[This is from the Freedom Road site: www.freedomroad.org/. Stan Goff is a retired Special Forces Master Sergeant.]

I am a veteran of operations gone bad, and right now I am experiencing a powerful sense of vicarious deja vu.

Four days ago, I couldn't watch CNN for more than ten minutes at a time or I was risking my own mental health. Now, I watch it with the perverse fascination one experiences when seeing a fifteen car pileup on the freeway.

Obviously, the parade of aging white Generals - even including my old commander Dave Grange - who simultaneously know that the US will prevail militarily through sheer force and that this entire operation is going terribly, terribly wrong, do not understand the wider political implications of what they are witnessing.

Still, they seem discomfited. They have been converted into cheap propagandists, and for me it's a lot like seeing a formerly tyrannical Sergeant Major who's retired and become an oily insurance salesman, reduced to haunting the barracks, kissing up to his own former troops to earn his way in the real world by selling them policies.

How the mighty can fall from great heights! Perhaps that's too majestic. The Haitians say, the higher the monkey climbs the tree, the more you see nothing but his ass.

Watch Wesley Clark, the CNN military star, who reputation in the Army was that of an inveterate ass kisser. He harbors presidential pretensions, and he's smooth as a baby's butt. Watch how the worry lines now come right through the pancake makeup.

Donald Rumsfeld has become positively humble - a first in his lifetime - during his Pentagon briefs.

George W. Bush is nearly absent. No one will risk his extemporaneous gaffes. Might he be medicated? His two-line appearances are hoarse and fatigued.

What's happening?

What's happening is that the superpower came face to face with its new counterpart: an international popular movement, focused against this war, but increasingly targeting US global hegemony itself. Our world-wide movement has become a material force on the battlefield, and has midwifed a deep crisis of legitimacy for the US military-political junta.

The whole adventure is rooted in systemic crisis, a reality that so far only the left wing of the movement itself understands. (For a longer discussion of that, see Military Matters #5: Overreach) How has the antiwar movement become a material force on the Iraqi battleground?

Let's take a snapshot of the tactical situation, as least can be gleaned from different accounts.

The original battle plan was scrapped. Let's start here. The complexity of planning a military operation of this scope is simply indescribable, and it takes months to do it right. But the unexpected loss of ground fronts, in Turkey in the North and Saudi Arabia in the South, forced a complete reconstruction of plans in a matter of days. The operation could be put off no longer. The aggressor's back was against the weather wall. The pre-summer sandstorms had already begun, and by late April the heat index inside a soldier's chemical protective gear will be 140 degrees Fahrenheit.

The international antiwar movement had firmed up political opposition around the world and forced the delays that culminated in the UN Security Council becoming a key arena of struggle. For all the infantile leftists who dismissed the UN on moral and ideological - and therefore idealist - grounds, I would say look now at Iraq and see how politics translates into military reality.

We stalled the Bush Administration to push to war where we could stall, and there is an effect.

The entire 4th Infantry Division is sitting in the barracks now waiting for their equipment to steam around the Arabian Peninsula in cargo ships because the Turkish parliament denied them their battlefront. Medium and short range tactical aircraft that could have struck dozens of key targets are sidelined because they are forbidden to take off from Saudi Arabia to deliver their "payloads."

Inside the Department of Defense there has been another war raging, that between the Generals of the Army and Marine Corps and the clique of doctrinal "revolutionaries" pushing Rumsfeld's crackpot theory of Network Centric Warfare (NCW), the methodological offspring of a strategic doctrine called Full Spectrum Dominance (FSD). The Rumsfeld Doctrine is cyberwar combined with commandos. Rumsfeld and his mentors have an absolute faith in the power of technology as the primary determinant of military outcomes, and a complete ignorance of politics as a force of war. (This will be the subject of a book due out this December, War Lies.)

Suffice it to say here, the combination of the failure of this new "doctrine" is creating a military debacle in Iraq. It is important to note that in war, which is an extreme form of politics, success is not measured empirically as it is in a sports competition. It is not measured in body counts or inventories of destroyed war materiel. In fact, it is not perfectly measurable at all. But success has to be gauged against the expectations of the military operation and its final objectives - which are always political. The US inflicted a terrible empirical toll on Southeast Asia and ultimately lost the Vietnam War. The US never grasped the political character of that war.

The US loss in Vietnam became the basis of the Powell Doctrine, which combines avoidance of decisive ground combat (and therefore avoidance of US casualties) with control over public perceptions of the war through the press. Rumsfeld's NCW attempts to assert that logic onto the battlefield with extremely complex technology that has displaced decision-making from human commanders to computerized hardware/software. I have referred to this in the past as "the organic composition of the military;" the relative weight of technological to cognitive process.

Every strength carries with it a corresponding weakness, and once military leaders perceive the strengths and weaknesses of their opposition, they can avoid the strengths and exploit the weaknesses.

The Iraqis are doing just that.

Accusations by the United States that the Russians are providing material assistance may very well be true. The Russians have now thrown in their lot with "old Europe" and China, and they are aiming to undermine US power at every opportunity. I suspect they have not only provided equipment and training on that equipment, but advisory assistance on the reorganization of the Iraqi military.

Someone sure has.

The Iraqi military has abandoned its former Soviet-style doctrine, predicated on armor, mass, and centralized command. It has seemingly now adopted tactics more suited to Special Operations; agile and decentralized. Such a switch requires a very intentional and systematic reorientation from top to bottom. This is an "asymmetrical" response to the high-tech doctrine the US developed to overcome the doctrine of its own predecessor. This Iraqi doctrinal reorientation is proving stunningly effective.

Rumsfeld's notion that he might "decapitate" the Iraqi military has led to an incessant and inane press speculation about whether on not Saddam Hussein is dead or alive. As the reports rolled of one setback after another, he was asked by the press whether there was any evidence to show that Saddam Hussein is dead. His response: "The word evidence is a hard word."

Less ridiculous and more telling was the statement by a Pentagon official, now dissing his boss Rumsfeld: "This is the ground war that was not going to happen in his plan."

Rumsfeld's computers told him that the Iraqis would be shocked and awed into capitulation within two days. Instead we have the (suppressed in the US) spectacle of ground troops in disarray as they attempted to cross their initial lines of departure, columns being stopped by urban resistance, ambushes of logistics tails, advances halted by blinding sandstorms, and captive American youngsters on television.

These first American prisoners of war were not Navy Seals or Delta Force, but military maintenance people and cooks, kids who signed up for an enlistment bonus, some college money, and a saleable skill. Now they stare hauntingly back at us all, with their fear almost an aura in their photographs.

The earlier uncomplicated advances, however, were remarkable. In set-piece war, Rumsfeld's impressive display of new battle software worked perfectly. Tank commanders could keep their lines dressed by simply referring to a digital display, and no one was pulling ahead into an adjacent unit's gunsights. Gee whiz.

The Generals are preoccupied now with retrieving their tactical victory from the chaos, a retrieval that will cost treasure, lives, and careers. But they are almost certainly also sharpening their knives and fantasizing about the spaces between Donald Rumsfeld's ribs.

The first images of the war were supposed to be the "liberation" of Basra, where jubilant crowds of Shi'ite Muslims would welcome the conquering American heroes. Instead, Basra fought back with a spectacular ferocity.

Now US ground forces are attempting to bypass every urban center on the road to Baghdad, but they are in the restricted terrain of the east, where bypass is not always an option. In Al Nasiriya, victory toasts turned to vinegar in their mouths.

City by city sieges have now become a real possibility, and the longer this war goes, the sharper will be the reaction throughout the region.

Aside from stalling, antiwar forces and the naked self-interest of the US regime have given us another multi-faceted victory. The US, fearing further erosion of its wounded legitimacy, has set out to genuinely limit civilian casualties. We have to be honest and clear about this. It is happening. There are certainly civilian casualties, but not nearly the mass slaughter many predicted.

One factor at play here is the need to avoid great damage to the infrastructure of their new prize. The other is the heat from the flames of an erupting international rebellion that they can illafford to fan any higher.

We must also be honest that this will cause the costs to American troops to go up, in lives. Basra can be conquered in a matter of hours, given a willingness to reduce it to rubble. So the US regime is caught between a rock and a hard place. The rock is international rage, including the ever more explosive rage of the Arab and Muslim masses in the region, and the concomitant certainty of further international isolation. The hard place is Colin Powell's nightmare - a parade of flag-draped coffins.

Given this choice, the US will probably be forced to abandon its precise target discrimination, and the bloodletting that has been thus far limited will likely happen after all. This underlinesthe urgency of the anti-war movement keeping up its unrelenting pressure.

Perhaps the most brilliant aspect of the US strategy - prior to recent developments - was the "embedded journalists" program. This is a masterpiece of Powell Doctrine: controlling public perceptions.

The criticism of the military "pool" system from the first Gulf War was checkmated. Reporters were put directly on the battlefield, and integrated into the actual military units. Those reporters are then dependent on the troops around them for their daily human contact, and grow quickly to identify directly with the people in those units.

Overt censorship is no longer needed.

But as the campaign goes further and further awry, these embedded journalists will see some of their new friends wounded and killed, and then the Powell anxiety becomes realized, the war is in our living rooms again, just like Vietnam. This fear of graphic audio-visual images of war is why there was such outrage at Al Jazeera showing dead GIs.

The bet that this would be a quick war with images of triumph is about to break the bank.

In the North, far from the most visible action, the Turkish military has already begun its incursions. The Kurds, in response, are already signing onto yet another Faustian deal with the Americans, now mostly Special Operations - Rangers to seize airheads and Special Forces to establish relationships with the Kurdish fighters. Without its Northern Front, the US is more dependent than ever on using Kurdish combatants to fight the Iraqis around the rich oilfields near Kirkuk.

Fragile Turkey is beset by a severe economic crisis. Its majority Muslim population has just elected a moderate Islamic Party, and the popular opposition to the war is overwhelming.

The Turkish ruling class cannot afford another insurrection from Kurdish nationalists, and the Turkish military has no intention of watching a Kurdish state take form to their South. Turkey, inside its stable exterior, is becoming a powder keg, and Kurdistan is a furnace.

The political implications reach deep into Europe, where one year ago the US saw the admission of Turkey as advancing in the EU. Germany, for instance, has a substantial population of Turks and Kurds, and the German government has a real and justifiable fear that open warfare in Iraqi Kurdistan will spill over into the streets of Germany.

To mollify the Kurds, the US must hold back the Turkish military, and the Kurds will certainly not abandon their dream for an independent Kurdistan. To appease the Turkish military, the US will have to disarm the Kurds. And the Kurds, even as they sign the deal with the devil, know it. The Kurds have no intention of relinquishing their weapons, their autonomy or their dream of an independent nation. The Turks have no intention of allowing it. The US cannot have it both ways.

Stay tuned.

This diplomatic minefield has been fobbed off on Colin Powell. If he doesn't feel a trickle of sweat between his shoulder blades, he's not paying attention. Once this is all over, heads will roll, and the visceral enmity between Powell and Richard Perle is well-known. It's Powell, the Kissinger-style realist and brilliant bureaucrat, versus Perle, the racist, right-wing visionary. There are already whispers that Powell will be scapegoated after the war, and other rumors that Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and Perle will be handed walking papers, and Powell will run for VP.

This fragmentation is another material result of popular resistance around the world, and for some it was the goal–the political destruction of the Bush junta.

That objective is now within sight. What comes after remains to be seen.

While we have riveted our attention on the blazing guns, a quieter weapon of mass destruction has been unleashed against the US working class - a trillion-dollar tax cut for the rich that will torch the tattered remains of our social infrastructure. The political crisis that is now almost certain in the wake of the war will settle on the United States.

Then there are the soldiers.

Bear in mind that these are still the most pampered soldiers in the world. Their morale was already eroded by waiting. They were already faced with basic erosions of benefits at home. The sense of dislocation due to the doctrinal shift under Rumsfeld (that translates to a lot of confusion and turbulence in day-to-day operations), to increases in operational tempo, to the tripling of average time deployed away from home in the last decade, are taking a toll. Divorces are filed. Homesickness. Superiors who are assholes are now constant companions. A substantial number of troops - particularly Black soldiers - who really see this as a job and not some deep patriotic commitment.

Now, with the war is going badly, as they say in the Army, shit rolls downhill, and when things go wrong at the top, there is a lot of blame-shifting and carrying on that percolates down.

On a cautionary note, I will mention the incident (about which I don't know much yet) of the soldier who fragged his officers. Hasan Karim Akbar, 31, a sergeant in the 101st Airborne Division apparently attacked his own tactical operations center in Kuwait with hand grenades. Akbar is Black and a convert to Islam, according to reports.

What we in the movement don't know could hurt us. I want to warn against the natural desire to turn this into a cause celebre. We don't know what Akbar's motives were, and the conditions simply do not yet exist for a Vietnam-style epidemic of fragging. Sharp us-versus-them class consciousness has not yet developed in the military and there appears to be zero sympathy for Akbar's attack in the armed forces. There are already murmurings across the right-wing web of purging the armed forces of "black muslims."

Rather than a being a catalyst for generalized class struggle in the military, the fragging will more likely result in polarization between Black and white, given the latent racism in the military that reflects all of American society. This will emerge over time, and must be navigated very delicately by the left. Before more-militant-than-thou types make this sergeant a hero or martyr, and they should do some investigation. When the facts are sorted out, we will have to reckon with them.

Social polarization of all sorts - outside the military - will emerge in the coming period. It has already started, with the competing street mobilizations of anti-war and pro-war forces. And there is polarization beginning within the anti-war movement as some forces argue for moral censure and others argue for disruption. This too presents a challenge for anti-war forces, and for anti-imperialist forces within the anti-war movement.

Part of developing a critical stance on these issues, and figuring out what our role is in the context of this war is understanding the connections and consequences of what we do here, what others do around the world, and what the regime continues to do. I, for one, still see the political destruction of the Bush government as a strategic priority.

But we have to ensure that our movement is thinking strategically as well, that we are not attacking our adversaries at their strong points but exploiting their weaknesses. We have to ensure that we can function in ways that are agile and often decentralized, even as we keep the same enemy in sight.

This means that the wing of the movement, as it moves toward disruption instead of protest, will have to carefully calculate its own tactics to ensure that - even as we hold the movement accountable and preserve our own goals and identities - we do not split the movement or detach ourselves from the masses. That means that audacity and patience must reside in the same space together. Now is a time for discipline.

One thing is clear. The counter- counter-propaganda war is vital. We must begin to aim incessant, clear, rigorous, systematic, and dispassionate logic at the Bush Junta's every thinner rationalizations.

Leadership is perceived as leader-like only as long as it is respected. The content of the leadership certainly helps determine whether it is accepted, but impressions are also critical. People will take leadership from someone who is wrong, but they balk at being led by someone who is ridiculous.

We can exploit the absurdities of this administration that are now reproducing like rats.

Waving around the Geneva Conventions when our POWs get put on camera, and we've been broadcasting footage of Iraqi prisoners on for days. Invoking a UN resolution to violate a UN charter. Rumsfeld's comment that, "The word evidence is a hard word." Examples are legion.

They are down, and we dare not let them back up.

I'm dusting off an old Bob Dylan record. Hard rain's a gonna fall.

--Stan Goff

by Ruben Navarrette Jr

DALLAS -- I KNOW the saying dictates that to the victor go the spoils. But there are serious questions emerging over the process by which US companies are hired to put out oil fires, build roads and bridges, restart oil production, and do whatever is necessary to ''reconstruct'' Iraq after allied forces deconstruct it. Some answers need to come from Vice President Dick Cheney, a major architect of the war with Iraq, according to many newspapers and columnists around the country. That's the same Dick Cheney who was, until 2 1/2 years ago, chief executive officer of Halliburton Co., a Houston-based oil field services firm that takes in nearly $20 billion annually.

It is a Halliburton subsidiary -- Kellogg, Brown & Root -- that landed on a short list of companies invited by the US Agency for International Development to bid on what could grow to be a $900 million contract to rebuild Iraq. That's the same Kellogg, Brown & Root that was recently awarded, by the Defense Department, the contract to put out fires at oil fields in Iraq.

Good work if you can get it. Oil-field firefighting firms fetch up to $50,000 per day, and it can take weeks to cap a single well. There's no telling how much work there will be in Iraq, but experience says there could be plenty.

In the first Gulf War, Iraqis torched more than 700 oil wells in Kuwait. About half the fires were extinguished by Halliburton.

There's that name again.

And just to prove what a small world it is, the man who was secretary of defense in 1991 was later himself awarded a choice position: CEO of Halliburton. His name: Dick Cheney.

The Halliburton gig, from 1995 to 2000, was a cash cow for Cheney. During his final 8 1/2 months on the job, he pulled down a salary of $806,332 and collected another $100,000 in benefits.

And, mind you, all this was occurring while he was directing George W. Bush's search for a running mate.

Not only did Halliburton not seem to mind that its CEO was moonlighting as a headhunter, it gave Cheney a $1.5 million bonus. But that was cookie jar money compared with what Cheney pocketed when Bush made him his running mate. Cheney then sold his stock options and pocketed another $22 million and change.

Now $22 million and change isn't just a golden handshake. It's a wet, sloppy kiss. And that brings us to the questions. Are the new contracts for Halliburton Cheney's idea of reciprocity? If not, why was the process done by invitation only and not opened to other bids? And why was all this done in relative quiet?

Moreover, why hasn't the vice president's office been more forthcoming in trying to clear up any confusion about any benefit that Halliburton might derive from having its former CEO now sitting to the right hand of the president? Why has Cheney's office typically referred inquiring reporters from The Washington Post to Halliburton, only to have Halliburton refer them back to the vice president?

And given that these are tax dollars we're talking about (lots of them), why isn't there more transparency in the whole process?

Americans may never learn the answers. After howls of protests from competing firms around the world that were aced out of the Iraqi reconstruction bidding process, the government has now shifted the responsibility for overseeing the oil-field contracts to the Army Corps of Engineers and stamped the matter ''classified.''

And why is that, exactly?

Here's the big question: Did the vice president of the United States use his influence to help make his wealthy friends at his old company wealthier?

No one knows. And it's mighty hard to find out when no one is talking and folks are giving reporters the run-around. That has to stop. Cheney should speak up and settle once and for all these questions about how his private sector experience may be affecting his public service.

AMMAN, Jordan - Bruised and bleeding, in need of medical care, the Americans stranded in Iraq's western desert approached the mud-brick town and found the hospital destroyed by bombs.

"Why? Why?" a doctor demanded of them. "Why did you Americans bomb our children's hospital?" Scores of Iraqi townspeople crowded around.

The American peace activists' account was the first confirmation of a report last week that a hospital in Rutbah was bombed Wednesday, with dead and injured. The travelers said they saw no significant Iraqi military presence near the hospital or elsewhere in Rutbah. The doctor did not discuss casualties, the Americans said.

U.S. Central Command said Sunday it had no knowledge of a hospital bombing in Rutbah. The U.S. military has said it is doing its best to avoid civilian casualties in its campaign to oust Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.

For the battered band of peace activists, recounting their nerve-jarring exit from Iraq on Sunday, it was one of the worst moments in 10 days of war.

That exit had begun at 9:15 a.m. Saturday, when a dozen foreigners — eight Americans and one Irish member of the Iraq Peace Team, and three unaffiliated Japanese and South Korean activists — set out from Baghdad on the 300-mile (480-kilometer) trek to the western border with Jordan, through a nation at war.

Members of the antiwar group have shuttled in and out of the Iraqi capital for months to take part in vigils, small demonstrations and other activities to protest U.S. war plans. Since March 20, they have borne witness and compiled reports on the U.S. bombing of Baghdad.

Some who left Saturday had been ordered out by jittery Iraqi bureaucrats for a minor infraction — taking snapshots in Baghdad without an official escort. Others said they left to get out the story of the Baghdad bombing.

The journey was a straight shot through the gritty western desert, the Badiyat ash-Sham, over a divided superhighway eerily empty of traffic. American special forces and warplanes have been staging raids and air attacks on isolated targets across the west.

"I'd say we passed up to 20 bombed-out, burned-out vehicles along the way," said Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove, 22, a student from Devon, Pennsylvania. Four were Iraqi tanks and other military vehicles, he said, but the others appeared to be civilian, including a bus and an ambulance.

"We had to detour around a bombed-out bridge, dodge lightpoles down across the road," said Shane Claiborne, 27, a community organizer from Philadelphia.

Three times the group — in a big white GMC Suburban and two yellow taxis — spotted bomb explosions nearby. The last, in early afternoon, occurred near the far-western town of Rutbah. Their Iraqi drivers' nerves were fraying as they sped toward Jordan at 80 mph (130 kph).

"He kept going faster, faster," Betty Scholten, 69, of Mount Rainier, Maryland, said of her driver.

Suddenly the lagging taxi, pushing to catch up, blew a tire. It careened, spun out of control and plunged down a ditch, landing on its side. "It was a heavy hit," Claiborne said. All five men inside were hurt. "We pulled each other up through the side doors."

A passing car eventually braked to a halt. The Iraqis inside got out, helped the injured into their vehicle and drove back toward Rutbah and a hospital. Along the way, Claiborne said, he spotted the contrails of a jet streaking toward the car. The Iraqis frantically waved a white sheet out a window, and the plane veered off, he said.

In poor, remote Rutbah, a burned-out oil tanker truck sat in the road, and the customs building and communications center had been wrecked by bombing. When they reached the hospital, they saw it, too, had been bombed, its roof caved in.

Claiborne said an English-speaking Iraqi doctor took them to a small nearby clinic, and 100 or so townspeople then gathered around the building. The men were worried, but the doctor told them, "We'll take care of you. Muslim, Christian, whatever, we are all brothers and sisters,'" Claiborne recalled.

The staff tended to them, stitching up a scalp laceration for group leader Cliff Kindy, 53, of North Manchester, Indiana, and doing their best for the worst hurt, Weldon Nisly, 57, of Seattle, who suffered cracked ribs and similar injuries.

The two other carloads, missing the third, eventually doubled back and found the men in Rutbah. All then ventured onward the final 80 miles (130 kilometers) to the Jordan border, and then Amman, where Nisly was admitted to a hospital early Sunday.

As they left Rutbah, said Wilson-Hartgrove's wife, Leah, 22, the villagers "said to us, `Please tell them about the hospital.'"

American Peace Activists Confirm Iraqi Hospital Bombed

Thickening

It is March 18, exactly 4:00 by my watch , which means 3:57 by the school’s clock, as I unlock my office door. The phone rings. Hello this is S. He is asking if I would be a reference for a federal job. Of course, what’s the job. The job is to assist in archiving an Islamic library in Dearborn. What have you been doing he asks. I’ve just returned from witnessing with Asa an act of non-violent civil disobedience.

We agree to meet for coffee after the war begins. Perhaps we should meet at the zoo. I am thinking about Victor Shklovsky’s Zoo or Letters Not About Love. What happens when one becomes a correspondent from a distance? Shklovsky, the herding animal, wanted above all to get back into his country. I am a migratory creature, one who has little means to travel, but I manage to see enough to bring back some news to my students confined in the unwieldy metropolis. The Middle East is not in my flight path except through the poets, faculty, and students I know here on the ground.

