'remember the ladies,' abigail adams instructed john adams on march 31, 1776.
we were 'ladies' then. that may be all that's changed.
why do i say that? democracy now decided to analyze the vote today. some guests did or tried and some just gas bagged.
but where were the 'ladies'? there were 2 guests (out of 4) who were women. they weren't allowed to speak as much as the men but then they didn't attempt to pass gas baggery off as analysis ('rock star!' obama was fawning, was spin, it wasn't analysis) so that may have hurt their chances to get a word in.
for those who missed it, 'Gender Gap Key in Democratic Victories' (feminist wire daily):
The exit polls were largely not broken up by House district, but overall, women voted five percentage points more (56 percent) for Democrats than men (51 percent). According to past gender gap analysis and overall Senate and House exit polls, women played an integral role in the House going Democratic -- especially in close races.
so what does it take for a discussion on the vote to include the topic of the voting patterns of women?
for those who missed it, there are more women in the united states than men. so how is that you can discuss the vote and not discuss women?
i'm used to it from the mainstream media. but how does that happen on independent media?
the four guests were there to speak on the topic of the latino vote (strongest guest), the african-american vote (biggest gas bas bag), the religious vote (an advocate attempting to push an agenda) and the youth vote (so little time allowed to speak she barely registered).
lydia camarillo was the most informed. she was also the only 1 to offer a qualifer (reminding that the latino vote did not go to bully boy in the numbers the media originally reported following the 2004 election and that msnbc had to issue a correction - something slimey simon rosenberg never did). she gave concerte examples and texas community members who wrote about the election for the gina & krista round-robin should be especially pleased because she noted not only delay's loss but the pick up of state seats (state legislature) and the fact that dallas (dallas- fort worth area) voted strongly democratic despite the conventional wisdom that it is a republican stronghold.
kathleen barr had some points to make and i would have enjoyed hearing those points; however, she wasn't given the time. i'll give her the benefit of the doubt and assume that if she had been given time to speak, she would have made strong points because she seemed to have something more to offer than gas baggery.
gas baggery? both men pushed the lie of the 'red' states. all this time later and we're still hearing that crap? and not on the mainstream, from our independent media. why? because it's easy, it's like being tim russert crowing 'florida! florida! florida!' ('supreme court! supreme court! supreme court! would have been just as gas baggery but it would have been closer to the truth.)
if that's what you have to offer, give up your mike. seriously, let people who have something to say speak instead because no 1 needs your boring jaw boning that they could hear on a chat & chew.
i share c.i.'s disdain for gas bags. we're supposed to be thrilled because the 'message' sounds good. if it's not truth, it's meaningless. and gas bags telling you what the election 'means' help no 1. the 2 men made claims that they have no support for. tom perriello wanted to share why 'vangical voters voted the way they did this time compared to 2004. that's interesting conjecture but there's no data backing up his statements.
there are numbers.
you can say X number of this or that category self-disclosed they voted this way. you can't sit there to and start hauling in the 'lessons of katrina' which both attempted to do.
you can offer that corruption might include what happened in after katrina - might. but to string together your own opinion and call it 'fact' with no basis in data is gas bagging.
the biggest gas bag was kirk clay. clay pushed the 'red' state lie like no one else. it was his pacifier and he needed it repeatedly. what he didn't need was facts. he did the check points on harold ford jr. the 'victim' of racism. (see the third estate sunday review this sunday where something should lay that myth to rest for good.) he was fond of junior. is he fond of privatizing social security? that was one of junior's pet projects that he advocated for through 2005. when the black commentator called him out he argued for a correction and they didn't budge because they were right. click here to read that.
but there was clay bragging on junior - who lost. junior's for the war and it the war mattered to those who voted, as exit polls and polling prior to the election seem to indicate, it's no real surprise that junior lost. but clay wasn't interested in addressing that. he was interested in 'rock star' (his phrase) barak obama. so interested that he offered that most people couldn't even pronounce barak obama's name?
what people?
it doesn't matter, he just tossed stuff out there. over and over. hogging all the time. if you doubt me, you can listen, watch or read the transcript. if you're pressed for time, just scan the transcript and you'll readily grasp that not only were women not 1 of the topics of discussion, female guests were sidelined during the discussion. according to the transcript, before any other guest got to speak, he'd gone on for over 40 transcripted lines.
