Wednesday, April 14, 2010

Time Has Come Today



I agree with David Corn in his article, "Obama's Nuclear Summit: The Big Truth That's Missing."
President Barack Obama has made history by putting the threat of nuclear terrorism on top of the global to-do list. But as world leaders discuss the issue this week at a summit in Washington, the scope of their talks has been limited, purposefully.

What's missing from the agenda? The idea that nations with nuclear weapons need to get rid of them—not just reduce their stockpiles. The nuclear weapons complex depends on highly enriched uranium. As long as there are nuclear weapons, there will be highly enriched uranium—and people who want to steal and smuggle it. Nuclear security is not the path to nuclear disarmament. Nuclear disarmament is the path to nuclear security. Read why HERE. —David Corn.
The time has come today to destroy the weapons not the world...and time for some Chambers Brothers!

Monday, April 12, 2010

A Thinking President

Via Think Progress: A Novel Idea

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, one of 47 world leaders gathering for the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington, D.C., appeared on ABC’s Good Morning America to relay his country’s concerns ahead of the summit. During one point in the interview, host George Stephanopoulos asked Medvedev what he thought of President Obama. The Russian leader coyly replied that he believed Obama distinguishes himself from “many other people” — presumably former President Bush — by being “a thinker”:

Watch it:

STEPHANOPOULOS: You’ve now met President Obama many times, at least fifteen meetings and phone calls –

MEDVEDEV: Sixteen times.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Sixteen, OK, I knew it was fifteen, I wasn’t sure about sixteen. What do you make of Barack Obama the man?

MEDVEDEV: [Obama] is a very comfortable partner. It’s very interesting to be with him. The most important thing that distinguishes him from many other people, I won’t name anyone by name, he’s a thinker. He thinks when he speaks.

STEPHANOPOULOS: (laughing) You have somebody in your mind, I think!

MEDVEDEV: Obviously I do have someone on my mind, I don’t want to offend anyone.

A worldwide poll taken last month found that the Obama administration’s global approving rating is 51 percent, a 17 percent jump from the Bush administration’s approval rating during its last year. (HT: Raw Story)

Yes or No? Hell, They Don't Know!

Eating Organic/Not

Kiera Butler at Mother Jones has an interesting article, "Which Veggie-Burgers Were Made With a Neurotoxin?" As Butler points out, a common found neurotoxin in many foods is hexane, an EPA-registered air pollutant.
The Cornucopia Institute, the food and agriculture nonprofit found that most non-organic veggie burgers currently on the market are made with the chemical hexane, an EPA-registered air pollutant and neurotoxin.

In order to meet the demands of health-conscious consumers, manufacturers of soy-based fake meat like to make their products have as little fat as possible. The cheapest way to do this is by submerging soybeans in a bath of hexane to extract the oil from the protein. Says Cornucopia Institute senior researcher Charlotte Vallaeys, "If a non-organic product contains a soy protein isolate, soy protein concentrate, or texturized vegetable protein, you can be pretty sure it was made using soy beans that were made with hexane."