I would meet at the butterfly exhibit. Would you? With butterflies from all over the world. We could talk while meditating on fragility and its opposite, prolific regeneration. Within this beautiful container we could discuss the problem of violence. And the way that violence, gives us, like it did Shklovsky, poetic devices.

Let us consider, for example, the path of the butterfly crossing the path of the automobile. Let us consider the potential fragility of the automobile in the path of a bomb. Or consider a bomb, which can not regenerate in the prolific manner of the butterfly.

Or a body instead of a gun.

S. tells me about the Koran, that the intellect is more important than the heart. Is that because one doesn’t have to wait for a “good” or “powerful” feeling to make an ethical judgment? That one can act ethically toward others without having to know them or have any particular feeling for them? This begins with one’s transcending of one’s fear of Allah.

He lives in the paradox between idealism and pragmatism. This is something he considers deeply.

Then he said, there are not enough people who can act ethically. It is human nature to forget. The people who retain the memory to act correctly are too small in numbers.

Right now I am thinking about shoes and boots. Black boots laced up above the calves of a large man in a black uniform with an insignia, federal marshal, on the pocket lapel. He stands in front of a gray-haired man, who, dressed in black trousers and a black t-shirt printed with the insignia pax cristi, is lying on the Federal Building steps. There are about ten people similarly dressed lying down on the steps. Behind them more marshals and federal agents. People are stepping over the bodies. People who have business in court. Lawyers. Clients. Our lawyers also. At this entrance there are about 35 or so supporters at first, until the people, perhaps 17 of them, on the other side are arrested. Then all of the supporters are here: we’re possibly two hundred in number, watching the die-in and singing, carrying anti-war placards, and waiting for the people doing the action to get arrested. It is going to be a federal criminal charge, blocking a federal building.

Last night Bush declared his pre-emptive war on Iraq in the guise of a preposterous demand. We are at the Federal Building today announcing our non-compliance with his war and with his refusal to obey international law. We indict him for intention to commit genocide.

Also at the Federal Building is the first day of the trial of four or is it three? people accused of being terrorists. It is no accident that the jury for this historical trial is being selected the day after Bush has made his baby furious declaration.

We are all being taken care of by a furious baby. Papa baby, who decided to side with the hawks, playing the role of their commander. Where shall we go today hawks? Iraq? Iran? Saudi Arabia? North Korea? When I was quite small, I used to watch the hawks in an empty field near my house and contemplate their vast travels. How glorious it would be to be a baby in charge of hawks, and by extension the baby parent of everyone, including my own father and sister Elizabeth, who must be at least in her 80’s seated in her wheelchair abutting the steps of the federal building.

But what I want to emphasize is how ordinary everything feels and looks. It is only the mind that tells me anything extraordinary about these events. It is cold. We are shivering. Most of us didn’t wear winter coats. Time is passing. Some of us are lying down on hard steps. Some of us are singing. And time is passing. There are a lot of cameras, all sorts. No butterflies, few birds. But it is all very quiet. And no one is in a hurry to get anywhere. We are just here, being. But H., H., who wants to be a lyric poet, has already been arrested on the other side. Everything is simple. Ordinary. The day goes by. I am standing alone at a garage entrance looking out for official vehicles carrying those who have already been arrested. A federal agent in a brown suit passes me. How are you, he asks? I’m okay. And yourself? We are actors with a script, and off stage, we are simply people at work.

At last, federal marshals carefully bend over the bodies on the steps. They ask them to get up. One by one people refuse to get up and one by one they are put under arrest. It is a small ceremony. Quiet, a tap here or there, and another person in black street clothes walks up the steps slowly with a marshal or two marshals in black uniforms on either side of them. They disappear into the Federal Building one by one. Some, who refuse to get up, are carried up, gently, as a civilian casualty might be carried by a medic in a war zone. We are all at the funeral together. Goodbye Judith, goodbye Bill, goodbye Billie. And this part is over.

[from The Globe and Mail:]

Dear America: This is a difficult letter to write, because I'm no longer sure who you are.

Some of you may be having the same trouble. I thought I knew you: We'd become well acquainted over the past 55 years. You were the Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck comic books I read in the late 1940s. You were the radio shows -- Jack Benny, Our Miss Brooks. You were the music I sang and danced to: the Andrews Sisters, Ella Fitzgerald, the Platters, Elvis. You were a ton of fun.

You wrote some of my favourite books. You created Huckleberry Finn, and Hawkeye, and Beth and Jo in Little Women, courageous in their different ways. Later, you were my beloved Thoreau, father of environmentalism, witness to individual conscience; and Walt Whitman, singer of the great Republic; and Emily Dickinson, keeper of the private soul. You were Hammett and Chandler, heroic walkers of mean streets; even later, you were the amazing trio, Hemingway, Fitzgerald, and Faulkner, who traced the dark labyrinths of your hidden heart. You were Sinclair Lewis and Arthur Miller, who, with their own American idealism, went after the sham in you, because they thought you could do better.

You were Marlon Brando in On The Waterfront, you were Humphrey Bogart in Key Largo, you were Lillian Gish in Night of the Hunter. You stood up for freedom, honesty and justice; you protected the innocent. I believed most of that. I think you did, too. It seemed true at the time.

You put God on the money, though, even then. You had a way of thinking that the things of Caesar were the same as the things of God: that gave you self-confidence. You have always wanted to be a city upon a hill, a light to all nations, and for a while you were. Give me your tired, your poor, you sang, and for a while you meant it.

We've always been close, you and us. History, that old entangler, has twisted us together since the early 17th century. Some of us used to be you; some of us want to be you; some of you used to be us. You are not only our neighbours: In many cases -- mine, for instance -- you are also our blood relations, our colleagues, and our personal friends. But although we've had a ringside seat, we've never understood you completely, up here north of the 49th parallel.

We're like Romanized Gauls -- look like Romans, dress like Romans, but aren't Romans -- peering over the wall at the real Romans. What are they doing? Why? What are they doing now? Why is the haruspex eyeballing the sheep's liver? Why is the soothsayer wholesaling the Bewares?

Perhaps that's been my difficulty in writing you this letter: I'm not sure I know what's really going on. Anyway, you have a huge posse of experienced entrail-sifters who do nothing but analyze your every vein and lobe. What can I tell you about yourself that you don't already know?

This might be the reason for my hesitation: embarrassment, brought on by a becoming modesty. But it is more likely to be embarrassment of another sort. When my grandmother -- from a New England background -- was confronted with an unsavoury topic, she would change the subject and gaze out the window. And that is my own inclination: Mind your own business.

But I'll take the plunge, because your business is no longer merely your business. To paraphrase Marley's Ghost, who figured it out too late, mankind is your business. And vice versa: When the Jolly Green Giant goes on the rampage, many lesser plants and animals get trampled underfoot. As for us, you're our biggest trading partner: We know perfectly well that if you go down the plug-hole, we're going with you. We have every reason to wish you well.

I won't go into the reasons why I think your recent Iraqi adventures have been -- taking the long view -- an ill-advised tactical error. By the time you read this, Baghdad may or may not look like the craters of the Moon, and many more sheep entrails will have been examined. Let's talk, then, not about what you're doing to other people, but about what you're doing to yourselves.

You're gutting the Constitution. Already your home can be entered without your knowledge or permission, you can be snatched away and incarcerated without cause, your mail can be spied on, your private records searched. Why isn't this a recipe for widespread business theft, political intimidation, and fraud? I know you've been told all this is for your own safety and protection, but think about it for a minute. Anyway, when did you get so scared? You didn't used to be easily frightened.

You're running up a record level of debt. Keep spending at this rate and pretty soon you won't be able to afford any big military adventures. Either that or you'll go the way of the USSR: lots of tanks, but no air conditioning. That will make folks very cross. They'll be even crosser when they can't take a shower because your short-sighted bulldozing of environmental protections has dirtied most of the water and dried up the rest. Then things will get hot and dirty indeed.

You're torching the American economy. How soon before the answer to that will be, not to produce anything yourselves, but to grab stuff other people produce, at gunboat-diplomacy prices? Is the world going to consist of a few megarich King Midases, with the rest being serfs, both inside and outside your country? Will the biggest business sector in the United States be the prison system? Let's hope not.

If you proceed much further down the slippery slope, people around the world will stop admiring the good things about you. They'll decide that your city upon the hill is a slum and your democracy is a sham, and therefore you have no business trying to impose your sullied vision on them. They'll think you've abandoned the rule of law. They'll think you've fouled your own nest.

The British used to have a myth about King Arthur. He wasn't dead, but sleeping in a cave, it was said; in the country's hour of greatest peril, he would return. You, too, have great spirits of the past you may call upon: men and women of courage, of conscience, of prescience. Summon them now, to stand with you, to inspire you, to defend the best in you. You need them.

Margaret Atwood studied American literature -- among other things -- at Radcliffe and Harvard in the 1960s. She is the author of 10 novels. Her 11th, Oryx and Crake, will be published in May. This essay also appears in The Nation.

(Gothic News Service, 03/31) The Petroleum Kids Studio ­-- a breakaway branch of the sculptor Matthew Barney¹s infamous film crew ­-- is reported about to complete a ten-minute work for Network News television. Filmed by the Studio at night on location in Monument Valley, New Mexico ­-- site of numerous cowboy features, including John Ford's "Stage Coach" --­ the Newscast features the White House's War Counsel. Framed against one of the Monument's most dramatic high-rise cliffs, the white petroleum greased theatrical set included elaborate multi-platform scaffolds, thick ropes and pulleys, a razor sharp, leather bull whip, a free wheeling Bradley steel tank tread, and an illuminated empty missile tip. Dressed in transparent body suits --­ also thoroughly greased in white jelly -­members of the President's War Counsel are filmed in an intense workout that is designed to revive the Administration's commitment to roll over Iraq in an ideologically consistent and timely manner.

Consistent with the work of Matthew Barney -- a Studio statement reads -- the Petroleum Kids’ work leaves no doubt as to the ambiguities of the power relationships within the Counsel. Vice President Cheney, while being raised and lowered from platform to platform, cannot stop rubbing large gobs of petroleum jelly into his heart. War Secretary Rumsfeld -- while held upside down by General Tommy Franks -- repetitively applies little dabs of the jelly lubricant to the muscles around his squinting eyes. At the same time, the General appears to use his feet to tightly enwrap the War Secretary inside the grip of the loose and greasy tank tread. Running up and down the ladders between scaffolds, Condoleezza Rice, National Security Adviser snaps the whip with a grace and ease, the white tip apparently stinging each Member in sensitive places in ways that cause their torsos to wince into rigid and freshly familiar postures. Only the President is spared the whip. Through out the sequence, while embracing a white missile tip, he struggles not to fall off a western saddle that is raised and lowered up and down the cliff by a barely stable, but well-oiled leather harness. Ironically General Collin Powell appears wrestle with Richard Perle and Paul Wolfolitz in a jelly mountain at the bottom of the set.

Back in New York, the Petroleum Kid’s reported great satisfaction with the first round of edits. Today’s film studio statement went on to say, "The use of malleable use of the white petroleum jelly in the Western context is perfect for showing the War Counsel’s slippery oscillations between covert and overt behavior. As a Studio we realize it as our public duty to dramatize and envision the ways in which the forceful members of this particular group­ especially in light of battleground realities -- are working to regroup and reframe the invasion and mastery of Iraq." At Press time it is not known whether or not the News Feature will achieve domestic distribution by any of Networks, however worldwide exposure appears a sure opportunity with much international interest immediately expressed.

The National Monument Park Service -- when asked - reports that no props were found on the reported film site. "We did find some odd white filaments of what looked like grease or jelly at the bottom of one the cliffs. Nothing serious. It did not seem to have anything to with making a cowboy movie, but we did pause to wonder if some Native American Church Group had secretly got in here to re-enact a version of The Ghost Dance. The remnants did have a scary, ghostly look about them."

Today's Philadelphia Inquirer has a page of poems by Sandy Solomon, Charles Bernstein, Daniel Hoffman and Rachel Blau Duplessis (links below)...

Taking in the news
Sandy Solomon

In the stupid computer game
to which I devote myself
as the world hurls itself
at war's impersonal fires
and bright-faced youths in fatigues ...

War stories
Charles Bernstein

War is the extension of prose by other means.
War is never having to say you're sorry.
War is the logical outcome of moral certainty. ...

A Riddle
Daniel Hoffman

If all but one desire me, I am not.
The Greeks had gods for everything but me. ...

From Draft 51: Clay Songs
Rachel Blau Duplessis

Why does it begin again and again?
Why insist on the jagged line
the lightning hitting precariously clear
the flooded splashbacks of political despair?

On May 3rd, 2003, The Works on Shirts Project invites you to take part in "WEARNICA", an international exhibition of artistic reactions to war. On the day of the event, participants in cities around the world will form walking art galleries, wearing original works they've created on the backs of white dress shirts into museums and monuments, parks and shopping malls to help raise public awareness of the realities of war in our time.

On February 5th, Colin Powell stood before the U. N. to make his case for a new resolution authorizing the U.S. to take military action against Iraq. Notably absent was Picasso's "Guernica" [...]

perhaps one of the the twentieth century's greatest, most unsettling artistic images depicting the brutal, self-destructive nature of war. Under pressure from the U.S. Government, The tapestry was covered prior to the Secretary of State's speech out of concern that the painting's message might speak to historical parallels that the Bush administration and UN officials were clearly determined that the media or the public should not make.

In response, the Works on Shirts Project (http://www.worksonshirts.org) has initiated this historic event to give people in the U.S. and around the world an opportunity to follow Picasso's example by publicly expressing their own personal reactions to the war in Iraq and continuing conflicts throughout the world.

Here's what YOU can do:

By staging an event in your area, making a financial contribution or just spreading the word, you can help send a message to the Bush administration, the U.N. and the world that the power of art to reveal the horrors of war and the promise of peace cannot be covered up.

The Idea is Simple:

By creating original war-inspired artwork that can be worn as clothing, it's possible to stage an art exhibition in any location open to the public. As long as the participants conform to the standard behavior for the general public in the space, the white dress shirts will visually tie the pieces together, and the images will speak for themselves.

Toronto Star art critic Peter Goddard wrote of the Guernica coverup: "If there is a war with Iraq, there's already been the first casualty — art." We can change that. Where one image has been silenced, a thousand may drown out the drums of war forever.

Those interested in learning more about this event and how they can participate should visit: http://www.worksonshirts.org

Bus Ride and March in Washington

At 9:30 Friday night, I got on one of four Detroit departing buses, sponsored as far as I can tell by a coalition that included both the peace and anti-racist activist organization A.N.S.W.E.R. (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism) and the International Socialist Party of Michigan (I wrote my $60 check to the ISP), and traveled overnight to the national demonstration against the on-going and forthcoming war in Iraq in Washington D.C. Most of the people on the bus were not affiliated with any specific organization, however. The man I sat next to was an ex-marine who used to work in the tourist industry and who hadn’t been to a demonstration since 1972, when he had been involved with veterans’ participation in the Viet Nam anti-war movement. [...]

He and I were of a small number of people traveling alone on our bus. Seated across from me was a woman with her three grown-up sons and a family friend. There were students from local high schools and the University of Michigan, and some people I took to be young Chomsky-style anarchists: one of them, or so I imagined, Corey, was a friend of Asa’s, but Asa now tells me “she doesn’t know what she is.” It was a happy coincidence that two of Asa’s friends were on the bus, as neither Asa, Barry, nor my friend Katie could make the trip. The other of Asa’s friends was Matt, who has become a committed member of the Socialist Party of Michigan. After the march on Saturday, Matt and I spent a good long time together looking for our missing bus in below-twenty degree weather.

On the bus were also a handful of “aging” street-style activists, including a new age-y radical wearing yellow ski pants and donning a head of thick bottle-enhanced deep yellow hair who claimed to be from Berkeley. I grew quite fond of this man and also to rely on his cheerful pants as a familiar fixture amongst the seas of travelers in the truck stops, all of who, like me, were bundled up against the bitter cold in similar dark clothes.

I was told there were 19 buses from Michigan altogether, with one from the resort town Traverse City. At the Pennsylvania truck stops jam packed with buses from all over the Midwest, I learned there were four busses from a village in Northern Wisconsin, eleven from Ohio State University, eleven from Milwaukee and many more than that from Minnesota. Loud speakers announced the departures of the busses: the bus from Missouri is leaving. Bus number such and such from Chicago is leaving. Another bus such and such from Chicago is leaving. A woman from Chicago in front of me on line for the women’s room had never been out of Chicago. She was looking into the gift shop window and asking, are we in Pennsylvania? I just bought all these D.C. postcards thinking I was in D.C.

I ate grits and cold eggs and soft biscuits at 5:30 a.m. with two women traveling on the Northern Wisconsin bus. They said that they knew 50% of the people on the four buses from their town. One of them was a high school math teacher. One of her students had decided to go at the last minute—she laughed and said, “That’s pretty good for my conservative school.” I asked her if she was able to introduce discussion of the war crisis into her teaching. Yes, a little bit, with probability problems. She started to mumble something about how to get away with it. We talked about fear of speaking out, but as we were speaking the fear was felt as past tense. I hope that with the nation-wide demonstrations achieving a larger, critical mass, the fear will be put behind us.

Ironically, when we woke up this morning, Asa’s car windows were painted with Fear in big red letters. Around the corner of our driveway is a flag Asa mounted on Christmas Eve. It says Hope.

Back to Pennsylvania--two older white women from West Detroit had met on a tour of Italy. One of them had bent arthritic hands. I wondered how she would do in the cold. They told me, over truck-stop coffee, that they had boarded a bus in Warren because they were afraid to leave their cars downtown. They had never been to a demonstration before, but they said they had to go—what Bush is doing is too scary they said. They also said that they expected we would all be ignored.

At first, I couldn’t believe that all of these buses, herds of them, were going to D.C. Weren’t any of them vacation tour buses? In the murky light of the eating halls, I kept trying to make myself see something else, something I could have imagined—even that didn’t make sense (who would be going on a vacation tour bus at 4 a.m. in the middle of winter in this part of the world?) other than what I did see. We were all war protestors, crowding into the slushy cafeterias somewhere on the mountain passes of Pennsylvania in the middle of night—this was not 1968, it was January 17, 2003 and we weren’t supposed to be here: we were supposed to be in snug, or not so snug, in isolated enclaves ignorant of each other dreaming our neo Orwellian dreams as the world’s boundaries stretched and warped unfathomably beyond us.

Every one of us was going to D.C. A few were affiliated with Christian organizations and schools. More were traveling under the sign of Wellstone---there were Wellstone buttons everywhere. In the march, I met people from Boston and Buffalo and Alabama and Colorado who had traveled by plane. Where are you from and how did you get here and how long did it take? We asked each other in the cafeteria and rest room lines, sharing tables for meals, and while marching. We were between the ages of eight and eighty.

I met Tom at the rally. We wandered around the three squares across from the capitol and caught up with each other, mostly talking about children, work, his experiences of Pakistan, writing, and friends. How is everybody? For the most part, the speeches weren’t news, although, I had earlier been impressed by a Korean American woman critiquing the deployment of the phrase “axis of evil.” I learned later that each square, when full, held 250,000 people—this according to one of the protest organizers. Later, I heard that we were 500,000 in all. Tom and I went for coffee at Starbucks, which was filled with demonstrators, including a man seated at a nearby stool who seemed to be suffering from a terrible headache. Later, after the march, lots of people had aches—a woman on my bus had frostbitten toes and the woman seated across from me seemed to be suffering from a little hypothermia as she was shivering uncontrollably.

In spite of the cold and the problem finding buses after the event was over, the march was wonderful, a joyful and determined experience. It took hours. In some places, I’m remembering particularly the Botanical Garden building, there were so many of us there already and so many others joining us that we couldn’t walk more than ten steps a minute. When we finally stretched out making a line you couldn’t see the end of, things would speed up and then slow way down, sometimes stop. As we got out of the government area and into the shopping area, we were greeted with NO WAR signs in the windows of shops and bistros. Dressed up young Asian women working at a nails salon, waved and danced on the balcony as we passed. The march had a nice beat: there was lots of hand drumming and singing and Bread and Puppet and other agit prop weaving its way through the crowd. A group of Philippino-American performers moved to the edge of a crowd, encircled themselves with a banner. Please move around us, we are going to congregate here, they said. I was moving past: it was hard sometimes to stop for performances. When I looked back, they had melted into the crowd. Another group weaving their way through the march were dressed all in black carrying a big black banner they held like a rope to keep them connected to each other. The grim, the parodic, the quiet were gathered in a massive harmonic. People chanted this is democracy. Masked Bushes and Cheneys and Rumsfelds skipped and strutted around us, trying to shake our hands: we mocked them, laughed, and they moved on.

When I talked to my 85 year-old 88 pound mother on the phone, she said, “I wish I could have been there.” “Next time, I’ll carry you,” I said in a mock-heroic tone. She also wanted reassurance that the crowd of protestors was diverse and was happy to hear of the placard that read, “Conservatives against the war in Iraq.”

India's national newspaper, The Hindu, is reporting that the British Government is angry over the way BBC is presenting the war in Iraq.

A senior Cabinet member had last week made clear his irritation to the public broadcaster's political editor. John Reid, chairman of Prime Minister Tony Blair's Labour Party and a member of his War Cabinet, took up the issue with Andrew Marr.

Blair's office believes the 24-hour coverage is distorting the events, and Reid is reported to have accused BBC of acting like a "friend of Baghdad".

Marr is reported to have responded that the Government was "angry that they can control where reporters go but what they cannot control is what they see".

[Thanks to Christian Bök and Bill Kennedy for sending this simultaneously ... ]

The horrible truth, just in time for Terminator 3.

Are you a Commander-in-Chief who needs a name for your next military operation? Just click here to generate up to 100 at a time ...

20 Randomly Generated American Military Operation Names

1. Operation Engorged Pit Bull
2. Operation Inflamed Manticore
3. Operation Eternal Cougar
4. Operation Shining Dragon
5. Operation Oversized Fiend
6. Operation Cowboy Badger
7. Operation Destroy the Otter
8. Operation Unindulgent Emu
9. Operation Nervous Democracy
10. Operation Don't Mess With Our Sucker Punch
11. Operation Terrible Equality
12. Operation Umbrageous Djinn
13. Operation Platinum Wombat
14. Operation Unexpected Imperialism
15. Operation Bitter Mosque
16. Operation Strong Missile
17. Operation Delirious Turban
18. Operation Rioting Supernova
19. Operation Wraithlike Beaver
20. Operation Angry Ka'bah

[Some good links at the end of this one, and mention of Circulars via our embedded Toronto correspondent, Darren W=H.]

By JOHN ALLEMANG

The first Gulf War did it for CNN. The new one may do it for 'blogs' -- personal Web pages of news and opinion, tracking and debating Iraq's fate by the minute. As JOHN ALLEMANG writes, they're now many people's first choice for unembedded journalism.

He calls himself George Paine, in a proud allusion to the 18th-century American patriot and pamphleteer Thomas Paine. But in every other respect, the young New York technology consultant is a man of these anxious times.

