the Bush Administration and the Telecom Giants in order to prevent the Telecom Companies from being granted immunity from law suits. Mr. Bush has made immunity from civil prosecution for the telecoms a must-have element for revamping the nation’s surveillance laws, repeatedly saying he would veto any bill that does not exempt telecoms from lawsuits. Currently there are approximately 40 lawsuits now brought by citizens and consumer groups against companies that enabled the government to illegally eavesdrop on Americans' phone and Internet communications.
Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Co) and others have withstood enormous pressure from the Bush Administration and the Telecom Giants in order to prevent the Telecom Companies from being granted immunity from law suits. Mr. Bush has made immunity from civil prosecution for the telecoms a must-have element for revamping the nation’s surveillance laws, repeatedly saying he would veto any bill that does not exempt telecoms from lawsuits. Currently there are approximately 40 lawsuits now brought by citizens and consumer groups against companies that enabled the government to illegally eavesdrop on Americans' phone and Internet communications.
New York, NY - At 8 am on Wednesday, March 19, the War Resisters League along with several other organizations will stage a nonviolent blockade of the national headquarters of the Internal Revenue Service in Washington, D.C., as part of a day of protests on this fifth anniversary of the invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan.
Participants will gather at McPherson Square (15th & K Streets, NW) at 7 am before marching to the IRS (1111 Constitution Ave., NW) to initiate the blockade. While some will attempt to block access to the IRS building, other demonstrators will pass out flyers, carry signs, banners, among other props to illustrate the disparity between spending on the wars and the needs of a faltering economy.
The War Resisters League, an 85-year-old secular pacifist organization headquartered in New York City, will be joined by Code Pink, United for Peace and Justice, Rude Mechanical Orchestra, Movement for a Democratic Society, the Socialist Party, and more than a dozen other organizations.
Participants will gather at McPherson Square (15th & K Streets, NW) at 7 am before marching to the IRS (1111 Constitution Ave., NW) to initiate the blockade. While some will attempt to block access to the IRS building, other demonstrators will pass out flyers, carry signs, banners, among other props to illustrate the disparity between spending on the wars and the needs of a faltering economy.
The War Resisters League, an 85-year-old secular pacifist organization headquartered in New York City, will be joined by Code Pink, United for Peace and Justice, Rude Mechanical Orchestra, Movement for a Democratic Society, the Socialist Party, and more than a dozen other organizations.
NEW YORK - The National Lawyers Guild calls on Congress to override George W. Bush’s veto—in direct contravention of the advice of military commanders—of the Intelligence Authorization Bill that contained a provision limiting the Central Intelligence Agency’s ability to engage in the torture technique known as waterboarding. The practice is currently prohibited by both military and law enforcement agencies. The bill would have limited U.S. interrogators to techniques permitted in the Army Field Manual on Interrogation. Senator John McCain voted against the bill, reversing his previous position on torture.
Torture is illegal under domestic and international law. The U.S. Constitution forbids cruel and unusual punishment, and the United States is a party to the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which makes it part of U.S. law under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution. That convention prohibits torture even in wartime. Torture is also unlawful under the U.S. Torture Statute (18 USC 2340) and the U.S. War Crimes Act (18 USC 2441).
Torture is illegal under domestic and international law. The U.S. Constitution forbids cruel and unusual punishment, and the United States is a party to the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which makes it part of U.S. law under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution. That convention prohibits torture even in wartime. Torture is also unlawful under the U.S. Torture Statute (18 USC 2340) and the U.S. War Crimes Act (18 USC 2441).
I seemed to have peed on my suit jacket, just now, in the restroom here at the Cleveland University's Wolstein Center, location of the last Democratic debate in the 2008 presidential primary cycle. I am on Location, I have traveled through Icy Hell to bring you this top-notch Reporting; I have seen the Beast up close, and it let me keep my beer.
Oh God....where am I? Why am I here? And why do I always begin these missives in the restroom, with detailed accounts of the heroic struggles of my urinary tract? These are legitimate questions, and by God, you deserve some answers. I am sorely addled, but let me try to sort this out, for my own sake if for no other reason.
Oh God....where am I? Why am I here? And why do I always begin these missives in the restroom, with detailed accounts of the heroic struggles of my urinary tract? These are legitimate questions, and by God, you deserve some answers. I am sorely addled, but let me try to sort this out, for my own sake if for no other reason.