If you've heard about hexane before, it was likely in the context of gasoline—the air pollutant is also a byproduct of gas refining. But in 2007, grain processors were responsible for two-thirds of our national hexane emissions. Hexane is hazardous in the factory, too: Workers who have been exposed to it have developed both skin and nervous system disorders. Troubling, then, that the FDA does not monitor or regulate hexane residue in foods. More worrisome still: According to the report, "Nearly every major ingredient in conventional soy-based infant formula is hexane extracted." The Cornucopia Institute found that a number of popular veggie burgers were made with hexane. The list (pdf, at page 37) is longer than you might think.
VEGGIE BURGERS AND HEXANE USE
NO HEXANE-EXTRACTED SOY INGREDIENTS USED
Boca Burgers “Made with organic soy”
Helen’s Kitchen
Morningstar “Made with organic”
Superburgers by Turtle Island
Tofurky
Wildwood
HEXANE-EXTRACTED SOY INGREDIENTS USED
Amy’s Kitchen
Boca Burger, conventional
Franklin Farms
Garden Burger
It’s All Good
Lightlife
Morningstar Farms
President’s Choice
Soy Boy
Taste Above
Trader Joe’s
Yves Veggie Cuisine
Products listed as 'Hexane-Extracted' use non-organic soy protein. Our research suggests that these soy protein ingredients were extracted with the use of hexane, a neurotoxic chemical solvent that is prohibited in organic food processing. We strongly urge the companies that manufacture these products to switch to non-hexane extracted soy products.
Also worth noting: Products labeled "organic" aren't allowed to contain any hexane-derived products, but that rule doesn't apply to foods that are labeled "made with organic ingredients." For more on soy sourcing, plus a list of popular "made with organic ingredients"-labeled protein bars that are made with hexane, read the Cornucopia Institute's study, "Behind the Bean."
The Cornucopia Institute study also lists Nutrition Bars and Infant Formula made with Hexane. The report found only one infant formula acceptable. (pdf, at page 38 -42)
Nature’s One’s Baby’s Only Organic is marketed as a “toddler formula,” but it is formulated to meet the nutritional requirements mandated by law for infant formulas. It is the only organic baby formula on the market that does not contain Martek’s hexane-extracted algal DHA and fungal ARA oils. Nature’s One also opts to source only organic ingredients when available, therefore the soy lecithin is organic and processed without the use of hexane.'
'Organic' is the word to look for. 'Made with organic ingredients' does not insure a pure organic product. Read the report and be diligent.

Sunday, April 11, 2010

The G.O.P. Reality



In his Op-Ed, A Voice of Reason, Bob Herbert discusses the failed Republican concept of smaller government and the progressive response from the "non-partisan public policy research and advocacy organization" Demos.
The Republican Party is not simply the “just-say-no” party. It’s also a shameless advocate of the free lunch. Ronald Reagan famously told us he could jack up defense spending, cut taxes and balance the federal budget all at the same time.

George W. Bush put two big wars on a credit card. And now we have the perennially clownish Newt Gingrich, in an embarrassing rant against President Obama, assuring the deluded G.O.P. faithful that, yes, the party can indeed bring down the federal deficit while cutting taxes.

The Great Recession and the debacles in Iraq and Afghanistan have not been savage enough to reintroduce the G.O.P. to reality.

One of the reasons so many conservative Republican absurdities became actual U.S. policy was the intellectual veneer slapped upon them by right-wing think tanks and commentators. The grossest nonsense was made to seem plausible to a lot of people — people who wanted to believe in a free lunch. When Mr. Reagan told the country that “government is the problem,” the intellectual handmaidens of the corporate and financial elite were right there to explain in exhaustive detail why that was so.

The result, in addition to the terrible consequences of Iraq and Afghanistan and the damage to America’s standing in the world, was the tremendous (and tremendously debilitating) transfer of wealth from working people in the U.S. to the folks already in the upper echelons of wealth and income. The elite made out like bandits — often literally.

The liberal or progressive community was slow to counter the remarkable effectiveness of this intellectual offensive from the right. But during the 1990s and into the early-2000s, that began to change. And one of the progressive organizations that has done a really good job (but has never been particularly well known) is about to celebrate its 10th anniversary.

Demos, headquartered in New York City, grew out of a series of meetings of scholars, activists, journalists and elected officials who were concerned about the ever-increasing influence of the right on public policy. “The thinking was that there should be more moderate, liberal and left-of-center voices,” said Miles Rapoport, the group’s president. The group was formed in 2000, a year that would later see the disputed election that gave the presidency to Mr. Bush.

It didn’t take long for Demos to begin issuing loud warnings about the danger that ever-increasing debt was posing to American households, while pointedly disputing the argument that over-the-top credit card debt was primarily the result of excessive consumer spending.