Talking into his cellphone at a patio table in a Chelsea café, keeping one eye on the darkening clouds while searching the Web for updates on the war in Iraq, the young man in his 20s is the very model of a communications revolution.

But the news George Paine accumulates and analyzes isn't just for his own peace of mind or intellectual hunger. Within minutes of finding an Arab-media contradiction of a CNN report, he will post it on his argumentative antiwar site, warblogging.com, and subversive readers who share his doubts will also share his newfound knowledge.

George Paine is what's called a blogger, a man who keeps a running log on the Web ("Web log" is contracted to "blog") of news and links of interest to him, with his own commentary. As it turns out, they are also of interest to tens of thousands of avid readers who don't believe that either government or the mainstream media have their best interests in mind.

"Seven or eight months ago," he says, "I was feeling dismayed by the direction my country was going in. I was looking for an outlet to share my feelings and maybe score some points against the authorities, and when the Patriot Act came along, I started the site."

With no formal journalistic training, he began by writing a paragraph or two about civil-liberties issues and the American war on terror. He reckons he had about 100 readers in the first month. But now, as the fog of war sweeps through Iraq, and eager reports of surrenders and uprisings disappear into the desert air, about 100,000 readers search warblogging.com for news and arguments ("I am ashamed that my country is engaged in an aggressive war") that embedded journalists can't or won't put forward.

George Paine is now writing thousands of words every day, and with the help of sympathetic readers, he is passing on hundreds of links where a wider range of war stories are told. And he is still working full-time as a technology consultant. "I post during the day, but I don't allow it to interfere with my day job," he says. "I'm blogging on breaks, or while I'm waiting for someone to call back. If I spend nine or 10 hours in the office, I'll bill for eight."

This is a large part of how the world, and especially that part of it under 40, is informing itself about the war. The truth, as they see it, is being composed on coffee breaks by people nowhere near the front lines, writers who are beholden to no one -- except perhaps the bosses in their off-line lives, who force them to use a liberating pseudonym.

Using free and relatively simple software available from such sites as blogger.com, with tools that can handle a huge amount of data, anyone with a modem can publish his views and find a following. And that following will probably grow, as younger readers numbed by the conventions of mainstream reporting and discouraged by its connections to government find a shared intimacy in the Web's daily diaries.

"I think that sort of clarity of voice and immediacy is more possible on Web logs than in any print media," says Dean Allen of textism.com. "I can't think of another broadcast medium that has such a potential for directness. Someone reporting live from the battlefield for CNN can't come close: As impressive as it can be, the reporter is still speaking though an editorial, journalistic gauze."

Of course, when anyone can do all this at low cost and with minimal technological skill, there's no shortage of eye-glazing egomania. Personal Web logs -- the daily, hourly and even minute-by-minute chronicles of lifeless keystrokers -- abound on the Web and have a terrible reputation among the serious-minded war bloggers. Yet even the war chroniclers, Mr. Allen says, seem to be getting carried away by both the recent deluge of recent media hype and the increased feedback their sites are receiving.

"These factors have led to oceans of unself-consciously hilarious self-importance on the part of people who are, after all, sitting in front of a computer typing a commentary through links on this and that."

And for all the alternative-culture myth-making that surrounds blogging, it is not the exclusive preserve of the enlightened fringe. Hard as it is to believe, one of the roots of all this harried Web activity was Matt Drudge's scandal-chasing Drudge Report. Andrew Sullivan, one of the pioneers of blogdom's public-pundit side, came to the Web from the editorship of the influential magazine The New Republic, and actually makes good money from his daily words.

Power-worshippers as diverse as David Frum and Warren Kinsella now share their thoughts with Web readers, and few mainstream news operations don't include a Web log somewhere on their site -- in the case of msnbc.com and its affiliated slate.com, that comes to means all blogs, all the time.

This mainstreaming of the Web log caused trouble for CNN's Iraq reporter Kevin Sites, whose much admired personal war blog kevinsites.net was ordered closed (temporarily, he hopes) by the people paying his salary.

Yet the most powerful blog to emerge from the war in Iraq is not from a North American networker, but from a Baghdad blogger who calls himself Salam Pax (from the Arabic and Latin words for peace). Salam is described as a worldly, 28-year-old, gay architect, who has little use for either Saddam Hussein or the war against him. But what makes his diary so affecting is the way it achieves an easy intimacy that eludes the one-size-fits-all coverage of Baghdad's besieged residents.

Humane in an inhuman environment, Salam writes of how to pack in case you have to flee, why he dislikes the self-appointed foreign human shields ("every third one of these shields will be writing an article somewhere"), what you need to buy when the Americans are coming (manual pump, 60 litres of gasoline, two kerosene cookers, particle masks), the music on the radio ("What good are patriotic songs when bombs are dropping?") and the distressing TV behaviour of Iraq's Interior Minister ("Hurling abuse at the world is the only thing left for them to do").

Like all good bloggers, once discovered, Salam has been overwhelmed by comments and questions. "Please stop sending e-mails asking if I were for real," he writes. "Don't believe it? Then don't read it. I am not anybody's propaganda ploy -- well, except my own."

For Paul Grabowicz, a professor of new media at the University of California School of Journalism at Berkeley, it's this kind of dialogue, along with the back-and-forth debates at more formal sites, that elevates Web logs into a powerful new form of communication.

"Traditional journalism can be very good at collecting information, writing great narratives and crafting a story. But that's just the starting point -- if there's no conversation, it's like making art and not showing it in a gallery. To me, the whole point is to get people talking."

Part of that conversation demands that you know what other people are looking at. Toronto writer and teacher Darren Wershler-Henry finds out through a site called Blogdex, which tracks the top stories being read on Web logs. "This way you know what everyone else on the Web is talking about," he says, "The more connectivity you can generate, the more powerful are your applications."

Mr. Wershler-Henry contributes to three Web logs when he's not writing poetry or teaching communications students at York University. At http://www.arras.net/circulars, he and New York writer Brian Stefans have brought together a blog group they title "Poets, Artists and Critics Respond to U.S. Policy."

Here, you can learn how to filter out jingoistic spam, read an eye-opening PRWeek magazine article on how the White House spins its public relations, link to a gambling site where you can bet on Saddam Hussein's future (the odds change rapidly) or follow the diary of a American teaching in Turkey. All of this, Mr. Wershler-Henry says, contributes to creating "communities of interest."

Some observers, such as Mr. Grabowicz, are critical of sites that are simply an excuse for people of like minds to agree, but Mr. Wershler-Henry resists the idea that the poets, artists and critics may be segregating themselves.

"The Internet was founded on rigorous debate," he says, "and you don't have to go far to see a lively discussion. You read one Web log and, sure, you're limited in what you're seeing. But if you read one newspaper or watch one television network, you're just as limited."

At this early stage in war-blog history, most sites are extremely wide-ranging and and almost unbearably informative (do these people ever leave their laptops?) without sacrificing the first-person approach. Eric Alterman writes an opinionated column called Altercations for msnbc.com, and his paragraphs are filled with blue-tinted links.

"I make my arguments," he says, mentioning how he had called the Bush foreign-policy team incompetent bozos. "But it's important for me to show that I'm not just talking off the top of my head."

By writing for a mainstream outlet such as msnbc.com, Mr. Alterman gets much stronger reactions than he would if he were isolated in his own private blog space. He quotes a letter he's just opened (all bloggers are unapologetic multitaskers) that calls his diary "a compendium of extremist stupidity." And yet, he says, this wider exposure of his intimate thoughts is both good and necessary.

"You judge a man by his enemies to some extent. I need to be exposed to ideas outside my own cocoon."

That will certainly happen to bloggers as more and more big media organizations pick up on the device, and many Web logs will undoubtedly lose their edge as they move upscale. But even now, reaching thousands of readers instead of dozens, many war bloggers say they can only practise their craft by treating it as the personal space it originally was.

"It really doesn't concern me whether anyone looks at this besides me," Bruce Rolston says. Mr. Rolston, who manages a university Web site by day and serves as a Canadian Forces logistics officer on weekends, writes a wonderfully detailed analysis of the war's tactics at http://www.snappingturtle.net/jmc/flit.

Though he disclaims any military expertise, Mr. Rolston's trenchant critiques of what he believes is going on are bracing to war obsessives who need to know everything -- a group that appears to be growing day by day. If you want to follow the movements of the 101st Airborne, or consider how bad the fighting in Najal might be, or conjecture why the beleaguered U.S. military might cut some ties with the embedded journalists, read the man with the laptop in Toronto.

No newspaper editor or TV producer would ever allow Mr. Rolston's work near a general reader or viewer, for fear of taxing or boring them. But war creates a need to know and the desire to share expertise, whether it's about daily life in Baghdad, antiwar poets in New York, or where the war is going on the banks of the Euphrates.

"The thirst for information on-line is remarkable now," Mr. Rolston says. "It's a defence mechanism after Sept. 11 -- people are willing to suck the information system dry."

John Allemang is a feature writer for The Globe and Mail.

Top war blogs

Some of the most popular and admired Web logs following the war, all linked with numerous other blogs and news sites:

The Agonist:

http://www.agonist.org
Renowned for its rapid reporting, this is the site many people turn to for the latest developments.

Tacitus:

http://www.tacitus.org

A smart, generous pro-war blog specializing in strategy and deep background.

The Command Post:

command-post.org

Minute-by-minute war updates, and reliably rant-free.

Warblogging.com:

http://www.warblogging.com

All-encompassing news and views, from an antiwar perspective.

Back to Iraq 2.0:

http://www.back-to-iraq.com

Supported by on-line donations, journalist Christopher Allbritton has been hailed as the first independent Web foreign correspondent.

Where is Raed?:

dear_raed.blogspot.com

Moving accounts of daily life in Baghdad, now worryingly sporadic.

Kevin Sites:

http://www.kevinsites.net

The CNN correspondent's suspended personal site chronicles life in Northern Iraq.

InstaPundit:

instapundit.com

Labelled the Grand Central Station of Bloggerville for its wide-ranging links, bolstered by cocky opinionizing from a Tennessee law professor.

Eschaton:

atrios.blogspot.com

Mouthy, to-the-point observations on bad government and weak media.

-- John Allemang

The Globe and Mail

U.S. intelligence officials have been spamming Iraq's generals and leaders of Saddam Hussein's ruling Baath Party via phone and email with promises of safety, asylum and a role in Iraq's new government if they defect, mount a coup or agree not to use biological or chemical weapons.

The spam, directed by the CIA, began three months ago during the buildup of U.S. and coalition forces on Iraq's borders. Initially, U.S. officials were so confident that they could persuade Iraqi leaders to surrender that they delayed the start of the war. And although those early efforts were largely unsuccessful, the communications have resumed even as U.S. forces carry out air and ground assaults inside Iraq, according to three intelligence and two military officials directly involved in the communications efforts.

United Press international reports that Oscar-winning filmmaker Michael Moore is working on a documentary about the "the murky relationship" between former President George Bush and the family of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden. The movie, Fahrenheit 911, will suggest that the bin Laden family profited greatly from the association.

According to Moore, the former president had a business relationship with Osama bin Laden's father, Mohammed bin Laden, a Saudi construction magnate who left $300 million to Osama bin Laden. It has been widely reported that bin Laden used the inheritance to finance global terrorism.

Moore said the bin Laden family was heavily invested in the Carlyle Group, a private global investment firm that the filmmaker said frequently buys failing defense companies and then sells them at a profit. Former President Bush has reportedly served as a senior adviser with the firm.

"The senior Bush kept his ties with the bin Laden family up until two months after Sept. 11," said Moore.

Moore said he expects the new movie to be in U.S. theaters in time for the 2004 presidential election. "I expressed exactly what was in the film and instead of being blacklisted, I've not only gotten a deal to fund Fahrenheit 911 but offers on the film after," he said.

From MoveOn.org:

"American media outlets have chosen to stifle or simply not show the most terrible and saddening aspects of this war. They are reluctant to air the voices of critics who are raising important questions about its effectiveness and purpose. And they appear to have acceded to the Bush Administration's desire to black out pictures or footage of civilian casualties.

We need to demand the full picture. The MoveOn Media Corps is a group of committed MoveOn volunteers who will mobilize to push the media to fairly cover this war. The action ideas we send you won't generally take longer than 15 minutes, but to be part of the Corps we ask that you commit to taking up to one action per day. The actions could include calling media outlets when they air especially bad coverage, pushing Clear Channel radio to stop censoring anti-war songs, or writing letters to the editor."

Interested parties can join by filling out this form. MoveOn is extending a special request to AOL Instant Messenger (AIM) users: "we especially need your help. We're developing an IM-based instant response network. By adding your handle, we'll be able to contact you with urgent, time-sensitive alerts that can make an impact more quickly than ever possible before."

The Guardian reports that General Paul Van Riper, a retired marine lieutenant-general, told the Army Times that the biggest war game in US military history, staged this month at a cost of £165 m with 13,000 troops, was rigged to ensure that the Americans beat their "Middle Eastern" adversaries.

Gen. Van Riper protested by quitting his role as commander of "enemy forces" (which bore a strong re semblance to Iraq, but could have been Iran), and warning that the Pentagon might wrongly conclude that its experimental tactics were working.

The Army Times reported that, as commander of a low-tech, third-world army, Gen Van Riper appeared to have repeatedly outwitted US forces. He sent orders with motorcycle couriers to evade sophisticated electronic eavesdropping equipment. When the US fleet sailed into the Gulf, he instructed his small boats and planes to move around in apparently aimless circles before launching a surprise attack which sank a substantial part of the US navy. The war game had to be stopped and the American ships "refloated" so that the US forces stood a chance.

After too much success, Van riper noted that "We were directed... to move air defences so that the army and marine units could successfully land," he said. "We were simply directed to turn [air defence systems] off or move them... So it was scripted to be whatever the control group wanted it to be."

[Glad to see that they're using smart bombs -- imagine this kid got hit in the eye?]

Saja Jaffar, 2, is treated by a hospital nurse after being wounded by a bomb that landed in West Baghdad Friday, March 28 2003. Five died in the blast according to local hospital sources. (AP Photo/Jerome Delay)

[I'm not sure about this one myself - I mean the organization is legit, certainly, just the concept seems troublesome. Well, it's too late for me, I filed a week ago. -- bks]

It's almost time again for those it's-almost-time-again news stories about the tax deadline, some old-fashioned good-natured, compassionating grumbling about the pain of civic duty, all of which will be reducible to that old-fashioned good-natured command: PAY TRIBUTE (AND ON TIME PLEASE). But in part or in whole you don't have to, and, especially right now, you might consider coyly withholding some or all of your alienating dollars to be your pressing civic duty. Or you might just get a little extra languorous about deadlines while the military machine gets a little more nervous about time passing. If you're at all interested in blocking the intersection of you and government, go to the National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee at http://www.nwtrcc.org/. -- Geoffrey G. O'Brien

(Gothic News Services, 03/29) United Nations, Secretary-General Koffi Annan's Washington, D.C. Address at an undisclosed location where the Secretary-General briefly spoke on Britain and the United States¹ Refusal to Comply with the Inspection Process and the Joint Decision of these two former Member countries to secede from the rule of the United Nations and Invade the Sovereign Nation of Iraq:

Two score and eighteen years ago, our nations' leaders brought forth on this globe, the United Nations, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all member nations are created equal. Now we are engaged in an international civil war, testing whether the United Nations, or any global body so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are not yet met on the great battle-field of this war. We have not yet come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who will give their lives so that these United Nations will live. It will be altogether fitting and proper do this.

But in a larger sense, we will not dedicate ­ we will not consecrate ­ we will not hallow this ground. The brave men and women, living and dead, who will have struggled here, will have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it will never forget what they will have done here. It is for us the living rather to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who will have fought here will have so nobly advanced. It is for us to be dedicated to the great task remaining before us ­ that from the to be honored dead we may take increased devotion to that cause for which they will give the last full measure of devotion ­ that we here highly resolve that the future dead shall not have died in vain ­ that these United Nations shall have a new birth of freedom ­ and that the government of nations, by the nations, for the nations, and for the peoples of these nations of the world, shall not perish from the earth.

My station is a threat to American media control - and they know it

by Faisal Bodi

Last month, when it became clear that the US-led drive to war was irreversible, I - like many other British journalists - relocated to Qatar for a ringside seat. But I am an Islamist journalist, so while the others bedded down at the £1m media center at US central command in As-Sayliyah, I found a more humble berth in the capital Doha, working for the internet arm of al-Jazeera.

And yet, only a week into the war, I find myself working for the most sought-after news resource in the world. On March 23, the night the channel screened the first footage of captured US PoW's, al-Jazeera was the most searched item on the internet portal, Lycos, registering three times as many hits as the next item.

I do not mean to brag - people are turning to us simply because the western media coverage has been so poor. For although Doha is just a 15-minute drive from central command, the view of events from here could not be more different. Of all the major global networks, al-Jazeera has been alone in proceeding from the premise that this war should be viewed as an illegal enterprise. It has broadcast the horror of the bombing campaign, the blown-out brains, the blood-spattered pavements, the screaming infants and the corpses. Its team of on-the-ground, unembedded correspondents has provided a corrective to the official line that the campaign is, barring occasional resistance, going to plan.

Last Tuesday, while western channels were celebrating a Basra "uprising" which none of them could have witnessed since they don't have reporters in the city, our correspondent in the Sheraton there returned a rather flat verdict of "uneventful" - a view confirmed shortly afterwards by a spokesman for the opposition Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq. By reporting propaganda as fact, the mainstream media had simply mirrored the Blair/Bush fantasy that the people who have been starved by UN sanctions and deformed by depleted uranium since 1991 will greet them as saviors.

Only hours before the Basra non-event, one of Iraq's most esteemed Shia authorities, Ayatollah Sistani, had dented coalition hopes of a southern uprising by reiterating a fatwa calling on all Muslims to resist the US-led forces. This real, and highly significant, event went unreported in the west.

Earlier in the week Arab viewers had seen the gruesome aftermath of the coalition bombing of "Ansar al-Islam" positions in the north-east of the country. All but two of the 35 killed were civilians in an area controlled by a neutral Islamist group, a fact passed over with undue haste in western reports. And before that, on the second day of the war, most of the western media reported verbatim central command statements that Umm Qasr was under "coalition" control - it was not until Wednesday that al-Jazeera could confirm all resistance there had been pacified.

Throughout the past week, armed peoples in the west and south have been attacking the exposed rearguard of coalition positions, while all the time - despite debilitating sandstorms - western TV audiences have seen little except their steady advance towards Baghdad. This is not truthful reporting.

There is also a marked difference when reporting the anger the invasion has unleashed on the Muslim street. The view from here is that any vestige of goodwill towards the US has evaporated with this latest aggression, and that Britain has now joined the US and Israel as a target of this rage.

The British media has condemned al-Jazeera's decision to screen a 30-second video clip of two dead British soldiers. This is simple hypocrisy. From the outset of the war, the British media has not balked at showing images of Iraqi soldiers either dead or captured and humiliated.

Amid the battle for hearts and minds in the most information-controlled war in history, one measure of the importance of those American PoW pictures and the images of the dead British soldiers is surely the sustained "shock and awe" hacking campaign directed at aljazeera.net since the start of the war. As I write, the al-Jazeera website has been down for three days and few here doubt that the provenance of the attack is the Pentagon. Meanwhile, our hosting company, the US-based DataPipe, has terminated our contract after lobbying by other clients whose websites have been brought down by the hacking.

It's too early for me to say when, or indeed if, I will return to my homeland. So far this war has progressed according to a near worst-case scenario. Iraqis have not turned against their tormentor. The southern Shia regard the invasion force as the greater Satan. Opposition in surrounding countries is shaking their regimes. I fear there remains much work to be done.

Al-Jazeera Tells the Truth About War

[Special thanks to my New Yorker reading friends for pointing this one out to me-- I didn't even know they were online. Read following Ari & I to see how fond the Administration is of Seymour Hersh.]

Why did the Administration endorse a forgery about Iraq’s nuclear program?

Last September 24th, as Congress prepared to vote on the resolution authorizing President George W. Bush to wage war in Iraq, a group of senior intelligence officials, including George Tenet, the Director of Central Intelligence, briefed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Iraq’s weapons capability. It was an important presentation for the Bush Administration. Some Democrats were publicly questioning the President’s claim that Iraq still possessed weapons of mass destruction which posed an immediate threat to the United States. Just the day before, former Vice-President Al Gore had sharply criticized the Administration’s advocacy of preëmptive war, calling it a doctrine that would replace “a world in which states consider themselves subject to law” with “the notion that there is no law but the discretion of the President of the United States.” A few Democrats were also considering putting an alternative resolution before Congress.

According to two of those present at the briefing, which was highly classified and took place in the committee’s secure hearing room, Tenet declared, as he had done before, that a shipment of high-strength aluminum tubes that was intercepted on its way to Iraq had been meant for the construction of centrifuges that could be used to produce enriched uranium. The suitability of the tubes for that purpose had been disputed, but this time the argument that Iraq had a nuclear program under way was buttressed by a new and striking fact: the C.I.A. had recently received intelligence showing that, between 1999 and 2001, Iraq had attempted to buy five hundred tons of uranium oxide from Niger, one of the world’s largest producers. The uranium, known as “yellow cake,” can be used to make fuel for nuclear reactors; if processed differently, it can also be enriched to make weapons. Five tons can produce enough weapon-grade uranium for a bomb. (When the C.I.A. spokesman William Harlow was asked for comment, he denied that Tenet had briefed the senators on Niger.)

On the same day, in London, Tony Blair’s government made public a dossier containing much of the information that the Senate committee was being given in secret—that Iraq had sought to buy “significant quantities of uranium” from an unnamed African country, “despite having no active civil nuclear power programme that could require it.” The allegation attracted immediate attention; a headline in the London Guardian declared, “african gangs offer route to uranium.”

Two days later, Secretary of State Colin Powell, appearing before a closed hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, also cited Iraq’s attempt to obtain uranium from Niger as evidence of its persistent nuclear ambitions. The testimony from Tenet and Powell helped to mollify the Democrats, and two weeks later the resolution passed overwhelmingly, giving the President a congressional mandate for a military assault on Iraq.

On December 19th, Washington, for the first time, publicly identified Niger as the alleged seller of the nuclear materials, in a State Department position paper that rhetorically asked, “Why is the Iraqi regime hiding their uranium procurement?” (The charge was denied by both Iraq and Niger.) A former high-level intelligence official told me that the information on Niger was judged serious enough to include in the President’s Daily Brief, known as the P.D.B., one of the most sensitive intelligence documents in the American system. Its information is supposed to be carefully analyzed, or “scrubbed.” Distribution of the two- or three-page early-morning report, which is prepared by the C.I.A., is limited to the President and a few other senior officials. The P.D.B. is not made available, for example, to any members of the Senate or House Intelligence Committees. “I don’t think anybody here sees that thing,” a State Department analyst told me. “You only know what’s in the P.D.B. because it echoes—people talk about it.”

President Bush cited the uranium deal, along with the aluminum tubes, in his State of the Union Message, on January 28th, while crediting Britain as the source of the information: “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.” He commented, “Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide.”