we do roundtables at the third estate sunday review. i'll give clay the benefit of the doubt that he was passionate about the issue (he came off as passionate) but if i'd gone on like that in a roundtable, i'd be quite aware of it and shut up so some 1 else could speak. i won't blame amy goodman or juan gonzalez for not realizing that female guests were sidelined because i know dona really has to focus during the roundtables to try to determine who has had a chance to speak at length and who hasn't. she does a pretty good job of that but it's also true that some 1 like c.i. speaks very quickly during that to make room for other people to speak. so dona's trying to factor that in and other things. for roundtables, it usually involves a lot of people.
that's a lot to juggle and i think dona tries very hard. she also attempts to factor in the passion involved in what is said. though i'll give them the benefit of the doubt (goodman and gonzalez) on the how, the fact remains that women were sidelined. it should never happen again.
but how forgiving should i be? i'm counting 126 lines for kirk clay in the transcript. 87 for tom perriello. 45 for kathleen barr. and 50 for lydia camarillo. do you see the problem?
the men spoke more than the women. it's also true that kirk clay was allowed to open with a lengthy gas bag and then gets called on by both amy goodman and juan gonzalez to speak again.
they also call on tom perriello to come back into the conversation after he's spoken at length. if perriello wasn't brought back into the conversation, he'd have about what the 2 women got. but he was brought back in, both men were specifically brought back in by the hosts. kirk clay got to speak almost 3 times as much as kathellen bar and over twice as much as lydia camarillo. is this an issue of teachers/hosts only calling on male students?
amy goodman is the 1 who goes from the 2 women finally being able to speak to turning it, as she puts it 'back to kirk clay.'
KIRK CLAY: Well, you know, oddly enough, for African Americans, this is sad to say, but, you know, we’ve seen these kinds of politics, especially in a red state like Virginia. I mean, you know, we do need to look at this. I mean, we're talking about the South. We're talking about a state that at one point refused to open their public schools, you know, because integration was being enforced. So, we sort of -- I mean, that wasn't -- it was an issue, because we understood it, but a lot of people in our community had known a lot of these things a long time ago. You know, when he was first running for office, we knew that this guy, you know, had a noose in his office at one point and that this guy used to walk around with the Confederate flag pin. So, some of these issues, we had already known.
But even more importantly, you know, the bigger story now, is people like Barack Obama -- think about this. I mean, you know, here’s an African American guy. You know, most people can barely say his name, and, you know, he was a rock star. I mean, he traveled to both red states and blue states. I mean, he campaigned hard in Virginia. He campaigned hard in Maryland. I mean, you know, he did a tremendous job. You know, even Harold Ford, I mean, and some of the things that happened to him, which is so disappointing for us. You know, we have to do better in places like Tennessee. I mean, campaigning like that and airing ads like that, very nasty partisan ads like that, you know, that’s just not the way to go. But that is the positive things.
disappoint for us? is he speaking for common cause (which is non-partisan though many viewers may not have grasped that by clay's statements)? if he's speaking for african-americans he might need to check out the third estate sunday review this weekend, especially since the pin upset him. (i'm not dismissing the pin - i think it's hateful and racist - but a pin is 'small.' other things aren't. if you're lost, wait for the third estate on sunday, it will be clear then.)
so how did it happen? does it bother any 1 that it happened? that women were 1/2 the roundtable but that wasn't reflected in their statements? if you don't get how bad it was, add both women together and you get 95, add both men together and you get 213. women didn't even get to speak exactly 1/2 as much as men. why did they even bother to invite the women on if they weren't going to give them a chance to speak equally? i have no idea.
i'm far less forgiving of the fact that women's votes weren't among the topics discussed. i'm even less forgiving of the fact that democracy now failed to note, even in the headlines, this morning that ehren watada has been charged. c.i. noted it yesterday in "And the war drags on . . ." and, in that, noted that The KPFA Evening News had covered it. so the news crew at kpfa knows about it thursday evening but on friday morning, democracy now still hasn't heard about it?
i don't buy it. i also don't buy the 'ken melhman steps down due to election results' spin. on larry king live, bill maher outed melhman. this week. john has the story at americablog.
on watada, let's note that not only did democracy now not mention it, buzzflash has no link to any story about him now facing a court-martial. nor does the progressive though they have added some more 'insight' from 1 of their 2 worst writers. here's the 'summary' of his 'in depth' piece:
Not only does the Nobel Prize-winner and economic heretic have wonderful ideas, he is also a great guy.