Working people from the middle class down were in serious trouble, and Demos, along with many other voices (the bankruptcy expert and middle-class advocate Elizabeth Warren comes quickly to mind) was sounding the alarm long before the Great Recession hit like a Category 5 hurricane.

In a 2003 report called “Borrowing to Make Ends Meet,” Demos spotlighted the increasing gap between the incomes and the day-to-day living costs of many low- and middle-income families. That report was updated steadily in subsequent years, and in 2007 Demos was reporting: “Many households have tried to cope with this financial imbalance by relying on credit cards to cover basic expenses that earnings do not meet. Homeowners, ominously, have then relied on cashed-out home equity — $1.2 trillion over the last six years — largely to pay down those debts and to cover other costs of living.”

The Bush crowd during this period had taken us into Iraq and was fashioning its own fantasy of free-lunch economics.

In 2006, Tamara Draut, Demos’s vice president of policy and programs, wrote a book called “Strapped: Why America’s 20- and 30-Somethings Can’t Get Ahead.” Ms. Draut made the case that the hallmarks of adulthood — from getting an education to buying a home to finding a good job with decent benefits to raising children and beginning to save for retirement — had been eroded by the shortsighted public policies that have prevailed in recent decades.

What has been left are just the remnants of the American dream.

Ronald Reagan and the right-wing zealots who revere him have preached a gospel that, when carried to its logical conclusion, would all but abolish government. It’s a failed philosophy.

Demos has responded with admirable real-world scholarship, a highly respected fellows program to encourage new writers and thinkers and steadfast efforts to promote civic engagement. (It’s a big champion, among other things, of same-day voter registration.)

It’s not just comforting but essential to have sane countervailing voices like Demos to remind us that government action is necessary to plan for the common good, to set proper rules for economic activity and to be a bulwark against predatory practices in the private sector.

Demos is holding its 10th anniversary celebration on May 11, and Ms. Warren will be one of the honorees. If you think about it, raise a toast in the group’s honor.

Progressive voices need to be stronger and louder to ward off the continuing misconstrued concepts of the G.O.P.

Sand Art

So Funny!!!!

An Ugly Choice in Afghanistan



According to

The war is likely to end in negotiations that will involve wrenching choices for the country as well as for U.S. and European allies.

Some day the war in Afghanistan will end. If it's like most civil wars, it will end in negotiations -- in this case, negotiations with the Taliban. And that's if we're lucky; the leading alternative to a negotiated settlement is a Taliban victory.

In fact, a negotiated settlement is what U.S. and NATO forces say they are fighting for, even though those negotiations will have to include a group most Afghans fear and Americans loathe. [...]

Next month, Afghanistan's mercurial president, Hamid Karzai, plans to convene a national jirga, or assembly, that will bring together many of the country's contesting tribes and factions. [...]

Karzai, a member of the Pashtun ethnic group like most of the Taliban and about 40% of the Afghan population, has called the insurgents "our disenchanted brothers" and has already talked with some of their leaders. (In a moment of anger at the United States last week, he even threatened to join the Taliban, although nobody in Kabul took that seriously.) The opposition in Kabul, dominated by non-Pashtun groups, scoffs at the idea that the Taliban's leaders are ready for reconciliation. [...]

Officially, the administration supports both Karzai and the peace jirga. "Whatever makes President Karzai more representative ... strengthens him and helps us," McChrystal said. But some U.S. officials worry that Karzai will start negotiating too soon. They'd rather give Obama's surge of 30,000 additional troops a chance to move the balance of power in the government's favor this summer.

The choices will depend in large part on the results of this summer's fighting. The best case scenario is that the insurgency collapses and democracy blossoms. But that doesn't appear likely.

More plausible is a divided insurgency in which dissident Taliban factions and individuals agree to stop fighting. This scenario would be helped by a successful "reintegration" plan to offer employment and protection to defectors. So far, Karzai's efforts in that regard have been ineffective.