Then the story fell apart. On March 7th, Mohamed ElBaradei, the director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, in Vienna, told the U.N. Security Council that the documents involving the Niger-Iraq uranium sale were fakes. “The I.A.E.A. has concluded, with the concurrence of outside experts, that these documents . . . are in fact not authentic,” ElBaradei said.

One senior I.A.E.A. official went further. He told me, “These documents are so bad that I cannot imagine that they came from a serious intelligence agency. It depresses me, given the low quality of the documents, that it was not stopped. At the level it reached, I would have expected more checking.”

The I.A.E.A. had first sought the documents last fall, shortly after the British government released its dossier. After months of pleading by the I.A.E.A., the United States turned them over to Jacques Baute, who is the director of the agency’s Iraq Nuclear Verification Office.

It took Baute’s team only a few hours to determine that the documents were fake. The agency had been given about a half-dozen letters and other communications between officials in Niger and Iraq, many of them written on letterheads of the Niger government. The problems were glaring. One letter, dated October 10, 2000, was signed with the name of Allele Habibou, a Niger Minister of Foreign Affairs and Coöperation, who had been out of office since 1989. Another letter, allegedly from Tandja Mamadou, the President of Niger, had a signature that had obviously been faked and a text with inaccuracies so egregious, the senior I.A.E.A. official said, that “they could be spotted by someone using Google on the Internet.”

The large quantity of uranium involved should have been another warning sign. Niger’s “yellow cake” comes from two uranium mines controlled by a French company, with its entire output presold to nuclear power companies in France, Japan, and Spain. “Five hundred tons can’t be siphoned off without anyone noticing,” another I.A.E.A. official told me.

This official told me that the I.A.E.A. has not been able to determine who actually prepared the documents. “It could be someone who intercepted faxes in Israel, or someone at the headquarters of the Niger Foreign Ministry, in Niamey. We just don’t know,” the official said. “Somebody got old letterheads and signatures, and cut and pasted.” Some I.A.E.A. investigators suspected that the inspiration for the documents was a trip that the Iraqi Ambassador to Italy took to several African countries, including Niger, in February, 1999. They also speculated that MI6—the branch of British intelligence responsible for foreign operations—had become involved, perhaps through contacts in Italy, after the Ambassador’s return to Rome.

Baute, according to the I.A.E.A. official, “confronted the United States with the forgery: ‘What do you have to say?’ They had nothing to say.”

ElBaradei’s disclosure has not been disputed by any government or intelligence official in Washington or London. Colin Powell, asked about the forgery during a television interview two days after ElBaradei’s report, dismissed the subject by saying, “If that issue is resolved, that issue is resolved.” A few days later, at a House hearing, he denied that anyone in the United States government had anything to do with the forgery. “It came from other sources,” Powell testified. “It was provided in good faith to the inspectors.”

The forgery became the object of widespread, and bitter, questions in Europe about the credibility of the United States. But it initially provoked only a few news stories in America, and little sustained questioning about how the White House could endorse such an obvious fake. On March 8th, an American official who had reviewed the documents was quoted in the Washington Post as explaining, simply, “We fell for it.”

The Bush Administration’s reliance on the Niger documents may, however, have stemmed from more than bureaucratic carelessness or political overreaching. Forged documents and false accusations have been an element in U.S. and British policy toward Iraq at least since the fall of 1997, after an impasse over U.N. inspections. Then as now, the Security Council was divided, with the French, the Russians, and the Chinese telling the United States and the United Kingdom that they were being too tough on the Iraqis. President Bill Clinton, weakened by the impeachment proceedings, hinted of renewed bombing, but, then as now, the British and the Americans were losing the battle for international public opinion. A former Clinton Administration official told me that London had resorted to, among other things, spreading false information about Iraq. The British propaganda program—part of its Information Operations, or I/Ops—was known to a few senior officials in Washington. “I knew that was going on,” the former Clinton Administration official said of the British efforts. “We were getting ready for action in Iraq, and we wanted the Brits to prepare.”

Over the next year, a former American intelligence officer told me, at least one member of the U.N. inspection team who supported the American and British position arranged for dozens of unverified and unverifiable intelligence reports and tips—data known as inactionable intelligence—to be funnelled to MI6 operatives and quietly passed along to newspapers in London and elsewhere. “It was intelligence that was crap, and that we couldn’t move on, but the Brits wanted to plant stories in England and around the world,” the former officer said. There was a series of clandestine meetings with MI6, at which documents were provided, as well as quiet meetings, usually at safe houses in the Washington area. The British propaganda scheme eventually became known to some members of the U.N. inspection team. “I knew a bit,” one official still on duty at U.N. headquarters acknowledged last week, “but I was never officially told about it.”

None of the past and present officials I spoke with were able to categorically state that the fake Niger documents were created or instigated by the same propaganda office in MI6 that had been part of the anti-Iraq propaganda wars in the late nineteen-nineties. (An MI6 intelligence source declined to comment.) Press reports in the United States and elsewhere have suggested other possible sources: the Iraqi exile community, the Italians, the French. What is generally agreed upon, a congressional intelligence-committee staff member told me, is that the Niger documents were initially circulated by the British—President Bush said as much in his State of the Union speech—and that “the Brits placed more stock in them than we did.” It is also clear, as the former high-level intelligence official told me, that “something as bizarre as Niger raises suspicions everywhere.”

What went wrong? Did a poorly conceived propaganda effort by British intelligence, whose practices had been known for years to senior American officials, manage to move, without significant challenge, through the top layers of the American intelligence community and into the most sacrosanct of Presidential briefings? Who permitted it to go into the President’s State of the Union speech? Was the message—the threat posed by Iraq—more important than the integrity of the intelligence-vetting process? Was the Administration lying to itself? Or did it deliberately give Congress and the public what it knew to be bad information?

Asked to respond, Harlow, the C.I.A. spokesman, said that the agency had not obtained the actual documents until early this year, after the President’s State of the Union speech and after the congressional briefings, and therefore had been unable to evaluate them in a timely manner. Harlow refused to respond to questions about the role of Britain’s MI6. Harlow’s statement does not, of course, explain why the agency left the job of exposing the embarrassing forgery to the I.A.E.A. It puts the C.I.A. in an unfortunate position: it is, essentially, copping a plea of incompetence.

The chance for American intelligence to challenge the documents came as the Administration debated whether to pass them on to ElBaradei. The former high-level intelligence official told me that some senior C.I.A. officials were aware that the documents weren’t trustworthy. “It’s not a question as to whether they were marginal. They can’t be ‘sort of’ bad, or ‘sort of’ ambiguous. They knew it was a fraud—it was useless. Everybody bit their tongue and said, ‘Wouldn’t it be great if the Secretary of State said this?’ The Secretary of State never saw the documents.” He added, “He’s absolutely apoplectic about it.” (A State Department spokesman was unable to comment.) A former intelligence officer told me that some questions about the authenticity of the Niger documents were raised inside the government by analysts at the Department of Energy and the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research. However, these warnings were not heeded.

“Somebody deliberately let something false get in there,” the former high-level intelligence official added. “It could not have gotten into the system without the agency being involved. Therefore it was an internal intention. Someone set someone up.” (The White House declined to comment.)

Washington’s case that the Iraqi regime had failed to meet its obligation to give up weapons of mass destruction was, of course, based on much more than a few documents of questionable provenance from a small African nation. But George W. Bush’s war against Iraq has created enormous anxiety throughout the world—in part because one side is a superpower and the other is not. It can’t help the President’s case, or his international standing, when his advisers brief him with falsehoods, whether by design or by mistake.

On March 14th, Senator Jay Rockefeller, of West Virginia, the senior Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, formally asked Robert Mueller, the F.B.I. director, to investigate the forged documents. Rockefeller had voted for the resolution authorizing force last fall. Now he wrote to Mueller, “There is a possibility that the fabrication of these documents may be part of a larger deception campaign aimed at manipulating public opinion and foreign policy regarding Iraq.” He urged the F.B.I. to ascertain the source of the documents, the skill-level of the forgery, the motives of those responsible, and “why the intelligence community did not recognize the documents were fabricated.” A Rockefeller aide told me that the F.B.I. had promised to look into it.

Mokhiber: Richard N. Perle is the chairman of the Defense Policy Board and a leading public advocate for war on Iraq. In the New Yorker magazine this week, Seymour Hersh reports that Perle is also managing partner in a venture capital company, Trireme Partners, that is positioned to profit from a war with Iraq. The federal Code of Conduct, which governs Perle in this matter, prohibits conflicts of interest. Henry Kissinger resigned from the 911 commission because of similar business conflicts. When asked on Sunday by Wolf Blitzer about the New Yorker article, Perle called Hersh "the closest thing American journalism has to a terrorist." Two questions. Given Perle's conflict of interest, and given the widespread public belief that this war is being driven by corporate interests -- war for oil, war for defense contracts, war for construction contracts -- does the President believe -

Fleischer: Whose informed judgement is that?

Mokhiber: Widespread public belief.

Fleischer: Widespread?

Mokhiber: Yes, widespread.

Fleischer: Widespread, or just that chair?

Mokhiber: No, widespread. Does the President believe that Richard Perle should resign from the Defense Policy Board? And the second question, do you agree with Richard Perle that Hersh is "the closest thing American journalism has to a terrorist."

Fleischer: Russell, there is absolutely no basis to your own individual and personal statement about what may lead to war. If anything leads to it is the fact that Saddam Hussein has refused to disarm. And I think you do an injustice to people, no matter what their background, if you believe that people believe that Saddam Hussein should be disarmed for any reason that suggests personal profit.

Mokhiber: What about the question Ari? Should he resign - and is he a terrorist?

Fleischer: Russell, you have made your speech.

Mokhiber: You didn't answer the question.

Fleischer: You have made your speech.

Ari & I: White House Press Briefing - March 13, 2003

The war is language,
          language abused
                    for Advertisement,
          language used
like magic for power on the planet

          —Allen Ginsberg, “Wichita Vortex Sutra” (1966)

If the first casualty of war is truth, the weapon of choice for its destruction is language. Tautology: “A war is a war.” We are caught in a barrage of language that is meant to destroy our capacity to interpret what is said, to make rational judgments, to evaluate moral choices, to visualize what is going on, to think the unthinkable, to remember, to imagine an alternative future, to connect to others, to use language for all its purposes, to convey content, to express emotion, to reveal its own signification, to make noise. Non sequitur: “Reassurance and Safety Fashion Show in Detroit: Valerie Hillery came because she is concerned. Not scared, she said, just concerned ‘because anything can happen.’” This destruction of truth by language as a military objective is being undertaken in multiple and reinforcing ways, primarily by the selection of metaphors and frame narratives that lock on to interpretive targets (what you are encouraged to think) so as to exclude collateral damage (anything else you might think), reinforced by their stultifying redundancy such that language is emptied of anything but its dumbed-down signification. [. . .]

Personification: “‘This is the head-of-the-snake conundrum,” said one senior official who was deeply involved in the planning for a post-Hussein Iraq.” Euphemism: “‘No one wants to commit themselves until it is clear regime change is happening.’” We are being saturated with the language of war games, policy scenarios, press conferences, official narratives, insider speculation, all scripted to be conveyed as if their assumptions were shared by everyone. “American military officials said the American soldiers had killed about 450 Iraqis and destroyed more than 35 vehicles. There was no word on American casualties.” At the same time, this language depends on a circularity in which the undeniable evidence of power (jets take off from aircraft carriers; military hardware lines up at the border; news media records surgical bombing campaigns; barefoot prisoners of war submit to troops) is juxtaposed with unavailable evidence of mysteries that may never be revealed (foremost among them, weapons of mass destruction as the rationale for war). For Gen. Tommy Franks, “there is no doubt that they exist” is equivalent to “our victory is sure.” Objective pseudo-facts are invented on the spot to explain rationales that have failed: that southern Iraqis have not revolted in support of the invasion = presence of “fedayeen,” so new to the public relations campaign that Gen. Tommy Franks cannot pronounce it. Metonymy: a “fedayeen” is a dark cipher, a shadowy particular that explains any event that does not go according to predetermined script, the antagonistic element that denies us our destiny. For it is a circular truth that everything can only go according to plan, a sublime blueprint known only to those closest to power: providence unfolds in mysterious ways. Narrative: “‘The moment the security apparatus of the country crumbles, the people will rise up,’ he said.” When will we convene a war crimes tribunal for the abuse of language, seen as a universal good? “Mr. Rumsfeld said today: I am very reluctant to run around the world encouraging people to rise up. . . . But I hope and pray they’ll do it at a time when there are sufficient forces nearby to be helpful to them rather than at a time where it simply costs their life and it’s a wasted life.” Driving to Kansas State University in Wichita, in a Volkswagen bus in February 1966, talking nonstop into a tape recorder as he listened to radio reports and took in the road signs along the way, Allen Ginsberg had a prescient vision of the condition of language we are in. Poetry: “Has anyone looked in the eyes of the wounded? / Have we seen but paper faces, Life Magazine? / Are screaming faces made of dots, / electric dots on Television—fuzzy decibels registering / the mammal voiced howl / from the outskirts of Saigon to console model picture tubes / in Beatrice, in Hutchinson, in El Dorado / in historic Abilene / O inconsolable!” The critique of the language is the first place to begin to attempt remove the veil to perception that has been imposed on us and to see things as they are. Pseudo-rationality based on lack of evidence or supporting argument: “It is difficult to conceive the volume of supplies required for a large combat force or the difficulty of delivering them where they are needed in a timely fashion.” We need to take the mechanized hardware of the language of war apart—by locating alternate evidence in multiple media, by questioning the pseudo-objectivity of its delusional conclusions, by unpacking its embedded metaphors and narrative frames, by thinking otherwise. Creative use of non sequitur: “War—what is it good for? Absolutely nothing.” We need to place our critical negativity in the language that surrounds us, as Allen Ginsberg did 37 years ago, as it is obvious the situation of language we are now in has grown even worse. Critical intervention: “The war is not the war; it is language.” To dismantle this war, in its causes and consequences, we must begin with language itself.

Read at a Day of Reflection on the War on Iraq, Wayne State University, 26 March 2003.

Before yesterday my worst worry was a Germany 1939-type scenario, but the protests of March 27 have reduced my worry to something like Pinochet’s Chile or present day China. Yesterday marked, for me, the return of street activism to New York City and to the evolving and now very real, anti-war (or as Betsy insists anti-Imperial Invasion) movement. All over people are organizing in trust-worthy cells and yesterday, ( in addition to the massive die-in and subsequent arrest of 215 activists) in several places along Broadway and other places, we shut down Business-As-Usual by shutting down traffic with banners, garbage, tape, chants (No More War) and cyclists circling preventing cars--at one point at the busy intersection of Broadway and Prince for at least 10-12 minutes. Cops were everywhere and paranoia can be debilitating. But the success of an action, the solidarity of the group, and the kindnesses we show each other, move us forward. -- Rachel Levitsky

Jason Christie, currently of Calgary, Alberta, ruminates on world and personal issues in the following poetre-mail transmission.

Good Day

When I woke up today. The phone rang. My friend said you can't use the word punctilious in a poem. It has most certainly been tity-one mondays since we last discussed Stompin' Tom Connors. That it was the phone when it rang. What I've been trying to say. Is that you can't use the word poem in a poem. Anymore, or over the phone early in tehe morning; that certain prisoners of war are or once were our friends, bastards, themselves outshined by the sun, even the sun that now shines through my bedroom window, past the little bonsai leaves and rubber alligator, over the blue sheets, the dark bluee sheets, the dark blue sheets which you have pulled up over your head and it is at least seven am.
Punctilious.

Good Day

Our hands were so tired from changing the lightbulbs that we saw above all those people's heads. Donald Rumsfield won't even be a name we'll recognize in an hundred years. Not even Americans. With their eye flashes. It happened when you threw the lard into the frying pan, the third degree burns all up and down my arms. And that makes my hands tired too, I guess.

Good Day

Today it ruins. You've got 48 hrs without Nolte and Murphy. Black droplets; tears rend the sky into what appears to be a beach replete with driftwood. Our hour.

Good Day

Once is has passed upon a time, cloaked Wagner, quick institute bellows our youngsters, gifted or otherwise accidental. No one was badly hurt. Control blasts across the room and the weather chinooks it should be said. Beasts rifle the pages and further the blue on blue aphasia. How come your legs work. Against understanding in such plain talk as this. Rooms move past confederate Canadians, evolution beyond mourning: one against many should reveal itself as a Bruce Willis sort of construct and therefore false; a storm out of nowhere, see how semi-colons work, that is, a reading...

Good Day

Spin it clicks awake, and the blue as in sheets, rewind, that it said humble returns, eternally yours, and the kerning got all fucked up so fast between us. The US and the rest. That's them's the breaks I guess. This windows platform expertise makes lines break, little green hashes advance up the column till they drive from dark green, evergreen, central intelligence to red, bright red, with a little element to heat it all up from the center, between the screens, those blue screens. A several thing. Multifold. Many are folded into a discussion of kitchen sinks and their relationship to poetry, the porcelain wasn't always nontoxic. Who doesn't have a problematic relationship to such an overwhelming colonizing force? The english language? What we do is squat, rent some ideas, turn the sound down, enliven. The green movement against the whalers. Interviews would suggest that even the grass is fed up with growth because of the latent incorporations of so many natural metaphors by business. Add vert i sing. The fundamentals changed teams. Damn carpet pulled itself out from under my feet. To sleep at some point later. Find William Carlos Williams' Pictures from Cavanaugh under my pillow since my girlfriend has a group project on his poem the fall of Mike Harris. It goes unnoticed. Bellows in the annals of history. While the market seems to be on an upward swing. Technologies on the front lines aching for just a few more feet of desert. In advance.

Good Day

Mannerists matter mostly to muttering mothers on mondays. My mother. It was around this time that her mother died from complications that arose during some 'minor' surgery. My grandmother. Chrome graves risen, stand the blades of grass above the stiff; caught in the wind that also moves the elm's leaves far above. Scarborough to Capitol Hill. A granite key scrapes between the lines on my front door for you to let yourself in, and in hindsight you made breakfast before I even got out of bed around noon. That sentence is dead. Money is information. Water doesn't have a wallet. Or a shed. Something like language. You said be patient and I probably muttered something like I will if you are the doctor. If I could go back, I'd make breakfast before you got to my place, and I'd also most likely not say that thing about you being a doctor. It is all economics at our feet, the rubble of war over the airwaves, where I discover even you have succumbed to the dynamics of pressure, water wears down, erodes, new lines of slight, it builds on all of our shoulders, that snow as if flakes to the ground again, through the goddamned streetlight that slipped itself right into the poem by virtue, by virtue of it having no idea about the war, or about this poem, or about the fact it is unnatural; a mockery even of the UN in all of its patience. Standing tall out of the clouds, those clouds that roll across the ocean, charging steeds, steelheads billows sails out front over the wild drops, deep wells between the waves, deep wells somewhere and then gone. Gone just as fast between the ebb and flow of what my mother said the other day about leaving her husband; the graveyard is the brightest landmark back home, in Milton. Then there's this wind again. You find the key between the lines at my front door, let yourself in, and to my belated surprise make blueberry pancakes, some coffee, wake me softly out of a deep sleep asking whether or not I slept well through the night, through the storms.

Good Day

I watched television at work today and wanted to scream at CNN and BBC world news that they were capitalizing on the suffering of millions. But then, why is this poem any different?

kré                                                 puc te
kré               Everything must             puk te
pek               be arranged                  li le
kre                to a hair                      pek ti le
e                   in fulminating               kruk
pte                order.                    

I learned yesterday
(I must be behind the times, or perhaps
   it's only a false rumor, one of those pieces
   of spiteful gossip that are circulated between
   sink and latrine at the hour when meals that
   have been ingurgitated one more time are
   thrown in the slop buckets),
I learned yesterday
one of the most sensational of those official
   practices of American public schools
which no doubt account for the fact that this
   country believes itself to be in the vanguard
   of progress.
It seems that, among the examinations or tests
   required of a child entering public school for
   the first time, there is the so-called seminal
   fluid or sperm test,

which consists of asking this newly entering
   child for a small amount of his sperm so it
   can be placed in a jar
and kept ready for any attempts at artificial
insemination that might later take place.
For Americans are finding more and more
   that they lack muscle and children,
that is, not workers
but soldiers,
and they want at all costs and by every possible
   means to make and manufacture soldiers
with a view to all the planetary wars which might
   later take place,
and which would be intended to demonstrate by
   the overwhelming virtues of force
the superiority of American products,
and the fruits of American sweat in all fields of
   activity and of the superiority of the possible
   dynamism of force.
Because one must produce,
one must by all possible means of activity replace
   nature wherever it can be replaced,
one must find a major field of action for human inertia,
the worker must have something to keep him busy,
new fields of activity must be created,
in which we shall see at last the reign of all the fake
manufactured products,
of all the vile synthetic substitutes
in which beautiful real nature has no part,
and must give way finally and shamefully before
   all the victorious substitute products
in which the sperm of all the artificial insemination
   factories
will make a miracle
in order to produce armies and battleships.
No more fruit, no more trees, no more vegetables,
   no more plants pharmaceutical or otherwise and
   consequently no more food,
but synthetic products to satiety,
amid the fumes,
amid the special humors of the atmosphere, on the
   particular axes of atmospheres wrenched violently
   and synthetically from the resistances of a nature
   which has known nothing of war except fear.
And war is wonderful, isn't it?
For it's war, isn't it, that the Americans have been
   preparing for and are preparing for this way step
   by step.
In order to defend this senseless manufacture from
   all competition that could not fail to arise on all
   sides,
one must have soldiers, armies, airplanes, battleships,
hence this sperm
which it seems the governments of America have had
   the effrontery to think of.
For we have more than one enemy
lying in wait for us, my son,
we, the born capitalists,
and among these enemies
Stalin's Russia
which also doesn't lack armed men.
All this is very well,
but I didn't know the Americans were such a warlike
   people.
In order to fight one must get shot at
and although I have seen many Americans at war
they always had huge armies of tanks, airplanes,
   battleships
that served as their shield.
I have seen machines fighting a lot
but only infinitely far
                behind
them have I seen the men who directed them.
Rather than a people who feed their horses, cattle,
   and mules the last tons of real morphine they have
   left and replace it with substitutes made of smoke,
I prefer the people who eat of the bare earth the delirium
   from which they were born
I mean the Tarahumara
eating peyote off the ground
while they are born,
and who kill the sun to establish the kingdom of black
   night,
and who smash the cross so that the spaces of space can
   never again meet and cross.

And so now you are going to hear the dance of the T U T U G U R I.
                                  Antonin Artaud (1947)

Trans. by Helen Weaver

Also:
http://www.ubu.com/sound/artaud.html

Poets for Peace, Poets Against the War and Poetry Is News invite all poets
to read poems against the war on the steps (near the lion) of the main
branch of The New York Public Library at 42nd St and 5th Ave on Friday March
28 at 1pm. Rain or shine. Look for the "Poets for Peace" banner.

We also invite all poets to an open reading on the steps of St. Mark's
Church at 131 E 10th St (on the corner of 2nd Ave) on Wednesday April 2 from
noon to 2pm. This is an open call for poets to bring their own and others'
anti-war poems.