omg. when c.i. insisted on teen beat and tiger beat refs in 'Death of the Press' we all wondered. there have been funnier comparisons (often made by c.i.) but c.i. was adament on sunday that teen beat and tiger beat be noted. i'm wondering if c.i. knew this story was in the works then because it perfectly captures the 'beat' mood. 'a great guy' - all that's missing is the exclamation point - and the glossy cover the headline blares from. maybe he can do that deep puppy-dog look ralph machio used to back in the days of 8 is enough?
i look forward to next hearing that the new u.n. head is 'sexy' with accompanying bare chested photo.
over at the nation, katrina vanden heuvel has posted today. at 2;41 a.m. another 'sweet victories' column that sends readers fleeing (and always reminds me of the scene in winona's little women when the call of 'marmie's home!' sends the gals fleeing.) leave the motivational crap to tony robbins, okay?
and it's really disgusting that the non 'sweet victory' of the military announcing they would court-martial ehren watada was known and reported on hours before kvh decided to go misty-eyed.
in 'honor' of 'sweet victories,' i think i'm creating a feature for my site called 'silly turds.' from now on, any day where news of war resisters is covered by the mainstream and independent media refuses to note it, i'll do a post entitled 'sweet turds' and let you know what they felt was more important to waste time on.
oh god, i'm laughing so hard. there's nothing at the nation on ehren watada - not even their 'news feed' where they just link to ap and others. that's disgusting.
but what's hilarious is the title of eric alterpunk's latest juvenile whine. i think i'll kick off silly turds with a review of his latest when the issue arrives. (if there's news of war resistance between now and then, i'll have to kick off the series then. if not, it will be kicked off with eric alterpunk. pointing at editorials with 1 finger while the other 4 point back at him. his writing truly is a waste of paper.)
they also still have the hearts & flowers to harry ford junior up - it's called 'the unstoppable harold ford' - well voters stopped him tuesday. maybe they didn't hear?
while kvh (whom i do like but not the nonsense of 'sweet victories') is grasping for the silver lining, joshua frank sets you straight at counterpunch in 'Bye-Bye Coke, Hello Pepsi:'
That means of the 29 new Democratic Representatives, 13 are staunchly pro-war. Of the rest, only a handful hold moderately decent positions on US foreign policy, yet the small group will continue to remain a minority within their party. Not surprisingly, none feel our relationship with Israel should be altered. Clearly, that is the direction the Democratic leadership in Washington is looking for in its candidates.
The Blue Dog caucus will no longer have minority status in the House, and will bump their numbers to at least 45 next year. If Christine Jennings wins her recount in Florida that total could reach 46. To put this in perspective, the Blue Dogs are on their way to being on par with DLC's strength in the House and could outnumber the Black Caucus. The Blue Dogs will soon make up at least 20% of the Democrats in the House of Representatives.
The future looks bleak for progressives in the Senate as well. Of the 6 new Democrats who won Senate races, none plan on challenging the Bush administration's war on terror. Aside from Jon Tester of Montana who supports Murtha's call for redeployment, virtually every new Democratic Senator-Elect opposes a timetable for troop withdrawal and believes the Bush administration, not the Democrats, should come up with an alternative course for Iraq.
Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island was quoted in October 2005 by the Brown Daily Herald as saying, "[by] disclosing an exit strategy ... US leaders would be compromising troops' safety." Senator-Elect Jim Webb of Virginia, who served as Secretary of the Navy under Reagan, "opposes a timetable for withdrawal." Democrat Bob Casey, who knocked off Sen. Rick Santorum in Pennsylvania, does not support a timetable to get troops out of Iraq. And while Sherrod Brown of Ohio supports a timetable for Iraq, he believes Bush should put more pressure on Iran, noting that while we've been occupying Baghdad, Iran has "gained ground in their effort to posses weapons of mass destruction." And if you think Vermont's big Bernie Sanders has what it takes, don't forget he supported the bombing of Serbia.