John Yoo, the author of the infamous August 1, 2002 "torture memo" that formed the legal basis for so-called "enhanced" interrogation techniques against high-level terrorist detainees, used a statute governing health benefits when he provided the White House with a legal opinion defining torture, according to a former Justice Department official.
Yoo's legal opinion stated that unless the amount of pain administered to a detainee results in injury "such as death, organ failure, or serious impairment of body functions" than the interrogation technique could not be defined as torture. Waterboarding, a brutal and painful technique in which a prisoner believes he is drowning, therefore was not considered to be torture.
Jack Goldsmith, the former head of the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel, said that Yoo, a former OLC attorney who now teaches at the University of California at Berkeley, arrived at that definition by relying on statute written in 2000 related to health benefits.
Yoo's legal opinion stated that unless the amount of pain administered to a detainee results in injury "such as death, organ failure, or serious impairment of body functions" than the interrogation technique could not be defined as torture. Waterboarding, a brutal and painful technique in which a prisoner believes he is drowning, therefore was not considered to be torture.
Jack Goldsmith, the former head of the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel, said that Yoo, a former OLC attorney who now teaches at the University of California at Berkeley, arrived at that definition by relying on statute written in 2000 related to health benefits.
We have screamed at the heavens and cried bitter tears. We've marched and picketed and gone to jail. And we are sick. Sick of the corruption…sick of the liars…sick of this war!
On March 19, the day the U.S. invaded Iraq five years ago, we'll be sick of it yet again. But on that revolting day we can do something nonviolently revolutionary. We can withdraw our consent from this sick system – by calling in sick.
People are signing up to do just that at the "Sick Of It Day" website. With passion and eloquence they're saying why they are "sick of it." Listen:
"Because over a million innocents have died. Because the Democrats, who promised to end the war, have been in control of the budget now for almost a year and a half, and they have continued to fund the war. Because I'm disgusted with Bush, Cheney and the Democrats." David Lindorff, Ambler PA
"The lies, the deaths, the brutality, the sheer hubris and arrogance, and the obscene profits from it all." Ron Jacobs, Asheville NC
On March 19, the day the U.S. invaded Iraq five years ago, we'll be sick of it yet again. But on that revolting day we can do something nonviolently revolutionary. We can withdraw our consent from this sick system – by calling in sick.
People are signing up to do just that at the "Sick Of It Day" website. With passion and eloquence they're saying why they are "sick of it." Listen:
"Because over a million innocents have died. Because the Democrats, who promised to end the war, have been in control of the budget now for almost a year and a half, and they have continued to fund the war. Because I'm disgusted with Bush, Cheney and the Democrats." David Lindorff, Ambler PA
"The lies, the deaths, the brutality, the sheer hubris and arrogance, and the obscene profits from it all." Ron Jacobs, Asheville NC
Just about a year ago a leading activist in the climate movement made a comment that I took note of at the time and haven’t forgotten: Presidential politics overshadows all other politics during a Presidential election period.
This comment was made in the context of a discussion about how do we keep building a non-electoral, grassroots-driven climate movement which makes the global warming crisis a central national issue. But it could be said about any issue. Presidential campaign season sucks up activist energy, popular attention and donor contributions, as we have definitely seen so far in this particular campaign season.
Issue-oriented, independent progressive activists ignore this truth at their peril.
But there’s an opposite mistake that can be made—accommodating tactics to the electoral season in a way which strips our movements of urgency, creativity, militancy and edginess. At its worst, this approach opposes or denigrates mass demonstrations and nonviolent direct action, seeing them as distractions from the “real work” of getting good candidates elected to office.
This comment was made in the context of a discussion about how do we keep building a non-electoral, grassroots-driven climate movement which makes the global warming crisis a central national issue. But it could be said about any issue. Presidential campaign season sucks up activist energy, popular attention and donor contributions, as we have definitely seen so far in this particular campaign season.
Issue-oriented, independent progressive activists ignore this truth at their peril.
But there’s an opposite mistake that can be made—accommodating tactics to the electoral season in a way which strips our movements of urgency, creativity, militancy and edginess. At its worst, this approach opposes or denigrates mass demonstrations and nonviolent direct action, seeing them as distractions from the “real work” of getting good candidates elected to office.