For more info: www.poetsagainstthewar.org

This image is from the second piece of pro-war spam I've received in two days; both were offers for crap-ass jingoistic t-shirts (presumably, this is what you wear while learning how to enlarge your penis, buy Viagra online and and invest in African pyramid schemes). I heartily recommend Spamsieve or any Bayesian filtering system for dealing with this problem (Bayesian filtering is built into the new Mac mail application) -- it kills spam dead.

(Gothic News Service, 03/25) Viz-Ops ­ the White House/Pentagon organization in Iraq responsible for still photography and cinematic site management - has withdrawn its Cecil B. De Mille group from Media control of ground operations. The De Mille group - with an expertise in ancient Biblical and desert landscapes - was responsible for training and embedding network and cable film crews to shoot from inside Bradley tanks as they rolled into Iraq.

In off-the-record remarks, Jay Cagney, Viz-Ops new Director, revealed that the DeMille group achieved exactly what Command wanted in the visual capture of sublime and enduring patriotic views of hundreds of American tanks cruising in formation across the desert towards Baghdad ­ while no doubt simultaneously terrifying possible enemy resistance. These lead caravan images paired spectacularly with T.V. images of the golden clouds that lifted and hung radiantly over Baghdad during the first Air Force strikes on the City. Like a great symphony, it was a first class overture and feed to networks around the world."

Replacing the DeMille Group is B-Movie Enterprises (B-ME), a Culver City, California Group noted for its expertise in re-mixing fresh 35MM Prints of Thirties classics with remakes that already include Angels with Dirty Faces, Little Caesar, The Public Enemy and Dead End - titles that Viz-Ops suggests prophesy conflict conditions and prospects in cities through out Iraq.

"As troops now face house-to-house urban warfare," Cagney continued, "Viz-Ops has asked B-ME to provide Network and Cable film crews with review training in panning roof jumps, interior black and white shots, up-close weapon manipulation, and, most important, the skills required to portray urban combat personnel with a sophisticated, non-stressed appearance of accomplishing immediate objectives while keeping an overall grasp of their difficult mission. Viz-Ops is also studying the Bruce Lee¹s Kung Fu film techniques as well as the urban feel of Spike Lee¹s works ­ though it is already understood approaches of both these filmmakers may present problems for Fox Network's viewers at the white male right and center."

When asked about the finale of the war, particularly images of surrender and liberation, Cagney said, "That will require another kind of expertise and represents the huge challenge to balance the arrest of combatants with Iraqi joy at liberation from the grips of Saddam. We obviously have to make the Iraqi surrender as cordial as possible. Soldiers will have to do a quick turn around from fight-mode to a stance of generous care including medical and nutrition support. Viz-Ops is currently studying community scenes in Broadway Musicals ­ everything from West Side Story to Chorus Line. The War Finale and it's opening to U.S Occupation has to be uplifting, hopeful and optimistic for everyone."

The Pentagon refused to characterize Cagney's off-the-record remarks other than to say, "It would be totally erroneous to have Viz-Ops' work interpreted in a cynical manner. These are the lives of young American men and women soldiers who are at war with a ruthless dictator bent on creating harm and terror across the world. Media Images of this conflict and the portrayal of our peaceful objectives remain at the heart of our business."

Hundreds of chanting anti-war demonstrators lined Manhattan's Fifth Avenue on Thursday and dozens lay down in the street to begin a day of planned civil disobedience actions.

Officers, some in riot gear, clamped plastic handcuffs onto protesters and loaded them into police vehicles.

Anti-war groups had called for a day of widespread civil disobedience, including blocking busy intersections and staging a ``die-in'' to protest media and corporate ``profiteering from the war.''

As helicopters hovered overhead, the protesters -- chanting ``Hey-hey, ho-ho, Bush's war has to go!'' and ``Peace now!'' -- jammed police pens along Fifth Avenue between 49th and 50th streets, near St. Patrick's Cathedral and the Saks Fifth Avenue store.

One lane of traffic was reopened on that block 25 minutes later.

Police and security officers placed a web of barricades at adjacent Rockefeller Center, home of the GE Building, NBC and The Associated Press, to prevent a planned ``die-in'' there.

Organizers of the loose coalition, which calls itself M27, said the ``die-in'' was intended to symbolize Iraqi war victims.

One Fifth Avenue protester held a sign showing a picture of parrots and the words, ``Don't Parrot the Right-wing Propaganda.''

``There's a long-standing tradition of nonviolent witness, which we're enacting today,'' said the Rev. Patricia Ackerman, of the Fellowship of Reconciliation and Code Pink.

Another protester, Lee Whiting, 44, held up a sign that said, ``Embedded? or In Bed?'' Embedded, she said, means that ``journalists are presenting almost exclusively the military view of this war.''

``We're seeing glorification of technology. We're seeing heartwarming moments. We're not seeing much in the way of the real casualties inflicted on the Iraqis,'' said Whiting, a teacher from Manhattan.

The anti-war demonstrations are costing the city millions of dollars in police overtime and drawing resources away from crime-fighting and anti-terrorism operations, Police Commissioner Ray Kelly said Wednesday.

``This is more than protest, more than free speech,'' Kelly said. ``We're talking about violating the law.''

The traffic-blocking technique was used in recent protests in San Francisco, which led to thousands of arrests and complaints that police used excessive force.

Hundreds Protest in New York's Anti-War 'Die-In'

Anyone who's ever wondered why blogs are crucial alternatives to mainstream news sources need only look at an item from Monday's PRWeek on the White House plan to not only "disseminate, but also to dominate news of the conflict around the world."

Each morning, White House press secretary Ari Fleischer sets "the day's message" in an early-morning conference call to his British counterpart Alastair Campbell, White House communications director Dan Bartlett, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher, Pentagon spokesperson Torie Clarke, and White House Office of Global Communication (OGC) director Tucker Eskew.

PRWeek says "The OGC, an office born out of post-September-11 efforts to combat anti-American news stories emerging from Arab countries, will be key in keeping all US spokespeople on message. Each night, US embassies around the world, along with all federal departments in DC, will receive a'Global Messenger' e-mail containing talking points and ready-to-use quotes."

Further, "administration officials have made it clear they'll rely on independent journalists, 'embedded' by the Pentagon with military units, to act as one of their most reliable PR vehicles."

From Politech: a sudden price drop in the market for predictions on Saddam's date of demise indicates that gamblers think he may be able to hang onto power well into June.

Sites like Tradesports allow gambling on world political future events as well as sports. Clicking on the site's "Trading Screen" tab presents a set of odds on whether or not Hussein will be president of Iraq into April, May or June. In the last few days the graphs have shown a sharp decline in the percentage chance that he will be gone soon. The numbers change by the minute, just like stock futures.

War-hungry bettors can also trade on the colors for the monthly US national Security Alert Level March 2003 -- red, orange, yellow, blue and green.

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Nicole Maestri reports that following a ban earlier this week from airing live market reports from the floor of the New York Stock Exchange, Arabic-language television network al Jazeera has also been turned down by the Nasdaq Stock Market Inc.

Nasdaq spokeswoman Silvia Davi said Al Jazeera asked Nasdaq on Tuesday for permission to broadcast live reports from its building in Times Square, but the request was denied. She would not expand on why the Nasdaq refused. Earlier this week, the NYSE revoked the rights of al Jazeera reporters to broadcast from its trading floor, saying its credentials were for networks that provided "responsible" coverage.

"This is ridiculous," said Jeffrey Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy, a media watchdog group in Washington, D.C. "Clearly, it is a violation of press freedom."

Thursday, March 27th 2003 8:00 AM

conduct civil disobedience or go give your support in legal protest!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

NO BUSINESS AS USUAL
MASSIVE NON-VIOLENT CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE
DIE-IN AT ROCKEFELLER CENTER: 5th Ave. at 50th St. NYC

This direct action will target the media/government collusion that is promoting the war to further corporate interests. The Rockefeller Center area was chosen as the target since many media giants and corporations have offices there or nearby.

The plan is for a massive die-in on 5th Avenue at Rockefeller Center, with coordinated actions planned by affinity groups throughout the city.

There will also be space for a legal protest at the action.

Location:
5th Ave. at 50th St. New York New York
http://www.M27coalition.org

REM weighs in with the growing number of musicians producing antiwar songs with The Final Straw. The band's site currently features the song's complete lyrics as well as a rough studio mix in both streaming Quicktime and Windows Media formats. "This is the strongest voice I could think of to send out there" -- Michael Stipe.

[This just in from Musicians for Peace.]

www.protest-records.com

(as curated by Thurston Moore and Chris Habib)

exists for musicians, poets and artists to express LOVE + LIBERTY in the face of greed, sexism, racism, hate-crime and war

FIGHT THE GOOD FIGHT

All songs on this site are free to share, not to sell

Please forward

Mike Gerhardt's site features a series of screenshots of a Japanese TV show called Kodomo News ("Kids' News") that was "using toys and cartoons to show a trio of very glum-looking kids what was happening in Iraq. It was too bizzare to pass up, so I grabbed my camera and started snapping photos." The caption for this screenshot (there are 15 on the site) reads "Hussein in the middle of his Baghdad defenses."

When five captured US soldiers were paraded in front of the Iraqi television cameras on Sunday, Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, immediately complained that "it is against the Geneva convention to show photographs of prisoners of war in a manner that is humiliating for them".

George Monbiot of the Guardian responds "This being so, Rumsfeld had better watch his back. For this enthusiastic convert to the cause of legal warfare is, as head of the defence department, responsible for a series of crimes sufficient, were he ever to be tried, to put him away for the rest of his natural life."

Monbiot goes on to detail the following breaches of the Geneva Convention for which Rumsfeld is responsible:

[Rumsfeld's] prison camp in Guantanamo Bay, in Cuba, where 641 men (nine of whom are British citizens) are held, breaches no fewer than 15 articles of the third convention. The US government broke the first of these (article 13) as soon as the prisoners arrived, by displaying them, just as the Iraqis have done, on television. In this case, however, they were not encouraged to address the cameras. They were kneeling on the ground, hands tied behind their backs, wearing blacked-out goggles and earphones. In breach of article 18, they had been stripped of their own clothes and deprived of their possessions. They were then interned in a penitentiary (against article 22), where they were denied proper mess facilities (26), canteens (28), religious premises (34), opportunities for physical exercise (38), access to the text of the convention (41), freedom to write to their families (70 and 71) and parcels of food and books (72).

They were not "released and repatriated without delay after the cessation of active hostilities" (118), because, the US authorities say, their interrogation might, one day, reveal interesting information about al-Qaida. Article 17 rules that captives are obliged to give only their name, rank, number and date of birth.

[...]

The US government claims that these men are not subject to the Geneva conventions, as they are not "prisoners of war", but "unlawful combatants". The same claim could be made, with rather more justice, by the Iraqis holding the US soldiers who illegally invaded their country. But this redefinition is itself a breach of article 4 of the third convention, under which people detained as suspected members of a militia (the Taliban) or a volunteer corps (al-Qaida) must be regarded as prisoners of war.

Hot on the heels of the US Ambassador to Canada Paul Cellucci's statement that "security will trump trade," implying possible implications for cross-border traffic, comes a story on Wired News indicating that CompAtlanta, a company selling computer equipment on eBay, is refusing to "ship to, or accept bids from, Canada, Mexico, France, Germany or any other country that does not support the United States in our efforts to rid the world of Saddam Hussein. If you are not with us, you are against us."

EBay spokesman Kevin Pursglove said CompAtlanta was the only eBay merchant he knew of that is boycotting buyers for reasons related to the war. He said sellers can decide with whom they want to do business, but eBay frowns on posting overtly political messages. Pursglove said eBay ordered CompAtlanta to remove the auction item and to modify its message to bidders from Canada, Mexico, France and Germany.

By Reshma Kapadia

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Hacker attacks and technical glitches caused a string of headaches on Tuesday for a new English-language Web site launched by Arab satellite TV network Al Jazeera.

The Qatar-based network, already controversial in the West for airing messages from Osama bin Laden (news - web sites), has faced a storm of criticism in the United States for broadcasting Iraqi footage of five U.S. prisoners of war and at least eight corpses.

Its new site (http;//english.aljazeera.net) went live on Monday, but was quickly hit by hacker attacks -- as was the Arabic-language site (www.aljazeera.net).

Staff were unable to update the English site for about four hours on Tuesday, said it managing editor Joanne Tucker.

"We've had a lot of obstacles thrown in our way," Tucker said. "I thought the launch of this site would be quite smooth and wouldn't make too many waves, but the reaction has been amazing. It has been almost surreal."

Al Jazeera's information technology manager Salah Al Seddiqui said the company was also told by its Qatar-based vendor that U.S.-based DataPipe could no longer host its site from the end of the month. Al Seddiqui said the company was moving its servers to Europe.

Tucker said war sensitivities may have been behind the decision, but DataPipe said in a statement it was ending its relationship with a company that manages Al Jazeera's site on March 31. It said it had no direct ties with Al Jazeera.

The new English-language site has no multi-media capability but carried photos from the footage showing the U.S. prisoners of war. The Arabic-language site had the video, prompting a flood of traffic on Sunday.

Lycos cited that video as the factor that made Al Jazeera the most searched term on search engine, generating three times as much search activity as anything else.

The surge traffic badly hit the site's performance. Product manager Roopak Patel of performance tracker Keynote Systems said the site's performance "went to hell" on March 23.

Tucker said the new site, which for now is devoted exclusively to the war on Iraq (news - web sites), was a temporary operation pending a full launch tentatively set for mid-April.

"Every story on the site now has a byline. It should have been (that way) from the first day but it was just one of the glitches," she said.

Yahoo! News - New Al Jazeera Web Site Runs Into Headaches

[Transcription of a very good radio interview with Robert Fisk in Bagdhad.]

Live From Iraq, an Un-Embedded Journalist

Amy Goodman, Democracy Now! Host: Set the scene for us in Baghdad right now.

Robert Fisk, The Independent: Well, it’s been a relatively—relatively being the word—quiet night, there’s been quite a lot of explosions about an hour ago. There have obviously been an awful lot of missiles arriving on some target, but I would say it was about 4 or 5 miles away. You can hear the change in air pressure and you can hear this long, low rumble like drums or like someone banging on a drum deep beneath the ground, but quite a ways away. There have only been 2 or 3 explosions near the center of the city, which is where I am, in the last 12 hours. So, I suppose you could say that, comparatively, to anyone living in central Baghdad, it’s been a quiet night.

The strange thing is that the intensity of the attacks on Baghdad changes quite extraordinarily; you’ll get one evening when you can actually sleep through it all, and the next evening when you see the explosions red hot around you.

As if no one really planning the things, it’s like someone wakes up in the morning and says, “Let’s target this on the map today”, and it’s something which sort of characterizes the whole adventure because if you actually look at what’s happening on the ground, you’ll see that the American and British armies started off in the border. They started off at Um Qasr and got stuck, carried on up the road through the desert, took another right turn and tried to get into Basra, got stuck, took another right at Nasiriyah, got stuck—it’s almost as if they keep on saying, “Well let’s try the next road on the right”, and it has kind of a lack of planning to it. There will be those who say that, “No it’s been meticulously planned,” but it doesn’t feel like it to be here.

The Onion continues its history of devastating political satire this week with almost-too-real-to-be-funny items like U.S. Forms Own U.N. (Dick Cheney: "I can't tell you how much easier it is to achieve consensus when you don't have to worry about dissent") and Sheryl Crow Unsuccessful; War On Iraq Begins ("In spite of recording artist Sheryl Crow's strong protestations, including the wearing of a 'No War' guitar strap, the U.S. went to war with Iraq last week. 'Making the decision to go to war is never easy, but it's that much harder when you know Sheryl Crow disapproves,' White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said at a press conference Monday").

WASHINGTON - The US army said it gave the main Iraqi oil well firefighting contract to a unit of Halliburton Co., a firm once run by Vice President Dick Cheney, without any bidding.

Kellogg, Brown and Root, a unit of Houston, Texas-based Halliburton, was handed the contract by the Army Corps of Engineers, which has been placed in charge of fighting the blazes.

The contract had not been put out to tender, said the Corps spokesman, Lieutenant Colonel Gene Pawlik.

Kellogg, Brown and Root (KBR) had already been asked by the Pentagon to draw up plans for extinguishing oil well fires in Iraq, Pawlik noted.

"It made the most sense to engage them in the near term as the company to get the mission done because they were familiar with the details of the fires themselves and what would be needed," he said.

The value of the contract would depend on the scale of the work.

The chief of Britain's armed forces, Admiral Sir Michael Boyce, said Friday that Iraqi forces had set fire to seven oil wells in the south of the country.

KBR would claim the cost of its services plus two to five percent depending on how it executed the job, Pawlik said.

Shares in KBR parent Halliburton rose 54 cents or 2.68 percent to 20.66 dollars.

"KBR was selected for this award based on the fact that KBR is the only contractor that could commence implementing the complex contingency plan on extremely short notice," the company said in a statement.

KBR said it had teams of well control and engineering contractors preparing the initial phase.

The company was given a free hand to choose subcontractors for the work, the Corps spokesman said.

KBR chose Houston-based Boots and Coots International, with which it has a services and equipment partnership, and Wild Well Control Inc. as firefighting subcontractors.

President George W. Bush's spokesman, Ari Fleischer, said he did not have the details.

"I think the question that people will want answered is: Do we have a plan in place to put out the oil fires, and is it a good plan to put out the oil fires?," he told a news conference.

Bush asked lawmakers on Tuesday to approve some 3.5 billion dollars in aid to get Iraq back on its feet, including nearly half a billion for oil field repair.

In a statement late Monday, the Defense Department said the Army Corps of Engineers would rely largely on contractors to extinguish the oil well fires and assess the damage to facilities.

Halliburton Handed No-Bid Iraqi Oil Firefighting Contract

If news is the first casualty of war, the first victor is government. It is ironic that every war fought by Britain in the past century, justly in the cause of freedom, has led directly to a curtailment of freedom in favour of state control. The history of war runs in tandem with that of higher taxes, greater regulation and more government.

... an excellent op-ed piece from day 1 of the war outlining the UK history of income tax (invented to pay for hostilities against Napoleon), growth in officialdom ("The first surge in officialdom occurred in the Great War. By the time of the Second World War there were roughly 200,000 civil servants. Fifteen years after it had ended there were 375,000 and rising"), and regressive homeland security legislation ("After an IRA attack in 1974, the supposedly liberal Roy Jenkins introduced the Prevention of Terrorism Act, pledging in public that it was a “strictly temporary measure”. It gave the police extensive discretion to spy on, intern and deport citizens without trial. It has never been repealed").

MSNBC.com reports that a Taiwanese company is selling rice crackers wrapped in images of U.S. President Bush and Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. If only they had instituted some sort of polling system based on purchases.

And over on the Far Right is Star-Spangled Ice Cream, a self-described "conservative alternative to Ben & Jerry's" for Americans who "enjoy ice cream but do NOT enjoy seeing your money funneled to wacko left-wing causes". 76 bucks will get you four quarts of I Hate The French Vanilla, Iraqi Road, Smaller Governmint, and Nutty Environmentalist ...

USATODAY.com

Very good story by Angela Gunn with links to varoius blogs related to the war, such as this one by CNN journalist Kevin Sites -- it's been shut down temporarily by his employers but with luck will be up soon -- and the English language version of Al Jazeera (it seems to be quite slow, probably tons of traffic).

A crowd gathered in Louisiana to watch a 33,000-pound tractor smash a collection of Dixie Chicks CD's, tapes and other paraphernalia. To those familiar with 20th-century European history it seemed eerily reminiscent of . . . . But as Sinclair Lewis said, it can't happen here.

So begins a new op-ed piece by Paul Krugman for the Times, who uses the incident to segue into a discussion of the string of pro-war rallies that have been organized across the US by Clear Channel Communications, a key player in the radio industry with strong ties to the Bush presidency.

Krugman argues that "we're now seeing the next stage in the evolution of a new American oligarchy", where big business interests have an increasing say in government policy as "scores of midlevel appointees [...] now oversee industries for which they once worked." More depressing yet, he ends by noting that the role of the press as a watchdog for such matters has also been severely eroded, because "these days, the scandalmongers are more likely to go after journalists who raise questions."

Declan McCullagh's Politech is carrying a story stating that YellowTimes.org, a Canadian website, was shut down for two hours until they removed a photo of an American POW and a photo of a dead Iraqi child.

McCullagh says "YellowTimes told me that their hosting provider, Vortech Hosting, pulled the plug because of pressure from its upstream provider, Level3.net. Ogrish.com has posted a far more disturbing video clip and hasn't received any threats yet (at least as of mid-afternoon [March 24th])".

At one point, YellowTimes had posted an article on the incident here, but their hosting has been suspended entirely.

[from Samantha Sigler]

The Not in My Name Music project is a collaboration of artists (begun by DJ Spooky, Coldcut and DJ Goo) dedicated to forwarding a culture of resistance worldwide. The Not In My Name EP will soon be for sale worldwide, on Ninja Tune in Europe and the rest of the world and on Synchronic Records in the US. They are also providing MP3s of their music for free download on their home page, as well as on the Ninjatune and Synchronic Records sites.

All DJs and mashup aficionados should note that the Not in My Name home page also provides a vocal acappella track for the the Pledge of Resistance tune; the site says "Feel free to throw this into your mix whenever possible! For remix requests beyond live mixing, please contact us and we'll send you to the right people to discuss this further."

Some people hate lame subway poetry as much as they (um, "we") hate the Oil War. The following poem was spotted by not so soft on a London District Line tube this past weekend:

Sing a song of Esso
A packet full of lies
and oily greasy dollars
to help the climate fry
When the wallet opened
George Bush began to sing
"The planet may be burning
but I don't see a thing"

According to Viralmeister, several different poems were deployed; full text can be downloaded here.

March 23, 2003

Tonight I attended a planning meeting for direct action in NYC at Washington Square United Methodist Church. Over 33 groups were represented and over 150 showed up (I counted everyone but lost count after 152). The group was consensus based and made no decisions without every person in the room agreeing to it. United For Peace was there, Not in our Name was there, Act Now ws there, No blood For Oil, The Green Party was there, automous more anarchist oriented groups were there, and church groups.

The consensus was that Thursday, March 27th will be "NO BUSINESS AS USUAL" and will be a day that will rival San Fransicso in the scope of civil disobedience and direct action. The main mass action will be at 8:00 am at the Rockefeller Center and will be a die in. People will lay down in symbol of the dead in Iraq. Rockefeller Ctr. was chosen because GE is there who makes much of the military equipment, and several news organiztions are there, and this is the center of many other businesses like the NY Post, Lockheed Martin, and many other corporations that stand to benefit and support this war in many ways. That general area will be targeted heavily with massive civil disobedience. But the main call is for Rockefeller Ctr. at 8am in the morning. To go there and there will be a cue to lay down. This will be an act of civil disobedience and will be an arrestable offense, a misdemeanor. Most people will be issued a citation and released. The massive numbers of people that will likely turn out will preclude the police from detaining anyone for long (exactly what has happened in San Fran.)