Every new Democratic Senator-Elect also supported Israel's invasion of Lebanon.
why do i hate 'sweet victories' so much? it's just nonsense. it's like me logging on to post after i've been mugged, 'the good news is i made it back safely on the ferry, the ride was wonderful, the sky looked beautiful.' it truly is grasping for the silver lining.
it's that whole matt lauer approach to 'news' of 'it's not often that we have good news to tell you' breathless sort of 'news.' don't worry if it's good or bad, sweet or bitter, just tell me the reality.
if i'm in need of 'sweet inspiration,' i'll put on barbra streisand's greatest hits: volume 2. art can do that. it can inspire and motivate. news-based commentary needs to focus on reality. you get more reality in 1 paragraph of joshua frank than you do in 'sweet victories.' i think the whole notion of 'sweet victories' turns readers into infants (or attempts to) with the assumption that nation readers need some candy to stomach reality. the movement is not in need of a lefty mary poppins so save the spoonful of sugar and just pass out the medicine.
i just remembered common dreams. checking to see if they have a link to the news on watada?
not no, but hell no.
delusions lead to 'sweet victories' and they also lead to a lack of coverage of the topics that actually matter.
i bet c.i. that the snapshot could not be done in 1 hour. i just got the call that it's starting. let's see how long it takes.
1 hour? try 2 and 1/2! (c.i. said 'i made 78 calls, give me a break.') c.i. wanted to link in what i'd written so i threw this up with out the snapshot. now i'm adding it.
here's c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'
Friday, November 10th. Chaos and violence continue in Iraq, the US military announces they will court-martial Lt. Ehren Watada, the US military also announces the death of five more US troops in Iraq, John Howard makes Australians and the rest of the world glad that there's only one of him, and David Swanson explains what really happened in DC.
Starting with news on US war resister Ehren Watada. In June, Watada went public with his refusal to deploy to Iraq because the war is illegal and deploying would subject both himself and those serving under him to war crimes. In standing up, Watada became the first US commissioned officer to publicly refuse to serve in the illegal war. On August 17th, Article 32 hearing was held. [For details on Ann Wright's testimony, click here, Dennis Halliday click here, and here for Francis A. Boyle.] Following the hearing on the 17th, the US military announced August 24th that the presiding officer of the hearing, Lt. Colonel Mark Keith, had made a recommendation, court-martial. Yesterday, The KPFA Evening News reported that the US military had decided to court-martial Watada. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer reports that "Lt. Gen. James Dubik, agreed with the recommended charges of missing a military movement and conduct unbecoming an officer." Gregg Kakesako (Honolulu Star-Bulletin) reports that conviction during the court-martial ("held next year") could result in "six years in jail and a dishonorable discharge." Honolulu's KITV spoke with Eric Seitz, attorney for Watada, who stated, "Unfortunately the army does want to make a martyr out of him. They have told us they will not enter into any agreement that doesn't include at least a year of incarceration, and that's just simply something we are unable to agree to." Rod Ohira (Honolulu Advertiser) notes the following statements by Watada after learning of the recommendation to court-martial him:"I feel the referral of the charges was not unexpected and at this time, I'm moving forward as I always have with resilience and fortitude to face the challenges ahead. . . . I think as the recent elections show more and more Americans are opening their eyes, but we aren't there yet. It is my hope that actions such as my own continue to call for the truth behind the fundamental illegality and immorality of those who perpetrated this war."
Coverage of war resisters in the US independent media has been embarrassing and shameful. Rebecca checks in on several independent outlets only to find that none have anything on Watada this morning. He appears to getting the full-Brobeck from independent media. (CBS notes Watada here.) War resister Ivan Brobeck returned to the US from Canada to turn himself in Tuesday and he didn't even make the indy headlines. (Nora Barrows Friedman did interview him on Monday's Flashpoints.) It's not cutting it. Not for Brobeck, not for Kyle Snyder who's also been ignored after returning to the US and, on October 31st, turning himself in at Fort Knox only to self-check out again after discovering the military had lied yet again. Not for Joshua Key who learned that the Canadian government was denying him refugee status.
A list of war resisters within the military would include Watada, Key, Snyder, and Brobeck. It would also include many other names such as Darrell Anderson, Ricky Clousing, Mark Wilkerson, Camilo Meija, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Jeremy Hinzman, Corey Glass, Patrick Hart, Clifford Cornell, Agustin Aguayo, Joshua Despain, Katherine Jashinski, and Kevin Benderman. That's just the ones who have gone public. (Over thirty US war resisters are currently in Canada attempting to be legally recognized.) It is a movement and should be covered as such. Ehren Watada's father and step-mother are currently on a speaking tour (tonight they're in NYC) and details on that will be at the end of the snapshot.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at Center on Conscience & War, The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Appeal for Redress is collecting signatures of active duty service members calling on Congress to bring the troops home -- the petition will be delivered to Congress in January.