But at some point, negotiations will almost certainly have to include the main body of the Taliban, the brutal Islamists who ruled Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001. Otherwise, a European diplomat here warned, "the insurgency will break out again -- because disenfranchised groups will feel they have no recourse ... and they will seek support from extreme Islamist groups, which takes us back to Al Qaeda."

That is going to mean hard choices and an imperfect ending. The Taliban's leaders don't believe in democracy. They don't accept Afghanistan's new constitution, especially its commitments to women's equality and universal education. They don't seek to share power; they want to take it back.

The Obama administration says it supports negotiations with any Afghan who abandons ties to Al Qaeda, renounces violence and embraces the constitution. A weakened Taliban might give on some of those conditions, beginning with their disastrous alliance with Al Qaeda. A cease-fire can be declared; the constitution can be amended. But some issues will be more difficult -- including women's rights, which touches the core of the Taliban's fundamentalist theology.

When the United States invaded Afghanistan in 2001, one of our proudest achievements was the liberation of the country's women from oppression (at least on paper). Already, the return of the Taliban to Afghanistan's countryside has forced many women back to traditional ways. It is a bitter irony that peace talks, if they come, will put these women at even greater risk.

"Women's rights don't matter all that much when people are being killed," argued a diplomat who has been urging negotiations.

No one wants to choose between human rights and human lives. But it's an ugly choice we may soon face.
The answer for the U.S. regarding Afghanistan rests in the history of insurgents fighting occupiers. The occupiers do not win!

It is time to leave Afghanistan. The presence of the U.S. will not be an answer to peace for the Afghan people.


Saturday, April 10, 2010

A Change of Venue!



...and The Question Is...



"Why Are Pedophilia--Hiding, Child-Abusing Church Fathers Allowed to Write Laws about Women's Bodies?"

The moral authority granted the Catholic Church in the secular world is the most repellent aspect of the current crisis.

My favorite moment of the whole child abuse scandal in the Catholic Church was when Father Klaus Malangré suggested that Peter Hullermann, the redoubtable German pedophile priest, might be sent to work in a girls' school. No boys, no molestation. Or, in churchly language, no occasion of sin. Problem solved! Plus, the good father would spend his life warding off female cooties. Malangré must not have heard about priests -- and they do exist -- who abused both male and female children. Nor had he learned the lesson of Watergate: the cover-up is worse than the crime.

The church has yet to learn that lesson. There is a positively Nixonian smarmy truculence in the response of church hierarchs to the ongoing scandal, which now involves Pope Benedict XVI himself. On Palm Sunday, New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan urged worshipers at St. Patrick's Cathedral to show "love and solidarity for our earthly shepherd now suffering some of the same unjust accusations, shouts of the mob and scourging at the pillar, as did Jesus." On his blog, Dolan explains that what gets Catholics angry is not just the molestations themselves but also that "the sexual abuse of minors is presented as a tragedy unique to the Church alone." Oh, really? Does the name Mary Kay Letourneau mean nothing to him? This man needs to read the tabloids, which have for years featured an endless parade of molesting teachers, doctors, dentists, therapists and scout leaders. To go by the news, looking at child pornography on one's office computer is so common, it's a wonder anyone finds the time to abuse real kids. At this late date I doubt anyone is unaware that the sexual abuse of children is a widespread phenomenon.

The difference is, when other professionals who work with children are caught out, justice takes its course. People are fired. Licenses are lost. Reputations are ruined. Sometimes jail is involved. No human institution is perfect, and it would be foolish to suggest that incidents are always investigated and that abusers who don't happen to be priests are never protected by colleagues or superiors. Still, it's probably safe to say that if a principal was accused of overlooking a child molester in his classrooms or recycling him to other schools, nobody would compare his suffering to Christ's.