This action is meant to be the mass action, and there will be break off groups throughout the city doing civil disobedience in many ways (all them at this group were committed to nonviolence). They are also calling for strikes or taking the day off work to have no business as usual. The goal is to literally shut this city down and not allow people to go on with normal routines as we drop bombs on others (bombs are dropping while you're shopping...we are going to prevent the shopping).

That is basically the what came of the meeting by consensus, and it is supported by all the major organizing groups in this city. And will be advertised starting tonite on email lists and fliers. Please distribute this information to everyone you know... We only have three days to organize this massive effort...but it can and will be done.

Hope this information was helpful and I am sure it will delight you as much as it did me while we were planning it

Dave Schamuch daveschmauch@hotmail.com

Monday March 24, 2003
The Guardian

A 29-year-old, middle-class man somewhere in the suburbs of the Iraqi capital has become one of the most intriguing stories on the internet. Known simply as Salam Pax, his online diary has fascinated the web's myriad users with its sharp observations of a tumultuous six months for the beleaguered Iraqi nation that has included a presidential election, yet another UN resolution, its resulting weapons inspectors and, of course, the approach of war.

Story continues below; here's the blog Where is Raed ?

As the build-up to conflict intensified, more and more people became drawn - through forwarded emails, weblogs, or message boards - to the compelling musings of what appeared to be an educated, if cynical, young man in Baghdad waiting for war. His diary, mysteriously titled Where is Raed?, has recorded, with humour and in eloquent detail, the anxieties of the Iraqi capital's besieged citizens as they awaited attack - their rush to tape up windows, the stockpiling of groceries, the increased presence of menacing Ba'ath party officials on the streets. By last Friday, as American B52s finally homed in on Baghdad, the website had become the most linked-to web diary on the internet as visitors, in fear of his safety, eagerly awaited his next posting. At the time of going to press, Salam hadn't posted again since Friday.

But is he real? It has been one of the most popular and debated questions on the internet for weeks. What has been troubling many visitors to the site is the question of whether Pax is who he claims he is. Never ones to spurn a conspiracy theory, internet users have queried whether he is an ordinary Iraqi man located in a Baghdad suburb, as he vehemently says he is, and put forward wild claims that he could be anything from a Mossad agent to a Saddam stooge intent on pumping out misinformation for the gullible masses.

To start with, there is the mystery of his cryptic name. It doesn't take long to realise that "Salam Pax" is a simple play on words meaning "peace" and "peace" in Arabic and Latin respectively. This mirroring motif is reflected in the website's address, www.dear_raed.blogspot.com, with its palindromic "dear" and "Raed". There has also been a lot of chatter about the true identity of the eponymous "Raed" from the website's title, Where is Raed? Is "Raed" a euphemism for a family member in trouble with the Iraqi authorities? Or is he Salam's gay lover? Speculation has been rife. But isn't he just understandably protecting his identity?

But the doubters seem to ignore the most compelling evidence that Salam is who he says he is - the detail of his day-to-day life. Those who know Baghdad well, and who have read the diary closely, say there is no doubt in their mind that whoever is writing it is currently resident in the Iraqi capital. The author may display evidence of spending time in the west (possibly Britain, though he does use Americanisms) with his cynical sense of humour and love of David Bowie lyrics, but the reams and reams of fascinating detail about domestic and street life in Baghdad are highly convincing. After all, why would he make it all up, especially for the long period before it even became the internet phenomenon it is today. As Salam himself said last Friday: "Please stop sending emails asking if I were for real. Don't believe it? Then don't read it. I am not anybody's propaganda ploy. Well, except my own."

Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Baghdad calling

The following is a message from Amy Partridge, who was arrested in Chicago under the Patriot Act while exercising her constitutional rights. Press accounts of these arrests last Thursday are inaccurate: please help us get this message out. -- Matthias Regan

Dear all,

I want to warn you all about what happened to hundreds of peaceful protesters, myself included, at the rally and march on Thursday night in downtown Chicago.  Both the rally and march were entirely peaceful.  I saw not one instance of civil disobedience or aggro behavior.  Police escorted us on the March and onto Lake Shore Drive.  We were never asked to disperse or threatened with arrest.  When police prevented us from marching on Michigan Ave marchers moved on.  We were, however, surrounded by hundreds of police a few block later and prevented from leaving.  No one around me intended to or wanted to be arrested.  Everyone asked to be allowed to leave and disperse.  I have since heard this was not how the media reported it but more than once the crowd chanted “let us go” and “we will disperse.”  The police told individuals who asked that they could leave from some other side of the crowd but in EVERY instance I witnessed this was not the case and no one was allowed to leave, including a 17 year old boy and his 14 year old sister.  At first police rushed the crowd and pulled out 10 people at a time.  I and everyone around me was arrested despite the fact that we were standing on the sidewalk (not in the street) and that we asked again and again to be allowed to leave since we had done nothing illegal.  A cop grabbed me, put me in cuffs, and told me I was being charged with mob action and that I should be glad I was not in Iraq.  I have since heard that people were allowed to leave much later but we were told that everyone would be arrested sooner or later.

Close to 300 (at least) women were held in custody for hours.  I was in custody for over 20 hours.  Despite the fact that we were told that we be released as soon as we were processed, I was held in a jail cell from midnight until 4:00 pm the next day.  During this time I was not allowed a phone call, not read my rights, and my charge was not explained to me.  We were all told numerous times that we would be released on I-Bonds, meaning once we were processed (mug shots taken and finger prints sent to the federal registry) we could sign ourselves out.  A friend of mine came to get me at 8:00 am and was told I would be released by noon.  By 2:00 she was told I had been “lost” and might not be “found” or released until Monday.  When she offered $100 cash at 4:00 (despite the fact that we had been told explicitly numerous times that we did not require bail money) I was “found” and released.  Only because a cell phone had been smuggled into my cell block was I able to contact this friend or to hear the news that they were suddenly and inexplicably requiring $100 bail to release us.  The police allowed no one to call friends and family to arrange this payment.  We were all told that if we got arrested again within 24 hours of signing our bond we would be charged with a FELONY.  Waiting parents and friends were told that if we SO MUCH AS SHOWED UP AGAIN AT ANOTHER RALLY we would be charged with a felony.  This, of course, cannot be right.  But this is the mood of Ashcroft’s America.

The average age of the arrestees as far as I could tell was between 17-25.  No one I met had ever been arrested before or had had any intention of being arrested for civil disobedience Thursday night.  At least 3 women that I met were tourist that had gotten trapped in the crowd.  This fact was explained both by the women themselves and many of the protesters but they were treated no differently and as far as I know held for the same amount of time as the rest of us.  While some the cops were fine, a number threatened us and many ridiculed us.  They treated us with disdain and disgust and booked us as though we were terrorists under the new Patriot Act and not peaceful protesters.  It was a miserable and shocking experience.  This may have been the most egregious response and it may be that no other peaceful protesters will be trapped and arrested as we were.  But I recommend if you intend to go to any future protests that you make sure you have a number of a lawyer or the ACLU memorized.  I would also suggest that you let someone know you are going and that if you do not call them upon your return that they should check to see if you have been arrested. Those of us that had it worst and were held the longest did not have anyone waiting for us and demanding our release.

All the best,
Amy Partridge
PhD Candidate Performance Studies
Northwestern University

Michael Moore: Whoa. On behalf of our producers Kathleen Glynn and Michael Donovan from Canada, I'd like to thank the Academy for this. I have invited my fellow documentary nominees on the stage with us, and we would like to — they're here in solidarity with me because we like nonfiction. We like nonfiction and we live in fictitious times. We live in the time where we have fictitious election results that elects a fictitious president. We live in a time where we have a man sending us to war for fictitious reasons. Whether it's the fictition of duct tape or fictition of orange alerts we are against this war, Mr. Bush. Shame on you, Mr. Bush, shame on you. And any time you got the Pope and the Dixie Chicks against you, your time is up. Thank you very much. [video here.]

Zack de la Rocha, ex vocalist of Rage Against the Machine, and the one and only DJ Shadow have released a new protest tune, "March of Death," on the subject of the current war. It's available for download on de la Rocha's website. "Artists, be they painters, actors, writers or musicians, have a responsibility to reflect and interpret the world around them. Our current administration's foreign policy strikes me as being reckless, inhumane and hopelessly out of step with the so-called 'values' it claims to defend." -- DJ Shadow

Three Squares Press is pleased to announce the Toronto launch of The Common Sky: Canadian Writers Against the War. The event will be held at The Cameron House (408 Queen Street West) on Monday, March 31, at 7:30 p.m. The book will be available for sale at a special launch rate.

Published by Three Squares Press, The Common Sky: Canadian Writers Against the War brings together the work of more than 80 Canadian writers, expressing their opposition to a U.S.-led war on Iraq. Featuring a stirring foreword by Alistair MacLeod, The Common Sky includes many of this country's most recognized writers, including: Margaret Atwood, Robert Kroetsch, Christian Bök, Canada's Poet Laureate George Bowering, Fred Wah, Nicole Brossard, Daphne Marlatt, Steven Heighton, Gerry Shikatani, Maggie Helwig, and many more. A complete list of authors can be found on the Three Squares website.

For more information, email Mark Higgins or call (416) 406-0591.

Please feel free to distribute this widely.

We knew before the illegal invasion of Iraq began that the U.S. government would be pushing legislature through Congress, and we agreed that we'd have to pay attention to that. (Please note: This is not a war; Patriot II itself states that the U.S. has not been involved in a war in more than 60 years.) While we mourn for those who are suffering and dying under weapons of mass destruction, let's remain close in our communities and active in our dialogues.

WE ARE ALL TERRORISTS
The first page alone of the Domestic Security Enhancement Act (aka Patriot II) is off-the-charts alarming. In defining terrorism, Section 101: Individual Terrorists as Foreign Powers reads, "This provision would expand FISA's definition of "foreign power" to include *all* persons, regardless of whether they are affiliated with an international terrorist group, who engage in international terrorism."

Proceeding to Section 102: Clandestine Intelligence Activities by Agent of a Foreign Power: "FISA currently defines "agent of a foreign power" to include a person who knowingly engages in clandestine intelligence gathering activities on behalf of a foreign power -- but only if those activities "involve or may involve a violation of" federal criminal law. Requiring the additional showing that the intelligence gathering violates the laws of the United States is both unnecessary and counterproductive.. Any person who engages in clandestine intelligence gathering activities for a foreign power would qualify as an "agent of foreign power," regardless of whether those activities are federal crimes."

"Clandestine"?

"Intelligence"?

So, with law out the window, how are these offenses qualified, and by whom? If detainment is at the sole discretion of the Attorney General, and detainees are not only denied the right to trial, but denied contact with *all persons*, then this administration is indeed positioned to detain anyone perceived to be an Other, be it an international resident or a domestic dissident.

"Terrorist"?

You can download Patriot II at
www.public-i.org/dtaweb/report.asp?ReportID=502&L1=10&L2=10&L3=0&L4=0 &L5=0

RACIAL PROFILING
"Since September 11, the INS and FBI have detained over 1,200 immigrants, mainly of Arab or South Asian (especially Pakistani) origin. Most are accused only of minor immigration violations, such as overstaying a visa. Despite Attorney General Ashcroft's assurances to the contrary, many are being held without access to legal assistance or proper care."
www.drumnation.org/stopdc.html

"SEVIS is a national computer system operated by the INS.. Under SEVIS, information on every international student is automatically provided to the government via computer. Much more information on each student collected and input. SEVIS works like the Interpol database. The information is shared among federal agencies (and even other countries!), and the student has no control over what is provided."
www.stopsevis.org

SEND A FREE FAX URGING CONGRESS TO STOP THE PROFILING
www.aclu.org/ImmigrantsRights/ImmigrantsRights.cfm?ID=11561&c=95

INS DETAINEES: WHERE ARE THEY NOW?
In the two months following the attacks, the Justice Department refused to release specific information about detainees. Groups estimated that more than 1,000 people had been detained, but it was unclear who they were, why they had been detained, or whether any had been released.
www.rcfp.org/secretjustice/terrorism/detainment.html

"The Department of Justice has argued that disclosing the names and other information about post- September 11 detainees held on immigration charges and opening their immigration hearings to the public could compromise its terrorism-related investigations." Yet, "it is difficult to square the Department of Justice's contention that terrorist organizations are extremely sophisticated and could put together bits and pieces of information from hundreds of hearings around the country, with the argument that official disclosure would alert such organizations to who has been detained. Sophisticated terrorist groups likely already know through their own networks whether any of their members or allies have been arrested."
www.hrw.org/reports/2002/us911/USA0802-02.htm#P474_104537

LEGGO MY FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT!
"[T]he DSEA would revoke key elements of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), enacted to prevent government from keeping secrets from the public unless a legitimate security concern exists. Currently, FOIA gives us the right to know if a missing person is in the custody of any government agency. But under DSEA, anyone -- even U.S. citizens -- could be detained secretly in connection with any "terrorist" investigation, a term lacking legal definition.
reclaimdemocracy.org/civil_rights/patriot_act_ii_oped.html

KEEPING THE WORLD SAFE FOR HUMANITY
A NYTimes article reveals that the treatment of U.S. military prisoners at Guantánamo Bay has yielded criticism: "without individual hearings to determine the prisoners' status, without charges and trials, critics see Guantánamo as a synonym for human rights violations. While there is no indication of physical torture.. they still lack the basic legal rights that many countries, including the United States, have agreed are fundamental even to warriors."

Gen. Rick Baccus of the Army, who commands the detention center at Guantánamo Bay, says, "While the public debates the technicalities of how these people should be classified," he said, "we will continue to follow the traditions of humane treatment." He added: "In other countries, these detainees would not be heard from again."

Patriot II would make it possible indeed that these detainees would not be heard from again. Even the directors of the U.S. military's most aggressive jails acknowledge that Patriot II is contrary to USAmerican concepts of justice.
www.nytimes.com/2002/09/16/international/americas/16DETA.html

PRESUMED GUILTY: ANSER MEHMOOD
Anser Mehmood came to the U.S. from Pakistan in 1989. "On [September 11, 2001], he failed to make a scheduled delivery to Washington, DC. Mehmood was taken into custody along with several thousand other men of Middle Eastern and South Asian origin. Mehmood remains here in custody although it turned out that it was his company that cancelled his September 11th shipment to Washington when they learned of the Pentagon bombing."
www.pbs.org/now/transcript/transcript_family2.html

The official charge on Anser Mehmood are an overstayed visa and and altered security card (to secure employment). Uzma Mehmood, Anser's wife, and their children have been forced to return to Pakistan, while Anser remains in a NJ jail. "He is held without a bond on a very specious affidavit put in by an FBI agent. And put in the special housing unit otherwise known as 'The Hole'. It's solitary confinement he's locked down 23 and a half hours a day. He's fed through a slot in the door."
www.pbs.org/now/transcript/transcript_familydivided.html Stories of other innocent detainees are here:
www.hrw.org/reports/2002/us911/USA0802-01.htm#P217_31161

"I DIDN'T SPEAK OUT"
They came for the Communists, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Catholic.
Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak out for me.
-- Pastor Martin Niemoller

The climate is rapidly changing such that it is more and more likely that a good number of U.S.-born citizens might be subject to detainment. I'm sure I'm a good candidate, with the money I have given and continue to give to organizations such as MoveOn.org and ZNet, which are today considered treasonous at best.

How might they know who I've donated money to? Well for starters, a new security program to be implemented by Delta Airlines later this month will mean that when you book a flight to or from one of three undisclosed airports, you will be subject to a credit check, an investigation of your banking history, and a criminal background check. The controls on how this information will be used has not been adequately defined. This appears to be illegal. It is an egregious invasion of privacy.
www.nytimes.com/2003/03/06/business/06FLY.html?ex=1047531600&en=27fa9 893300c6439&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

SAUDI SUSPECTS OFF LIMITS

Maybe one reason the number of detainees is so high is, they're looking for a needle in a haystack: an innocent on whom to pin a colossal, heinous crime. from an interview with journalist Greg Palast:

"In the eight weeks since the attacks, over 1,000 suspects and potential witnesses have been detained. Yet, just days after the hijackers took off from Boston aiming for the Twin Towers, a special charter flight out of the same airport whisked 11 members of Osama Bin Laden's family off to Saudi Arabia. That did not concern the White House.

"Their official line is that the Bin Ladens are above suspicion - apart from Osama, the black sheep, who they say hijacked the family name. That's fortunate for the Bush family and the Saudi royal household, whose links with the Bin Ladens could otherwise prove embarrassing. But Newsnight has obtained evidence that the FBI was on the trail of other members of the Bin Laden family for links to terrorist organisations before and after September 11th.

"This document is marked "Secret". Case ID - 199-Eye WF 213 589. 199 is FBI code for case type. 9 would be murder. 65 would be espionage. 199 means national security. WF indicates Washington field office special agents were investigating ABL - because of it's relationship with the World Assembly of Muslim Youth, WAMY - a suspected terrorist organisation. ABL is Abdullah Bin Laden, president and treasurer of WAMY."
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/events/newsnight/1645527.stm

More from Palast:

"FBI agents had wanted to check into two members of the Bin Laden family, Abdullah and Omar, but were told to stay away by superiors -- until September 13, 2001. By then, Abdullah and Omar were long gone from the United States.
www.guerrillanews.com/government/doc1148.html

"The intelligence agencies had been told to "back off" from investigations involving other members of the Bin Laden family, the Saudi royals, and possible Saudi links to the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Pakistan."
www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,589168,00.html

[Editorial Note: I want to be clear that this reporting is not anti-Saudi; it is of course offered to evidence the lack of integrity and justice in the current U.S. administration]

WHY WAIT FOR PATRIOT II? DETAIN TODAY! Sadly, even without Patriot II, immigrants are being detained on trivial charges, without recourse:

Rules on Detention Widened: FBI, Marshals Can Hold Foreigners: Attorney General John D. Ashcroft has issued orders that allow FBI agents and U.S. marshals to detain foreign nationals for alleged immigration violations in cases where there is not enough evidence to hold them on criminal charges, according to Justice Department officials and a copy of the rules.
www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A56948-2003Mar19.html

Registration Program Problems Cited: Immigrants' Attorneys Kept From Investigative Interviews: "The failure to provide clear and explicit directions to local immigration officials is inexcusable given the absolute right to legal counsel," said Lucas Guttentag, director of the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project. He charged that the "foot-dragging" could be explained only by a reluctance to dig into the matter before the registration deadlines have passed.
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A55994-2003Mar19.html

HOW MUCH BAD HISTORY CAN WE BEAR TO REPEAT? Let's not forget FDR's passage of Executive Order 9066, which led to the internment of 110,000 Japanese Americans between 1942 and 1944.
www.sscnet.ucla.edu/aasc/ex9066/

WHO HOW & WHAT 2 RELAY Many thanks to contributors Natasha Dwyer, Allison Cobb, and Tom Orange.

Thanks to everyone for participating. I'm sorry to say that I'm unable to manage unsolicited content for Relay; if you find something to circulate, why not relay it directly to your own address book? We like it when those cats at Clamor Magazine say, Become the Media!

Subscription requests go to mirakove_relay@yahoo.com

TOY SURPRISE! A friend reminded me a few months ago that throughout our fighting and disgust, we need to make a world worth saving. Pursue beauty. Laughter. Celebrate our relationships. In that spirit, I encourage you to visit some terrific NYC subway graffiti from the 1970s:
www.at149st.com/

20.03.03, Bilkent University, Ankara, Turkey

Suddenly, after months of thinking about war but having nothing besides the media to focus our attention on it, there are signs of it everywhere we look. I returned home from school yesterday to discover notices in the lobby of our building outlining security procedures for air attacks. “Apparently there’s a bomb shelter in the next building,” Glenys said with an eghads look.

It’s highly unlikely there will be any spillover of this conflict into Turkey. Although it is possible that Turkey will soon be engaged in a conflict of its own with the northern Iraqi Kurds. We’re not hearing much about what it currently happening at the Turkey-Iraq border.

A pair of men tested the generators in a nearby building this morning. They rumbled to life with the clanky growl of an old mechanical beast that’s been hibernating. A short while later, as Euan and I were doing our usual Magpie count out the window, a jet roared over the campus at great speed heading southeast, as if to confirm that Turkey has indeed opened its airspace to coalition forces. Vanloads of Jandarma tool around the area incessantly. We start to try to interpret these signs.

Being a new dad in times like these is an uncanny and confusing experience. It’s jarring to look at my son and see so much innocence and wonder and be thinking about people dying and suffering off in the distance. I told my son what was happening because we always tell him everything that’s happening (“Daddy’s licking oatmeal off his thumb Euan!"). Again I had Oppen to put some texture to this feeling I have for my son with regard to the war:

My daughter, my daughter, what can I say
Of living?

I cannot judge it.

We seem caught
In reality together my lovely
Daughter

Meanwhile, life goes on, but in a much different way, with a much different feeling to it, naturally. I greeted one of my students yesterday and asked her how she was. “Uptight,” she said. It’s difficult to teach or sit for classes when your mind is elsewhere. I sit in my office and stare off into space for periods of time, my mind reeling. When I snap out of it, I realize I must get my act together, and I start to scurry in my head even more.

I’ve made last minute adjustments to the syllabus of my American Poetry class in an attempt to keep focus on both poetry and the war. I put Oppen’s Of Being Numerous, Williams’ Introduction to The Wedge, and selections from Reznikoff’s Testimony on for this week. This work has generated good discussion and, to the extent that they want to, has allowed my students to use class discussions as a forum for their thoughts and feelings about the war.

On Thursday’s class I read from Of Being Numerous and asked my students to listen with an ear toward the poem and with an ear toward Baghdad, to see if this poem in any way enabled them to focus on the war. When I asked them if the poem helped or hindered their attempt to focus on the war several students said they went into and out of focus about the war, but that the poem helped them focus on experience and what that is. How do you experience something you’re not experiencing? If war is meaningless, then what is poetry?

I read the Williams stuff I posted to the list on Thursday. Poetry isn’t a turning away from the war, it is the war, “merely a different sector of the field.” How can that be?

We talked about objectivism as a poetry of attention. Attention to the very facts of existence and to time, what that dialectic produces in the mind and in language.

We had also read for that day selections of Charles Reznikoff’s amazingly affecting poem Testimony. Two students introduced the poem and got a discussion going about the discrepancy between the lack of emotion in the language and the deeply emotional effect that that language produces when you read it.

Then a student named Berna compared the poems to “the media,” to news. I told the class about one of Pound’s definitions of poetry: “Poetry is news that stays news.” It turned out to be the perfect way to account for the relevance of reading a poem that was published in the 60’s, and which incorporated images of WW2 and Vietnam, to focus our attention on a war that was happening while we were talking.

I ended class about 8 minutes early, but then something very unexpected happened. None of my students got up to leave. None of them even stirred. There was a short silence and then another student picked up the discussion again, and we continued talking as if class was still in session.

But the atmosphere in the room had changed completely. I was no longer presiding and everyone was there by choice. The classroom turned into a meeting place. What a freaky feeling it was to have everything change so dramatically like that with no apparent activity to produce it. I felt a lot calmer after this class than I have in days. The two students who exited the classroom with me told me in Turkish to take good care (“kendine iyi bak”). Normally they just say, in English, “See you.”