Grabbing headlines is Ali al-Shemari. The Iraqi Health minister announced a number for the death toll of Iraqis due to the illegal war. AP notes that he places the death toll at 150,000. The KPFA Evening News pointed out on Thursday that is he was actually basing his 'count' on the United Nations estimate of at least 100 Iraqis dying each day "that calculation would be closer to 130,000." CBS and AP note that he rejects the number of approximately 655,000 in the Lancet Study but thinks his own number is "OK." Sabrina Tavernise (New York Times) calls the number "an off-the-cuff estimate". Puppets can't go off-the-cuff or off-script which may be why AFP is reporting that the estimates being watered down (the Health Ministry is now saying between 100,000 and 150,000).
Meanwhile the US military has announced today "One Marine assigned to Regimental Combat Team 5 died Thursday from wounds sustained due to enemy action while operating in Al Anbar Province" and also "Two 89th Military Police Brigade Soldiers were killed and one Soldier was wounded Thursday after their vehicle was struck by an improvised explosive device at 12:48 p.m. Thursday in west Baghdad." Later in the day would come more announcements. This: "One Marine assigned to Regimental Combat Team 7 died today from non-hostile causes while operating in Al Anbar Province," and this: "One Soldier assigned to the 13th Sustainment Command (Expeditionary) was killed and another wounded Nov. 10 during a combat logistics patrol when their truck was hit by an improvised explosive device west of Hadithah" for a total of five deaths announced today. ICCC currently lists 24 as the number of US troop deaths in Iraq for the month, thus far (2842 since the start of the illegal war). As the numbers continue to climb, Michael Luo and Michael Wilson (New York Times) report that funerals have become so common for the First Battalion, 22nd Infantry in Iraq that planning time for services have been cut from 45 minutes to five minutes.
While the numbers (on all sides) continue to mount, AP notes Donald Rumsfled stated (yesterday), "I will say this -- it is very clear that the major combat operations were an enormous success." Oh White Queen, get someone to help you a-dress quickly. Forgetting the illegal nature of the war for a moment, that's a bit like a drunk driver who plows into a car and kills an entire family stating, "I will say this -- I pulled away from the curb nicely."
In some of the reported violence today . . .
Bombings?
AFP reports: "In violence on the ground, a powerful blast killed an Iraqi army colonel and his five bodyguards in the northern town of Tall Afar. Reuters notes it was a car bombing and that 17 people were wounded while, in Kirkuk, a roadside bombing injured two Iraqi soldiers.
Shootings?
Reuters notes that, in Yusufiya, 14 people were kidnapped (by "gunmen") and then found dead and a man was shot dead in Diwaniya. Christopher Bodeen (AP) reports that three family members were shot dead in Baghdad (home invasion).
Corpses?
Reuters reports, "Police fished the body of a woman, bearing signs of torture and bullet wounds, from the Tigris river in Mosul, 390 km (240 miles) north of Baghdad, police said." In addition, Christopher Bodeen (AP) informs that 33 corpses were discovered "in Baghdad and several nearby cities."
In Australia, War Hawk and prime minister John Howard's laughable comments yesterday have resulted in more punch lines. Gillian Bradford observered to Eleanor Hall (ABC's PM) that "Whatever the opinion polls here may say here about Australians' desire to get out of Iraq, the Prime Minister isn't swayed" and he intended to ring Tony Blair up just as soon as he (Howard) finished his cricket match. Give 'em Flair, Howie. AAP reports that: "Prime Minister John Howard should tell George W Bush that he's pulling Australian troops out of Iraq when the two leaders meet next week, Opposition Leader Kim Beazley says. Mr Howard will have lunch with the US president during next week's APEC meeting in Hanoi, Vietnam - their first meeting since Mr Bush's Republican party was thumped in US mid-term elections." Bully Boy gets to Vietnam a lot more today than when he 'served,' doesn't he? Meanwhile Xinhau reports: "Howard said he will commiserate with Bush in person at the APEC meeting in the second half of next week.Howard said he had always accepted that the majority of the Australian public had been against the military commitment to Iraq." Howard 'accepts' the majority opinion, he just doesn't 'respect' it.