And nobody would be asking for his views about sex, reproduction, women, homosexuality or healthcare either. The moral authority granted the Catholic Church in the secular world is for me the most repellent aspect of the current crisis. In the succinct words of Jodi Jacobson, editor of RHRealityCheck.org, "Why is a pedophilia-ridden, pedophilia-hiding, child-abusing Church allowed to write laws controlling women's rights?" To which one might add: what gives a church in which celibacy is equated with holiness, in which males have almost all the power, the right to a place at the table where laws are made about women's bodies? The same institution that has dealt so indulgently with its ordained pedophiles had no problem excommunicating a Brazilian mother who sought an abortion for her 9-year-old daughter, raped and impregnated with twins by her stepfather, or pushing for laws in El Salvador, Nicaragua and Chile banning abortion even to save the woman's life.

The Church's position of protecting priests and it's own reputation has been shown to be a higher priority than the protection of women and children. It is time to realize that these men are merely mortals who are fallible. They are no closer to the God they believe in, than anyone else is. It is therefore time to stop listening their opinions.

Just for Laughs

Friday, April 9, 2010

Sewage Sludge in Your Garden

estabrook_dec01_sludge_post.jpgPhoto Courtesy of San Francisco Bay Area Independent Media Center

Since 2007, the City of San Francisco has been giving away bags of "organic biosolids compost" to the residents of the city for use in their backyard gardens . The problem is that the compost is really not organic because it contains sewage sludge. That's right, is it "free compost or toxic sludge." Well, it is both.
Some offers are too good to be true. In late September, San Francisco's Public Utilities Commission once again offered "high-quality, nutrient-rich, organic" compost to any citizen who wanted it absolutely free. It's a popular program. Bay-area residents sprinkle about 80 tons a year of the fertilizer on their lawns and gardens--even schoolyards.

But Washington, D. C.-based Center for Food Safety (CFS) says that San Franciscans may be getting more than they bargain for when they load their trunks with white plastic bags at the city's "Compost Giveaway Events." What the Public Utilities Commission fails to disclose, the CFS says, is that the popular soil amendment is made out of sewage sludge composted with wood chips or paper by-products. According to a report released this year by the Environmental Protection Agency, sludge has been found to contain heavy metals, pharmaceuticals, PCBs, flame retardants, and endocrine disruptors--pretty much anything that humans living and working in a large metropolitan area flush down their toilets or pour down their drains. The CFS claims that San Francisco's compost contains "toxic chemicals and hazardous materials."

Although the current flashpoint is San Francisco, municipalities across the country are looking for places to put their sludge. The CFS has an on-going, nationwide program to shine light on the environmentally questionable practice, and the Organic Consumers Association, an advocacy group, announced last month that it is about to launch a "major campaign against the sewage sludge industry."
In March, the Organic Consumers Association decided to send a message to Mayor Gavin Newsom at San Francisco's City Hall.
It was quite a spectacle at San Francisco City Hall Thursday. People dressed in hazmat suits, goggles and gloves dumped piles of compost on the steps.

"It's the stuff your flushing down your toilet," San Francisco PUC spokesperson Tyrone Jue said. "It's brought to our treatment plant, treated there, then to a compost facility where it's treated for another 30 days at 130 degrees Fahrenheit."

The Organic Consumers Association says it is dangerous sewage sludge.

Biosolids is really just a clever way of saying crap, and the water that went down with it -- it is the byproduct of the water treatment process. And the compost that was given to San Franciscans came from nine counties, which are home to oil refineries, metal container manufacturers, foundries and electronics manufacturers, Jill Richardson writes. Which means there's the potential for the compost to be a noxious soup of chemicals, metals, pharmaceuticals, bacteria, parasites and more.

San Francisco's choice to label the compost "organic" has really got residents steamed. Richardson writes that the city claims they meant "organic" not to connote the USDA's program but that it instead "referred to the scientific definition of organic matter as in containing significant amounts of organic carbon." Hm, I'm guessing that might not have been immediately apparent to all the gardeners who hauled away sludge-laden compost. And in a city full of greens, the city almost certainly knew better.