Scott

Scores of Readings Held Around the World
Poets Vow to Continue Working for Peace

March 22, 2003

Even as bombs destroy Baghdad and other Iraqi towns, lovers of poetry have continued to gather to read poems and cry out for peace over the past 72 hours. In Karachi, Pakistan, poets, writers and intellectuals of the Arts Council gathered at the Indus Valley School of Art & Architecture in a reading titled "SPEAK OUT! Poetry for Peace," sponsored by Tehrik Khidmatunnas Secretariate, a charity organization. In Temuco, Chile, poets gathered in a Wednesday reading called "Words Against War." In Tucson, Arizona, poets held a reading and non-violent public protest against the attack on Iraq, called "Poets' Brains Chained to the Ground," at the Federal Courthouse. And in Seattle, poets gathered at the Richard Hugo House for a 4-hour poetry vigil Friday, declared World Poetry Day by UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization).

Poets Against the War converged, read poetry, and lifted their voices in protest at Acqui Terme, Italy; Austin, Texas; and London, Ontario, Canada. In the remote little town of Gustavus-Glacier Bay, Alaska, the Gustavus Peace Poets met at their local library to read their own poems and selections from poetsagainstthewar.org, and to deliver a copy of the anthology of 13,000 poems to the Superintendent of the Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve.

The beat goes on. From Paris to Pisa to Philadelphia, poets are speaking out for a world in which compassion and non-violence will ultimately prevail over the Bush administration's philosophy that horrendous crimes are justifiable in the service of its unilateralist agenda. Our call for peace is more critical than ever before. Please join us. Organize a reading. Join a protest. Lift your voice.

Create a reading of Poetry Against the War.

Create a presentation to a government or organization of 13,000 antiwar poems, a roster of 12,000 poets and a showcase of 35 chapbook poems.

While it is important to record and acknowledge the deep sadness and sense of devastation so many of us feel, we must continue to channel and broaden our efforts for peace and justice. Remember that history is made by millions. Together we have created a presence on the world stage that can serve as a limit and counterweight to future wars, and the seed of a healthier world created by the conscience of the true majority.

We encourage you to read a thoughtful, eloquent article at Common Dreams by Archbishop Desmond Tutu and Ian Urbina titled Antiwar Thinking: Acknowledge Despair, Highlight Progress on Moral Preemption.

-- Your friends at poetsagainstthewar.org.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/22/arts/22BRIL.html

A grim view of the future from Steven Brill.

Neo-Totalitarianism
Nicolas Buchele, Arab News Staff

http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=23868

JEDDAH, 19 March 2003 - The person of the US president is an irrelevance. To
appeal to George W. Bush - amusing character though he may be - is like
berating a broom for omitting to sweep in the corners.

[comments involving Hannah Weiner & clairvoyance as resistance follow]

Neo-Totalitarianism
Nicolas Buchele, Arab News Staff

http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=23868

JEDDAH, 19 March 2003 - The person of the US president is an irrelevance. To
appeal to George W. Bush - amusing character though he may be - is like
berating a broom for omitting to sweep in the corners.

The new totalitarianism prevailing in America and taking hold in its
satellites around the world has learned important lessons from the failed
experiments of the past. The first of these lessons is that the greatest
liability to the survival of a regime is a strong and erratic leader.

A point often made in history classes is that Hitler should have stopped at
Kiev instead of thinning out his eastern front to move on toward Moscow.

Thus without Hitler's deranged ambitions, the Third Reich might really have
lasted a thousand years. Similarly, if Stalin had kept his genocidal
ambitions in check, the Soviet Union might have continued to enjoy its
initial popularity among sections of the West and at home.

With these examples in mind, the leader has been eliminated as a factor in
US politics. George W. Bush's very nullity as a politician throws into
relief the fact that the US has long been governed, not by its people, but
by interests that are happy to remain largely anonymous, do not rely on
individuals for their hold on power, and are recognizable in public mainly
by a soothing corporate blue.

Americans often seem baffled that others fail to admire their system of
government. They know after all that in the US there exists a lively culture
of debate, where the whole lunatic spectrum of opinion can find a platform
of one kind or another (though at the same time the difference between the
political parties it is actually possible to elect is vanishingly small).

They have a vibrant and largely unchecked artistic community. They have the
first amendment.

Even Greg Palast, at the end of his expose of corporate power The Best
Democracy Money Can Buy, found himself heartened by the American culture of
customer complaint, the notion that you have enforceable rights and can sue
for them in a court of law. This is, after all, the nation that gave us the
concept of "animal rights."

Hollywood is happy to feed this perception by producing blockbusters like
Erin Brockovitch and The Insider, where ordinary people take on corporations
and win, in other words, films which, by seeming to challenge, actually
affirm the existing order.

The reason for all this is that the new totalitarianism has learned a second
lesson from its heavy-handed predecessors. If artists and intellectuals were
able to do precisely nothing about Hitler or Stalin or any of the legion of
tin-pot dictators around the world, it follows that you might as well have
freedom of expression.

In the new totalitarian system, people can say whatever they like, and it
makes absolutely no difference.

The impending war on Iraq is only one example among many of a supposedly
sovereign public completely powerless in the face of a government bent on a
course of action.

That this should surprise some people outside America is odd. Proponents of
the enlightened self-interest of nations like the late Alan Clark MP - who
argued that it would have been better for Britain's imperial status if it
had signed a peace with Hitler in 1941 - have long held that nations do not
have morals.

They have interests. Thus the idea clogging up the editorial pages of
American papers that people ought to be grateful to the US is childish.
Alliances are formed where the interests of nations coincide or where one
nation expects to take advantage of another.

In other words, America has never been a moral guardian to the rest of the
world, and it would be peculiar to expect it to be. It has simply more
astutely safeguarded its interests, except where it has allowed its
interests to become distorted in countries like Vietnam. But these blunders
have long been rectified.

The neo-conservative writer P.J. O'Rourke some years ago said the Americans
had won the Vietnam war, and so they have - if not the one they were
fighting. Vietnam is now in all but name a busy capitalist country, and no
doubt the better for it as far as its long-suffering people are concerned.

On the whole, however, annexation by mostly carrot and a little stick has
worked best, and the US has avoided the limitless aggression that proved the
downfall of old-style regimes.

Many more obvious US satellites in Southeast Asia and elsewhere have
benefited from the ties that bind them and are evolving comparable
pseudo-democratic systems.

The middle-class subjects of these satellites would be foolish to prefer
their country to be differently aligned, and to the slum-dwellers it doesn't
matter either way. This practically guarantees a stable dependency on the
motherland, which an invasion could never have achieved.

The most important lesson to the new totalitarianism, then, comes from
ancient Rome, and is simply that people sufficiently supplied with bread and
games will put up with anything.

It may seem strange that a system that has been working so well both at home
and abroad should so blatantly rattle the saber and polish the jackboot, but
for this we may have to thank Al-Qaeda.

In Blowback, his study of American imperialism, Chalmers Johnson points out
that the intention of terrorists is among other things to provoke a
disproportionate reaction in the enemy and goad it into revealing itself as
the brute it is, thereby forfeiting public sympathy.

Alternatively, it could be that the fruits of a takeover of Iraq are too
juicy to pass up and difficult to get hold of by any other means. In either
case, this will be a passing phase, and the current preponderance of stick
in US international policy will in good time make way for more ample carrot.

But by improving on its predecessor, the US has not abandoned the essential
ingredients of the totalitarian state.

These include a powerful propaganda machine - America's is the most
comprehensive and sophisticated in history - centered around a few simple,
powerful symbols which, though in themselves meaningless, are nonetheless,
in old-fashioned parlance, taboo. It remains an offense to "desecrate" the
flag.

They also include a public rhetoric so far removed from ordinary speech as
to constitute practically a separate language and whose intended effect is
essentially to baffle; and control mechanisms that are not so much seen as
felt, as evidenced by the wide-ranging official and unofficial powers given
to US intelligence organizations.

The question remains whether overall there is anything wrong with an
endlessly adaptable, stable system of world government that keeps the
majority of its subjects happy or at least comfortable.

And once technology has solved the problem of cheap labor, there will
probably be nothing wrong with it. Only we mustn't call it democracy.

- - - - - - -

Patrick Durgin:

This article puts me in mind of the peculiar values I and many of the artists I admire invest in the work we do, characterized as "dialogic" in my last "statement" posted here at Circulars. Buchele rightly refers to the USAmerican art worlds as "mostly unchecked," while a project like Circulars, to which many of the artists I admire contribute - artists with whom I tend to share "poetics" or aesthetic criteria / directions - presumes the values of a dialogic poetics would be, by default, "checked." This is the land, after all, of "checks and balances," a concept crucial to the sort of "democracy" Buchele aptly perceives as disappeared (if ever it were there). However, the entity "checking" must be fundamentally "relevant" in order for a poetics to be in any sense democratic, much less anarchic or socialist, etc etc. And forget about activist ...

The autonomy of the artist has been sufficiently attacked - vis-a-vis liberal ideology - in the past several decades in the US, while the NEA (principle issuer of checks and checks) has been all but dismantled (the final straw being Gioa's appointment as head).

Meanwhile, there is the publication of Hannah Weiner's PAGE by Roof Books this fall. In my review of this book at Jacket Magazine, I argue that Weiner's notion of "clairvoyant writing" presumes the individual person is on the "same page" as the next in a contiguous movement unable to, quite simply, comprehend their subjectivity in the march of history.

Recent debates here at Circulars over anarchism / pacifism / dialectical reasoning vis-a-vis the place of artworks or their authors in an effective resistance to the criminal actions taking place all around us point to the need for a sort of inability to comprehend, foreseen by Weiner among others (Anne Tardos and Jackson Mac Low come to mind). But this alternative to dialectics is NOT the same as the relativism that forges an "unchecked" space for artists within the corporate power grid. And NOW is the least appropriate time to make "statements" in the sense of advancing aesthetics. Rather, nations AS WELL AS individual persons "have interests" - this radical inadequacy between persons can be demonstrated to be, as Mac Low once said of his own work, "microcosms of the good society," so long as we suffer one another to check that imbalance.

By Deborah Sharp
USA TODAY

MIAMI -- When Travis Clark joined the U.S. military at age 19, it seemed like a good way to travel and pay for college. It was 1996, the country was at peace, and Clark signed on for an eight-year hitch.

Now, with a year left on his contract, the Marine reservist from Plantation, Fla., says he won't go if his unit is called to serve in a war against Iraq. He is adding his voice to a small chorus of like-minded military personnel who say they will not fight for a cause they do not support.

''This war is the wrong war,'' says Clark, 25. ''I can't put myself into the position of going into another country and forcing them to defend themselves against me.''

Unlike during the Vietnam War era, when hundreds of thousands of men dodged the draft or sought the status of conscientious objector, today's military is composed solely of volunteers. About 2.7 million men and women serve in active-duty and reserve forces.

It's uncertain how many say their conscience won't allow them to fight in Iraq. Last year, 29 people were discharged from the military as conscientious objectors.

But peace groups say a hotline that counsels members of the military against war logged more than 3,500 calls in January, double its usual monthly average.

''I don't think there is anything cowardly about standing up and saying, 'I won't be a part of this,' '' says Bill Galvin of the Center on Conscience and War in Washington, D.C.

Critics say a person who volunteers for the military and discovers an aversion to war on the brink of invading Iraq is being disingenuous at best and cowardly at worst.

''Anyone in the military who has signed up to protect our country and now doesn't want to do so is doing a grave disservice to this country and to their fellow soldiers,'' says Jason Crawford, founder of Patriots for the Defense of America, an Internet-based group that supports attacking Iraq.

The government does recognize that views can change over the course of military service. Those who can prove a religious, ethical or moral opposition to all wars may apply for a discharge or transfer to a non-combat job as a conscientious objector. But the criteria for such cases are difficult. For example, the Air Force's policy governing application and approval runs to 20 pages. Those who don't receive such status but refuse to fight can face court-martial and penalties from dishonorable discharge to prison.

Pro- and anti-war sentiment divided the USA during the Vietnam War. From 1965 to 1973, 2.15 million people served in Vietnam. About 170,000 people earned status as conscientious objectors. Many thousands of others burned their draft cards. At least 40,000 fled the country, and others served time in prison. In 1977, President Carter granted amnesty to many war resisters.

Opposition to a war in Iraq is a trickle compared with the Vietnam War era.

Peace activists from the '60s are among those advising current military members how to follow their conscience and avoid war.

''I have no sympathy for Saddam Hussein. He's a blight on his people. But this war makes no sense,'' says Michael Simmons, 57, of the American Friends Service Committee, part of the Quaker religion.

Simmons was imprisoned in 1969 for 2 years for refusing to be drafted to fight in Vietnam. He says most servicemembers now wrestling with the possibility of killing Iraqis had joined the military for travel, self-improvement and other benefits promised by recruiters.

''I see these young kids who are going to be suffering from this for years to come -- if they're lucky enough to come out alive. And that's not even to mention the effect on the Iraqi people,'' says Simmons, whose older brother, Reginald, served in Vietnam. ''It pains my heart.''

Few hotline callers are willing to speak out about avoiding a war in Iraq. But Clark has some company in his public stance for peace:

* Michael Sudbury, 27, a former Army Reserve staff sergeant, called a news conference last month in Salt Lake City to say he wouldn't go when his unit deployed to a war in Iraq. Sudbury's military discharge, delayed because of the pending conflict, came through a day before his planned announcement.

* Travis Burnham, 24, an Army photojournalist at Fort Drum in Upstate New York, applied in January for conscientious objector status. The Army is considering his application. The process, which includes a psychiatric interview, can take up to six months.

Burnham's older brother, Taylor, is an Army combat engineer in Kuwait. Their mother keeps a yellow ribbon on her door for Taylor and a protest sign on her wall for Travis.

Dave Wiggins, 40, a physician and father of two who lives in High Point, N.C., has also counseled military personnel on avoiding war. A graduate of West Point who served as an Army captain and flight surgeon, he wound up with a dishonorable discharge and a $25,000 fine after he refused to take part in the Persian Gulf War in 1991. After his conscientious objector application was denied, Wiggins staged a hunger strike, endured death threats and finally stripped off his uniform and stopped military traffic heading to the front lines.

''It had become obvious to me that the military was more a political tool than white knights in shining armor going off to save democracy,'' Wiggins says.

His father told him he had brought such shame to the family that he didn't feel right hanging the American flag outside their home.

About 500 servicemembers filed for conscientious objector status during the Persian Gulf War, according to the General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress. Peace groups say as many as three times that number refused to fight, and many served prison sentences up to 18 months.

There have been conscientious objectors as long as there have been wars. In the Civil War, 4,000 soldiers whose religious beliefs prohibited killing for any reason served in unarmed positions. During World War II, 42,000 conscientious objectors refused to fight. Many went to prison, but 25,000 served in non-combat jobs, and 12,000 were placed in work camps. They volunteered to help in mental institutions and to serve in experiments on contracting pneumonia and the flu.

Some in today's all-volunteer force question those who enlisted but now don't want to go.

Says Navy Lt. Cmdr. Pauline Storum: ''When you sign up and raise your right hand to serve your country, you don't really get the option of rolling over one morning and saying, 'I'm not going to go to work today,' ''

A few in military refuse to fight 'wrong war' Activists call stance brave; critics say it's cowardly

Shutting Down San Francisco's Downtown

By SCOTT HANDLEMAN

Thursday, the day after start of bombing, was the long-anticipated day of direct-action protest in San Francisco. For weeks, the flyers were circulating from Direct Action to Stop the War, and weekly spokescouncil meetings were held, alternating between San Francisco and Oakland. The de-centralized planning paid off: Thursday morning seemed like Sunday morning in large parts of San Francisco's financial district.

The most noteworthy thing about this day of protest, I think, was the effectiveness of the new strategy of protest by small, autonomous clusters. A little after midnight yesterday, I got a call to report at 7am to 9th and Bryant for legal observation. Arriving a few minutes late, I saw a freeway off-ramp blocked by debris and large objects (old sofas, etc). CHP officers were pushing back protesters and hauling the obstacles aside, while rush-hour traffic honked in irritation. I understand why some might question the nobility of blocking drivers from getting to work, far from the seats of power that are the true targets, but what was surprising was that, here in Police State America, a group of 20-30 openly created a fairly serious (though brief) disruption, and not a single one got arrested. As the cops cleared the ramp and things started looking hot, the crowd started shambling up 9th Street toward Market, taking the wide street and chanting. This bunch, incidentally, was Queers Against Capitalism, marching under a giant pink flag.

Upon reaching Market, the militant queers took over the intersection, still unbothered by cops. Meanwhile, a block away in the intersection of Van Ness and Fell, a small group had occupied the intersection, linking arms in lock boxes. Van Ness was silent as Market. A block further on, a similar group had the intersection of Franklin and Fell occupied. I fed a banana to a supine young woman in a lock box, and felt a stirring in my subconscious. Upon returning to Market, the perambulating homosexuals had somehow taken over the major intersection of Van Ness and Market, and the cops had still made no move to arrest. "Move aimlessly," a woman on bullhorn directed, and the group moved on.

Bear in mind that there were small numbers at each of these sites. The Queers had perhaps grown to 50 by this point, and the lock-down sites, counting the surrounding supporters, probably had less. Dispersal, and the simultaneity of many happenings, meant the cops' resources were spread thin; they were too busy clearing the sit-down intersections to deal with the troublemakers on foot.

Riding my bike down Market Street, empty of cars, I encountered similar scenes. A sparse crowd, around 20 people, had taken over 6th and Market. This was a guerilla-theater group in costume, called Dead Against War. Scary horse cops approached, and the group walked off.

At Montgomery and Sutter, in front of the Schwab building, another tiny cluster had taken the intersection, including a core group locked down. A couple of fellows sat in lawn chairs in the middle of the street. This group included a hippyish contingent, joined in a soothing hum. But argument broke out between protesters and an angry driver, a scene that I saw repeated several times today.

At Montgomery and Pine, a group of only seven persons in lockboxes closed Pine on one side; on the other side, protesters sat on overturned newspaper bins. At Montgomery and California, another tiny group held the intersection. I waited while 2 busloads of cops arrived. The cop's leader came and said, "You are in violation of the traffic law. I am ordering you to move to the sidewalk," etc etc. The mystery is why this group did not take advantage of their warning and walk around awhile to another intersection, in conformity with the emerging principles of fourth-generation protest. This group sat there and let themselves get arrested.

Montgomery and Clay, the corner of the Transamerica Pyramid, saw another blockading group; some in lock-boxes. Hay was mysteriously scattered in the street, a warm pastoral touch. A firetruck showed up and menacingly took out its hose, but only used it to fill plastic trench plates with water. They drove away, protesters dry. I talked to two white-collar onlookers, mildly sympathetic.

Back to Market, where a group was locked down in boxes, surrounded by a fairly large crowd of protester-onlookers (maybe 100). Sparks flew copiously as the firemen cut through a lockbox. It was here that I first saw ugliness on both sides. Someone threw a glass bottle which hit a cop square in the helmet. (He didn't even flinch.) Protesters booed. A line of cops marched briskly into the crowd, and looked around. From my perch high in a tree, I saw the cops' body language. They walked around for a while acting unconvincingly like they in pursuit of somebody, then the victim-cop pointed at a fellow standing on a bench, and the cops went and grabbed him. I did not see who threw the bottle, but a legal observer later told me it was not the young man who got arrested. It stands to reason that the fellow who threw the thing would try to blend away and not stand in high view. I think the cops just decided they had to punish and deter, so better to arrest an innocent person and show eye-for-an-eye retribution.

(As they were pulling away their unfortunate victim, one of these cops backed into the misplaced bicycle of yrs truly and fell over; another cop somehow fell with him. This severely warped my back tire and broke three spokes. Safe in my tree, I declined to request compensation.)

Meanwhile, the lockbox extractions had been continuing-but the firemen did not break open the box linking the last two protesters. The cops dragged them off, still linked together. This was a piggish move on their part, for it was causing those arrested visibly to shout out in pain, and looked like the sort of thing that might do them lasting physical damage.

I continued down Market, where Christmas trees in big cement planters had been dragged to the middle of the street, and many newspaper vending boxes were overturned. At this point, I stopped taking regular notes. It was probably around 10 in the morning, and anarchy reigned downtown. Unwarping my tire, I rode to the Federal Building; protesters had shut it down. Red, white and blue vomit puddles all over the sidewalks.

Back downtown, Market remained in chaos; I hooked up with a large and rowdy bunch on Mission St., around a thousand or so rejoicing in their numbers, Spearhead blasting from bike-ferried speakers. We went back to Market for more intersection facedowns with riot-ready cops. It was 11:45 and I noticed, strangely, that Old Navy was open for business. I went to Civic Center for the noon rally; there was plenty of room and no one listened to the speaker. Ready for home, I headed back down Market. At around 5th Street was a confrontation noteworthy because the cluster of perhaps 100 protesters consisted almost entirely of youth of color (many of high school age).

From my observations today, I think that small, mobile clusters are a good way to go to make numbers have their maximum effect. The linger-then-escape method of blocking intersections seems ideal in that it frustrates cops and minimizes risk of arrest. It creates thrills and a sense of defiance that a permit-obeying march does not. On the other hand, the cat-and-mouse confrontations of the fourth generation lack a certain dignity and moral high ground associated with the sit-downs. Hard to picture Rosa Parks pull a sofa onto an off-ramp and scram.

I saw a lot of graffiti and overturned newspaper racks, but no smashed windows; I had a feeling the hard-core vandals were planning to let loose at another time, perhaps after the 5 p.m. convergence at Powell and Market.

By 1:00 I had had enough of the noise and chaos. Our government is still bombing Baghdad, and reflecting on that, I wonder what it all means. None of this is going to Stop the War. Of course, but what will? The day of protest didn't have to stop the war to be a good in itself. Not freedom, but defiance was in the air. People were starring in their own movies, circumstances were revealing the blend of human nature: people honorable and craven, among cops and protesters alike. People got a chance to get together and blow off steam. Last but not least, they sent a strong signal that business will not be tolerated, not if that business is war.

Welcome to CounterPunch

Scott Handleman is a law student at Berkeley. He can be reached at: scotthandle@yahoo.com

Friends,
Along with the Saturday march in NYC, groups large and small are gathering to increase the heat on the streets. For those interested in engaging in non-violent direct action there are two meetings planned for Sunday, March 23, plus the Baghdad Snapshot Sunday Action....

One:
Sunday, March 23, 10AM
----------------------
This meeting is for an action involving a number of different groups and will happening either Sunday or Monday. Location for the meeting is strictly on need-to-know basis. PLEASE CONTACT ME IF YOU ARE INTERESTED:
manwichartist@yahoo.com or call me: 212-966-0804

TWO:
Sunday, March 23, 5PM
----------------------
United Methodist Church
145 W. 4th St
This meeting is for a larger style direct action/protest for the coming week/s. Open to any and all.

THREE:
Sunday, March 23, 9PM
---------------------
Baghdad Snapshot Action (rain day)
The BSA crew will be on the streets Sunday night postering pics all around Manhatten. To get involved contact: newyork2baghdad@riseup.net

P.