In peace news, yesterday's snapshot noted Cindy Sheehan was arrested outside the White House while attempting to deliver a petition (with over 80,000 signatures) calling for the US troops to be brought home. Not quite. David Swanson (Let's Try Democracy) reports she was arrested outside the White House long after the petition: "Late Wednesday afternoon Cindy decided to lead a sit-in right in front of the White House, and then -- finally -- the Park Service arrested her. The Associated Press changed the lede to its article to read as follows: 'Activist Cindy Sheehan was arrested Wednesday as she led about 50 protesters to a White House gate to deliver anti-war petitions.' Not quite accurate. The petitions had been delivered several hours before the arrest. But what the heck, it probably got more editors to pick up the story. Thanks, again, Cindy!" Swasnon outlines the events as being stalled at the gates of the White House when attempting to deliver the petition leading activists to place pages in the fence and to send pages over the fence. Hours later, Cindy Sheehan staged the sit-down.
In other news of activists who refuse to hit the snooze button, Wendell Harper reported on yesterday's The KPFA Evening News and today on KPFA's The Morning Show that Medea Benjamin was among those activists participating in a rally outside the soon-to-be House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's San Francisco office calling for troops home now.
Finally, Ehren Watada's father, Bob Watada, and his step-mother, Rosa Sakanishi, continue their speaking tour to raise awareness on Ehren -- the first commissioned officer to refuse to deploy to Iraq. Due to increased interest there have been some date changes and a full schedule can be found here. Upcoming dates include:
Nov 10, Early PM, New York City, NY., Press ConferenceLocation: UN, 777 United Nations Plaza, First Avenue and E. 44th Street Sponsors: Veterans For Peace Chapters 138 & 34Contact: Thomas Brinson, 631-889-0203, ltbrin@earthlink.netGeorge McAnanama, gmacan@aol.com
Nov 10, 7:30PM, New York City, NY.Location: St. Paul/St. Andrews Methodist Church -- West End Avenue and West 86th Streets, Sponsors: Veterans For Peace Chapters 138 & 34Contacts: Thomas Brinson, 631-889-0203, ltbrin@earthlink.net
Nov 11, 10AM-2:30PM, New York City, NY.,Veterans Day ParadeSponsor: Veterans For Peace Chapters 34 & 138, IVAW, MFSO Contacts: Thomas Brinson, 631-889-0203, ltbrin@earthlink.netGeorge McAnanama, gmacan@aol.com
Nov 11, 3-5 PM, Flushing, NY.,Location: Macedonia AME Church (718) 353-587037-22 Union St. Sponsors: "United for Lt. Watada"Contact: Gloria Lum 646-824-2710, lumgloria@yahoo.com
Nov 11, 7 PM, New York City, NY., Manhattan,Location: Columbia University, Broadway and W 116 St., Bldg- Mathematics Rm 312 Sponsors: Asian American Alliance, "United for Lt. Watada",Veterans For Peace Chapters 138 & 34Contact: Gloria Lum 646-824-2710
Nov 12, 11AM-1PM, Providence, RI., Location: Brown University, The John Nicholas Brown Center, 357 Benefit Street at Williams Sponsor: Veterans For Peace NationalContact: Naoko Shibusawa, 401-286-1908, Naoko_Shibusawa@brown.edu
Nov 12, 7PM, Rockland County, NY., Location: TBA Sponsor: Rockland Coalition for Peace and Justice, Veterans For Peace National and Veterans For Peace Chapter /Rockland County Contact: Nancy Tsou, LYTHRN@aol.comBarbara Greenhut
Nov 13 , TBA, Ann Arbor, MI, "The Ground Truth" and Bob Watada,Location: University of Michigan, Angel Hall, Auditorium B, Sponsors: Michigan Peace Works http://michiganpeaceworks.org,Contact: Phillis Engelbert, work - 734-761-5922, home - 734-662-0818, cell- 734-660-489, philliseng@yahoo.com
Nov 14, TBA St. Louis, Mo. Location: Friends Meeting House, 1001 Park Avenue Sponsors: Veterans for Peace Chapter 161, 314-754-2651 Contact: Chuc Smith, 314-721-1814
vfpch61@riseup.netiraqkyle snyderivan brobeckflashpointsnora barrows friedmanjoshua keycindy sheehanehren watadabob watadakpfathe morning showmedea benjamincodepinkthe kpfa evening newswendell harperthe new york timesmichael luomichael wilsonsabrina tavernisesex and politics and screeds and attitude