Organic Consumers Association is calling on Newsom, who ironically was named the country's greenest mayor by Organic Style, to stop the "toxic sewage sludge giveaways."

It isn't only in San Francisco.

Unfortunately, many American farmers and gardeners are unknowingly using sludge-derived "compost." One reason for this is that sludged compost is being given away free in many cities throughout the United States, and as a result, farms and homes across the country have been unknowingly spreading hazardous chemicals and heavy metals on their fields, lawns and gardens. The problem has affected even our most prestigious residence--the White House. First Lady Michelle Obama herself has taken commendable steps to alleviate contamination from sludge-based fertilizer in her garden, a result of sludge used on the White House lawn more than a decade ago.

Courts have also weighed in on the dangers of sludge and the failure of the EPA to protect our food and farms. A federal court in Georgia recently ruled that land application of sewage sludge was the cause of contamination of several farms and the cause of death of the plaintiff farm's prizewinning cattle. The court also found that rat poison in sludge came out in milk distributed via commerce. It also turns out that in defending its sludge program in this case, the EPA used fraudulent data and tried to hide what they were doing. As the court noted: "The administrative record contains evidence that senior EPA officials took extraordinary steps to quash scientific dissent, and any questioning of the EPA's biosolids program."

Despite this case and mounting evidence of the dangers in biosolids, sludge giveaway programs continue unabated and are often accelerated.
What to do?
Source separation, reduction, and--where the wastes are too hazardous to reuse--containment, are the elements of a safe recycling plan. It's long past due that the EPA, the wastewater treatment industry, and city governments acknowledge the truth about sewage sludge distributed as fertilizer: it's not safe, it's not compost, it's not organic, and it's certainly not cheap. Indeed, our communities and children could pay a steep human health price.

Wednesday, April 7, 2010

The Future of Catholicism

Pope Benedict XVI delivers his Easter blessing from St. Peter's Basilica. (Elisabetta Villa/getty Images)

Timothy Shriver, chairman of Special Olympics, offers his analysis of what the Pope and the Catholic Church must now do in light of the child abuse scandal.
Shriver states that "what's needed is a conversion of the bishops and the pope himself."
That's right: It's time for the pope and the bishops to convert their culture to one that is centered on loving God from the depths of their souls and to leading a church that is as much mother as father, as much pastoral as theological, as much spiritual as doctrinal. It is time for them to listen to the deep and authentic witness of the people of faith, to trust the spirit that blows where it will, to abandon their defensiveness of their positions and trust only the gospel, and not their edifice of control. Conversion is a total experience -- letting go of the old and putting on the new.

The conversion we seek for them is the same conversion they invite for us: Put on a contrite heart and fall in love with God, recklessly, totally and passionately. Let the love of God be the only measure of their actions.

We live in a spiritual age, and until the bishops and the pope learn to lead a people hungry for authenticity, trust and spiritual nourishment, we will look elsewhere. There are millions of Catholics with deep spiritual wisdom -- millions of faith-filled people who love God in transformative ways. We will trust their faith and witness if the bishops fail us.

My faith is not shaken by these scandals. My hunger for my own conversion to a more loving, more just and more peaceful way of living is undiminished. On Easter, my family and I celebrated the hope beyond all hopes and did so with the Eucharist.

But this is Altargate. The hierarchy, not the faith, is in jeopardy. The pope need not resign. He must do something far more difficult: convert.

Difficult but necessary!

Tuesday, April 6, 2010

Window Farms

Urban agriculture is on the rise in cities across the country. In New York City, window farms are are perfect for urban dwellers. NPR has the story of the Do-It-Yourself Veggie Venture.

If you have a green thumb, a window and a serious Do-It-Yourself ethic, you too, can be a farmer ... even in your downtown apartment building. Spring is here, and for urban dwellers with no access to soil, hydroponic gardening is a way to grow fresh veggies indoors.

"Window farming," as it is called, is catching on in New York City and beyond. Window farmers use recycled 1.5 liter water bottles, clay pellets, plastic tubing and inexpensive fish tank air pumps to create their indoor gardens. There are now 4,000 registered users at windowfarms.org. Farmers are tending to their greens everywhere from the U.S. to Italy, Israel and Hong Kong.

A simple window farm system is a column of upside down water bottles, with plants growing out of holes cut into the sides. An air pump is used to circulate liquid nutrients.

A window farm
WindowFarms

A simple window farm system is a column of upside down water bottles, with plants growing out of holes cut into the sides. An air pump is used to circulate liquid nutrients.

Last year in Brooklyn, N.Y., Britta Riley, 33, raised $27,000 for her window farms project through an online micro-donation web site. She's a true Do-It-Yourselfer.

Riley's project partner is Maya Nayak, 29, a professional gardener. Nayak has been growing herbs in her own window farm in her ground floor apartment. A sign in her window advertises windowfarms.org — and plenty of people have paused to check it out.

The window farms Web site provides instructions on how to put together a system that grows three plants. The materials will cost about $30 — and not all of them are traditional gardening supplies: water bottles, an aquarium air pump, air valve needles (like the kind you use to pump up a basketball), and a hanging system designed for displaying art.

Riley says that putting recycled consumer goods to use is an important part of the DIY ethic.

The simplest window farm system is a column of upside-down water bottles connected to one another. Plants grow out of holes cut into the sides. An air pump is used to circulate liquid nutrients that trickle down from the top of the column and make their way to the plant roots.

Window farms have been used to grow strawberries, cherry tomatoes and peppers. Riley's favorite is bok choi.

"Buttercrunch lettuce grows great and lots of herbs," Nayak says. "Anything leafy and green, essentially. You can't grow carrots. I mean, you can't grow root vegetables. Potatoes, garlic. Those things don't work."

Urban farmers use the Internet to exchange ideas for improving the window farms technology. It's a process Riley calls "R&D-I-Y" or Research and Develop It Yourself. One window farmer figured out a way to silence the gurgling sounds these window farm systems make — and he shared his solution with the rest of the indoor gardening community.

Check it out at WINDOWFARMS.ORG

Collateral Murder

If you haven't seen this, you should. "A stark and painful reminder of why military suppression of a sovereign civilian population does not work."
An Overview

5th April 2010 10:44 EST WikiLeaks has released a classified US military video depicting the indiscriminate slaying of over a dozen people in the Iraqi suburb of New Baghdad -- including two Reuters news staff.

Reuters has been trying to obtain the video through the Freedom of Information Act, without success since the time of the attack. The video, shot from an Apache helicopter gun-site, clearly shows the unprovoked slaying of a wounded Reuters employee and his rescuers. Two young children involved in the rescue were also seriously wounded.

The military did not reveal how the Reuters staff were killed, and stated that they did not know how the children were injured.

After demands by Reuters, the incident was investigated and the U.S. military concluded that the actions of the soldiers were in accordance with the law of armed conflict and its own "Rules of Engagement".

Consequently, WikiLeaks has released the classified Rules of Engagement for 2006, 2007 and 2008, revealing these rules before, during, and after the killings.

WikiLeaks has released both the original 38 minutes video and a shorter version with an initial analysis. Subtitles have been added to both versions from the radio transmissions.

WikiLeaks obtained this video as well as supporting documents from a number of military whistleblowers. WikiLeaks goes to great lengths to verify the authenticity of the information it receives. We have analyzed the information about this incident from a variety of source material. We have spoken to witnesses and journalists directly involved in the incident.

WikiLeaks wants to ensure that all the leaked information it receives gets the attention it deserves. In this particular case, some of the people killed were journalists that were simply doing their jobs: putting their lives at risk in order to report on war. Iraq is a very dangerous place for journalists: from 2003- 2009, 139 journalists were killed while doing their work.


Short Version



Full Version