Baghdad Snapshot Action
http://www.nationalphilistine.cok

Iraq peace team
http://www.iraqpeaceteam.org

United for peace and justice
http://www.unitedforpeace.org

[I'll probably put one of these on the site Monday, but with some reservations -- I'll have to look into how this information is being collected, etc., and whether or not it is more an object of bitter fascination rather than something that could rally support for the anti-war cause.]

Download Your IRAQ BODY COUNT Web Counter Here

The IBC Counters provided on this page carry our rolling update of total civilians reported killed, with both a Minimum and Maximum estimate given for accuracy, and are designed for extremely quick & easy installation on any website.

The white squares containing the actual numbers are provided directly from our webservers so that visitors to your site will always see the latest updates (which is why it's not necessary to include that part of the counter in the downloads below). The graphic with "Updating..." is a background which will appear only if there's a pause while the numbers are being downloaded from our server. To account for different web page layouts we provide a range of shapes and sizes, with a more eye-catching "red text" version of each graphic.

POETS FOR PEACE will also assemble for the Peace March on Saturday March 22
at 11:00am. Location: Gotham Book Mart at 41 W 47th St (between 5th and 6th
Aves). We will begin walking to the main rally at approximately 11:30am.
Main rally held on Broadway between 38th and 42nd Sts.

From David Ensor
CNN Washington Bureau

Intelligence documents that U.S. and British governments said were strong evidence that Iraq was developing nuclear weapons have been dismissed as forgeries by U.N. weapons inspectors.

The documents, given to International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Mohamed ElBaradei, indicated that Iraq might have tried to buy 500 tons of uranium from Niger, but the agency said they were "obvious" fakes.

U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell referred to the documents directly in his presentation to the U.N. Security Council outlining the Bush administration's case against Iraq.

"I'm sure the FBI and CIA must be mortified by this because it is extremely embarrassing to them," former CIA official Ray Close said.

Responding to questions about the documents from lawmakers, Powell said, "It was provided in good faith to the inspectors and our agency received it in good faith, not participating ... in any way in any falsification activities."

"It was the information that we had. We provided it. If that information is inaccurate, fine," Powell said on NBC's "Meet the Press" last Sunday.

"We don't believe that all the issues surrounding nuclear weapons have been resolved [in Iraq]," he said.

How were forgeries missed?
But the discovery raises questions such as why the apparent forgeries were given to inspectors and why U.S. and British intelligence agents did not recognize that they were not authentic.

Sources said that one of the documents was a letter discussing the uranium deal supposedly signed by Niger President Tandja Mamadou. The sources described the signature as "childlike" and said that it clearly was not Mamadou's.

Another, written on paper from a 1980s military government in Niger, bears the date of October 2000 and the signature of a man who by then had not been foreign minister of Niger in 14 years, sources said.

"The IAEA has concluded, with the concurrence of outside experts that these documents -- which formed the basis for the reports of recent uranium transactions between Iraq and Niger -- are not in fact authentic," ElBaradei said in his March 7 presentation to the U.N. Security Council.

Close said the CIA should have known better.

"They have tremendously sophisticated and experienced people in their technical services division, who wouldn't allow a forgery like this to get by," Close said. "I mean it's just mystifying to me. I can't understand it."

A U.S. intelligence official said that the documents were passed on to the International Atomic Energy Agency within days of being received with the comment, " 'We don't know the provenance of this information, but here it is.' "

If a mistake was made, a U.S. official suggested, it was more likely due to incompetence not malice.

"That's a convenient explanation, but it doesn't satisfy me," Close said. "Incompetence I have not seen in those agencies. I've seen plenty of malice, but I've never seen incompetence."

Who made the forgeries?
But the question remains -- who is responsible for the apparent forgeries?

Experts said the suspects include the intelligence services of Iraq's neighbors, other pro-war nations, Iraqi opposition groups or simply con men.

Most rule out the United States, Great Britain or Israel because they said those countries' intelligence services would have been able to make much more convincing forgeries if they had chosen to do so.

President Bush even highlighted the documents in his State of the Union address on January 28.

"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa," Bush said.

U.S. officials said that the assertion by the president and British government was also based on additional evidence of Iraqi efforts to obtain uranium from another African country. But officials would not say which nation and a knowledgable U.S. official said that there was not much to that evidence either.

CNN.com - Fake Iraq documents 'embarrassing' for U.S. - Mar. 14, 2003

[This one just came in...]

We knew they were a little batty and wanting in the IQ area, but look at the people who "signed" this thing... Dean Martin? Shazaam?

Statement of Principles

I believe in this beautiful country. I have studied its roots and gloried in the wisdom of its magnificent Constitution. I have marveled at the wisdom of its founders and framers. Generation after generation of Americans has understood the lofty ideals that underlie our great Republic. I have been inspired by the story of their sacrifice and their strength.

But, today I weep for my country. I have watched the events of recent months with a heavy, heavy heart. No more is the image of America one of strong, yet benevolent peacekeeper. The image of America has changed. Around the globe, our friends mistrust us, our word is disputed, our intentions are questioned.

Instead of reasoning with those with whom we disagree, we demand obedience or threaten recrimination. Instead of isolating Saddam Hussein, we seem to have isolated ourselves. We proclaim a new doctrine of preemption which is understood by few and feared by many. We say that the United States has the right to turn its firepower on any corner of the globe which might be suspect in the war on terrorism. We assert that right without the sanction of any international body. As a result, the world has become a much more dangerous place.

We flaunt our superpower status with arrogance. We treat UN Security Council members like ingrates who offend our princely dignity by lifting their heads from the carpet. Valuable alliances are split.

After war has ended, the United States will have to rebuild much more than the country of Iraq. We will have to rebuild America's image around the globe.

The case this Administration tries to make to justify its fixation with war is tainted by charges of falsified documents and circumstantial evidence. We cannot convince the world of the necessity of this war for one simple reason. This is a war of choice.

There is no credible information to connect Saddam Hussein to 9/11. The twin towers fell because a world-wide terrorist group, Al Qaeda, with cells in over 60 nations, struck at our wealth and our influence by turning our own planes into missiles, one of which would likely have slammed into the dome of this beautiful Capitol except for the brave sacrifice of the passengers on board.

The brutality seen on September 11th and in other terrorist attacks we have witnessed around the globe are the violent and desperate efforts by extremists to stop the daily encroachment of western values upon their cultures. That is what we fight. It is a force not confined to borders. It is a shadowy entity with many faces, many names, and many addresses.

But, this Administration has directed all of the anger, fear, and grief which emerged from the ashes of the twin towers and the twisted metal of the Pentagon towards a tangible villain, one we can see and hate and attack. And villain he is. But, he is the wrong villain. And this is the wrong war. If we attack Saddam Hussein, we will probably drive him from power. But, the zeal of our friends to assist our global war on terrorism may have already taken flight.

The general unease surrounding this war is not just due to "orange alert." There is a pervasive sense of rush and risk and too many questions unanswered. How long will we be in Iraq? What will be the cost? What is the ultimate mission? How great is the danger at home?

A pall has fallen over the Senate Chamber. We avoid our solemn duty to debate the one topic on the minds of all Americans, even while scores of thousands of our sons and daughters faithfully do their duty in Iraq.

What is happening to this country? When did we become a nation which ignores and berates our friends? When did we decide to risk undermining international order by adopting a radical and doctrinaire approach to using our awesome military might? How can we abandon diplomatic efforts when the turmoil in the world cries out for diplomacy?

Why can this President not seem to see that America's true power lies not in its will to intimidate, but in its ability to inspire?

War appears inevitable. But, I continue to hope that the cloud will lift. Perhaps Saddam will yet turn tail and run. Perhaps reason will somehow still prevail. I along with millions of Americans will pray for the safety of our troops, for the innocent civilians in Iraq, and for the security of our homeland. May God continue to bless the United States of America in the troubled days ahead, and may we somehow recapture the vision which for the present eludes us.

Arrogance of Power

Sticker Attack On Cups in US Senate Cafeteria

(Gothic News Service, 03/21) The United States Senate Press Office reported a strange event in the Senate Cafeteria this morning. When Senators sat down to take breakfast, each one found themselves surprised to look at a puzzling image uniquely glued to the outside of each of their coffee cups. Inserted between a gold Roman Capital letter "I" and the letter "M" was a picture of a big orange peach nesting on the black branches of a dead bush.

Senate cafeteria workers - many of who are reported to be against the Iraq war - reported that Senators raised their cups and looked both confused and attracted by the colorful image. Out of curiosity ­ maybe because he's classically educated ­ several Members walked over to Senator Byrd¹s table where, these days, he¹s normally camped out alone or with Senator Kennedy.

"It's an old fashioned 'rebus'," Byrd said, holding up his cup.

"Rebus?"

"Yes," said the Senator, rose from his table, cup in hand, to give a little lecture to his colleagues. "A rebus is a hieroglyphic riddle, "non verbis sed rebus." The origin of the word and custom is this: The basochiens of Paris, during the carnival, used to satirize the current follies and events of the day in squibs called De rebus quæ geruntur. That these squibs might not be accounted libelous, they employed hieroglyphics either wholly or in part."

"What hieroglyphics do you see here," Senator McCain asked.

"It¹s simple, Senator. The "IM" goes first, followed by "Peach" followed by "Bush". Put it all together and it's "IMPEACH BUSH". I guess someone or some ones are trying to get a message through to this Body"

"Out with the cups," yelled several Republican Senators. McCain reportedly left his cup on Byrd's table. "Support the troops," he said and turned away.

"I think I will stay here and enjoy my coffee," said Senator Byrd.
Later this morning Operation Rebus Insert (OPI) - an anonymous unit of Washington Cafeteria Workers Local 101 - left messages with several Washington media groups to take responsibility for the event. "Operation Rebis Insert," they are quoted as saying, "is not based on military "Insert" models currently in operation in Iraq. OPI is non-violent. We will continue to strike ­ riddle by riddle ­ and insert wherever necessary to impeach this President."

Senate Security did not respond to questions as to whether or not Senators may be endangered or further confronted by actions that may be carried by out secret OPI cells among Washington's local Union of Cafeteria Workers.

Dear friend,

I'm writing to ask you to join me in signing a Citizens' Declaration reaffirming our commitment to international cooperation.

The outbreak of war is not the end of the fight for peace -- only the beginning. Around the globe, people are joining together in the declaration below. We will be announcing it in a press conference on Friday, and we need your help to make it as big as possible.

Signing up will only take a minute of your time, but it'll send a message that the momentum built through our opposition to war in Iraq will only keep growing.

You can sign up at:

http://www.moveon.org/declaration/

Here's the text of the Declaration:

A CITIZENS' DECLARATION

As a US-led invasion of Iraq begins, we, the undersigned citizens of many countries, reaffirm our commitment to addressing international conflicts through the rule of law and the United Nations.

By joining together across countries and continents, we have emerged as a new force for peace. As we grieve for the victims of this war, we pledge to redouble our efforts to put an end to the Bush Administration's doctrine of pre-emptive attack and the reckless use of military power.

------------

Thank you.

United for Peace and Justice NYC
http://www.unitedforpeace.org/nyc 212-603-3700
====================================
>>EMERGENCY PROTEST 5:00PM TODAY
>>CONVERGE ON TIMES SQUARE
>>FROM ALL DIRECTIONS
>>important details below
====================================
NYC Anti-War March this Saturday, 3/22
Assemble at noon
Broadway between 36th & 41st Streets
March to Washington Square Park
details at http://www.unitedforpeace.org/nyc
====================================

The war has begun; it's time to get out in the streets! However you choose to express your feelings on this sad and ominous day - through solemn vigils, loud marches, or nonviolent direct action - we urge you to take immediate and visible action.

Converge on Times Square from all directions today at 5:00PM. If the police have blocked access to the Square, we will flood the surrounding streets with our cries for peace. After the Times Square protest has run its course, people will proceed to Washington Square Park for a candlelight vigil.

*Bring a portable radio tuned to WBAI 99.5 for important news & updates.
*Program these legal support numbers into your cellphone before you go, & call if you see arrests happen, or are arrested yourself: (212) 679-6018 and
(917) 807-0658
*The weather forecast calls for rain and temperatures in the 40s. Dress appropriately! Sturdy boots, wool socks if possible, rain gear, and a hat. Avoid cotton clothing, which draws heat away from your body when wet.
*Carry a valid photo ID, and don't bring anything that the police could construe as a weapon (e.g., a pocketknife or Leatherman tool)
*Bring signs, whistles, pots & pans, drums

There will be no permit for the emergency protest at Times Square. You have the legal right to protest on the sidewalk without a permit, providing pedestrian traffic is not obstructed, but we cannot predict how the police will actually respond to our presence. Marching or protesting on the street would be an act of civil disobedience.

We expect substantial numbers of people to show up for the Times Square emergency protest, and we will have the strength, solidarity, and support of one another. But if you are someone who absolutely cannot risk arrest at all - for example, if you are an immigrant who might face deportation - you might choose to attend one of the other NYC emergency protests:
http://www.unitedforpeace.org/calendar.php?caltype=8&area=33

Groups that will take part in today\'s protest are strongly encouraged to meet at one of the following spots and proceed to Times Square in a group. We've listed the groups that have already signed up for different meeting spots; please call UFPJ at (212) 603-3700 to let us know where your group will be meeting, and to give us a cellphone contact so we can communicate with you during the protest.

COLUMBUS CIRCLE, 59th Street & Broadway
Mobilize New York (meet at 4:30PM)
Reclaim the Streets (meet at 4:30PM)
Carnival Bloc (meet at 4:30PM)
Youth Bloc

CARNEGIE HALL, 57th Street & 7th Avenue
Peace Williamsburg
R.U. for Peace

BRYANT PARK, 42nd Street & 6th Avenue
War Resisters League

NEW YORK PUBLIC LIBRARY (42nd Street & 5th Avenue)
Jews Against the Occupation
Free Palestine Contingent (meet at 4:00PM)

MAIN POST OFFICE, 34th Street & 8th Avenue
New Yorkers Say No to War
MADRE
Peace Initiative Turkey

===================================
United for Peace and Justice NYC
330 West 42nd Street, 15th floor
http://www.unitedforpeace.org/nyc 212-603-3700
====================================
_____________________________________________________
To unsubscribe or update your listing go to:
http://www.unitedforpeace.org/email.php?id=32469&token=890282

Baghdad Snapshot Action 2

Thursday, March 20th, 9pm
548 W 21st Street near 11th ave
south side of street, ring artists studio bell
(emergency contact: Elise 917.572.4909)

What to bring:
- gallon buckets
- brushes
- clear packing tape
- friends
- cars

We¹ll have thousands of flyers, some supplies, legal information & postering tips at the meeting. If you're bringing your own wheatpaste (wall paper paste powder) bring brushes and a bucket. You can mix it up at the meeting.

United for Peace and Justice has called for a convergence at Times Square at 5pm in response to the start of the war. Pace yourself, get some food, keep warm and recoup. We'll see you at 9. Stay strong.

poster-activism info:
http://www.robbieconal.com/guerrilla_guide_a.html

civil disobedience handbooks + legal info:
http://www.actupny.org/documents/CDdocuments/CDindex.html
http://www.nlg.org/resources/kyr/kyr_english.htm

Baghdad Snapshot Action Crew:
http://www.nationalphilistine.com
newyork2baghdad@riseup.net

On Tuesday, before the bombs, the US dumped another 2 million leaflets on Iraq, bringing this year's total up to 17 million.

Three contained several references for Iraqis to tune to radio frequencies where Coalition forces are broadcasting information about United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441, United Nations weapons inspectors in Iraq, Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's reign and other topics. Another type of leaflet warned Iraqi troops not to use weapons of mass destruction, emphasizing that "unit commanders will be held accountable for non-compliance." One leaflet warned Iraqi troops that the Coalition will destroy any viable military targets and does not wish to destroy any Iraqi landmarks, and that the "Coalition forces do not wish to harm the noble people of Iraq. To ensure your safety, avoid areas occupied by military personnel." One more leaflet type told Iraqi troops "not risk their life and the life of their comrades," and to "leave now, go home, and learn, grow, prosper."

Pictures are available on the CENTCOM website.

[from Jason LeHeup]

The IRAQ BODY COUNT Database is a human security project to establish an independent and comprehensive public database of civilian deaths in Iraq resulting directly from military actions by the USA and its allies in 2003. Results and totals are continually updated and made immediately available on this page and on various IBC counters which may be freely displayed on any website, where they will be automatically updated without further intervention. Casualty figures are derived from a comprehensive survey of online media reports. Where These sources report differing figures, the range (a minimum and a maximum) are given. All results are independently reviewed and error-checked by at least three members of the Iraq Body Count project team before publication.

[Just picked this up from the Commondreams site.]

'You Just Can't Imagine It'

Editor's note: The parents of Rachel Corrie, the American woman killed by an Israeli bulldozer in Gaza this week, released excerpts of an e-mail message Corrie sent them Feb. 7. This material is taken from that e-mail.

I have been in Palestine for two weeks and one hour now, and I still have very few words to describe what I see. It is most difficult for me to think about what's going on here when I sit down to write back to the United States -- something about the virtual portal into luxury. I don't know if many of the children here have ever existed without tank-shell holes in their walls and the towers of an occupying army surveying them constantly from the near horizons. I think, although I'm not entirely sure, that even the smallest of these children understand that life is not like this everywhere. An 8-year-old was shot and killed by an Israeli tank two days before I got here, and many of the children murmur his name to me, Ali -- or point at the posters of him on the walls. The children also love to get me to practice my limited Arabic by asking me "Kaif Sharon?" "Kaif Bush?" and they laugh when I say "Bush Majnoon," "Sharon Majnoon" back in my limited Arabic. (How is Sharon? How is Bush? Bush is crazy. Sharon is crazy.) . . . . There are 8-year-olds here much more aware of the workings of the global power structure than I was just a few years ago -- at least regarding Israel.

Nevertheless, I think about the fact that no amount of reading, attendance at conferences, documentary viewing and word of mouth could have prepared me for the reality of the situation here. You just can't imagine it unless you see it, and even then you are always well aware that your experience is not at all the reality: What with the difficulties the Israeli Army would face if they shot an unarmed U.S. citizen, and with the fact that I have money to buy water when the army destroys wells, and, of course, the fact that I have the option of leaving. Nobody in my family has been shot, driving in their car, by a rocket launcher from a tower at the end of a major street in my hometown. I have a home. I am allowed to go see the ocean . . . . When I leave for school or work I can be relatively certain that there will not be a heavily armed soldier waiting halfway between Mud Bay and downtown Olympia at a checkpoint -- a soldier with the power to decide whether I can go about my business, and whether I can get home again when I'm done. So, if I feel outrage at arriving and entering briefly and incompletely into the world in which these children exist, I wonder conversely about how it would be for them to arrive in my world.

They know that children in the United States don't usually have their parents shot and they know they sometimes get to see the ocean. But once you have seen the ocean and lived in a silent place, where water is taken for granted and not stolen in the night by bulldozers, and once you have spent an evening when you haven't wondered if the walls of your home might suddenly fall inward waking you from your sleep, and once you've met people who have never lost anyone -- once you have experienced the reality of a world that isn't surrounded by murderous towers, tanks, armed "settlements" and now a giant metal wall, I wonder if you can forgive the world for all the years of your childhood spent existing -- just existing -- in resistance to the constant stranglehold of the world's fourth largest military -- backed by the world's only superpower -- in its attempt to erase you from your home. That is something I wonder about these children. I wonder what would happen if they really knew . . . .

Currently, the Israeli Army is building a 14-meter-high wall between Rafah in Palestine and the border, carving a no-man's land from the houses along the border. Six hundred and two homes have been completely bulldozed, according to the Rafah Popular Refugee Committee. The number of homes that have been partially destroyed is greater . . . .

I've been having trouble accessing news about the outside world here, but I hear an escalation of war on Iraq is inevitable. There is a great deal of concern here about the "reoccupation of Gaza." Gaza is reoccupied every day to various extents, but I think the fear is that the tanks will enter all the streets and remain here, instead of entering some of the streets and then withdrawing after some hours or days to observe and shoot from the edges of the communities. If people aren't already thinking about the consequences of this war for the people of the entire region then I hope they will start.

I also hope you'll come here . . . . There is also need for constant night-time presence at a well on the outskirts of Rafah since the Israeli Army destroyed the two largest wells. According to the municipal water office, the wells destroyed last week provided half of Rafah's water supply. Many of the communities have requested internationals to be present at night to attempt to shield houses from further demolition. . . .

I am just beginning to learn, from what I expect to be a very intense tutelage, about the ability of people to organize against all odds, and to resist against all odds.

Friday March 21 at 1pm on the steps of The Main Branch of The New York Public Library in response to www.poetsagainstthewar.org 's call for World Poetry Day, "poets against the war", "poets for Peace" and "POETRY IS NEWS" invites all poets to read poems against the war and poems on topical themes like the culture of peace, non-violence, tolerance etc. Rain or shine. Look for the "poets for Peace" banner.

Saturday March 22 at 11a.m. meet in front of Gotham Book Mart at 41 West 47th Street as we assemble for the www.unitedforpeace.org march planned for 12 noon on Broadway between 38th and 42nd Street. At approximately 11:30a.m. we will make our way to the main rally. Look for "poets for Peace" and or "Guernica" banner.

Your tax dollars are now being used to bulldoze idealistic 23 years-old girls from Olympia to death.

I guess people will get used to this way of answering idealism.

Maybe the reason fish are speaking in New York state is that people want the end of the world to happen? Does it make them feel important when they're there to see it, and to help it along?

By the "end of the world" I mean, of course, the mass killing of civilians by the United States. It's important to conceive of war crimes as being "inevitable" just because some maniac millionaires will personally profit from it. It's actually the begining of the world, not the end -- what world?

I guess it's not hard to get used to bulldozing girls. Get used to unprovoked invasions of foreign countries. Get used to detainees who never get trials. You get used to it.

The largest and most unified and peaceful anti-war protests in the history of the earth have produced this reaction in our leaders: Fuck you. I'm going to kill whoever I like. You're damn lucky you live in a country where it’s hard to just kill you for speaking your mind, because that’s what we’d like to do to you.

Sitting in the coffee shop on Ave. A before going to work this morning. People dressed sharply for their work day.

Carpet bombing of civilians.

Maybe there's some intrigue or gossip at work.

Destruction of water systems, food distribution, and communications.

Maybe people aren’t working or are working part time or have artistic goals they are trying to achieve.

Backing the bulldozer up over the body of the 23 year old girl after running her over once.

On the stereo they played a nice Indie-rock ballad I didn't recognize. I had an everything bagel toasted with cream cheese and a large coffee.

"The mother of all bombs."

Rachel Corrie was working on wells for drinking water.

Maybe the talking fish in New Square was really protesting the war. Maybe he knew about the well water -- maybe he understood that working on water systems was a good use of one's energy and resources -- unlike the production of depleted uranium weapons.

Fish know the importance of water after all.

The guy injured himself trying to kill this fish.

I wonder who ate the fish.

CNN reports that as part of the US government's prewar "orange" alert", the FAA has declared Disneyland and Disneyworld -- along with those other hubs of US civilization, New York and Washington DC -- to be no-fly zones.

"We're taking measures to correspond with the threat level to protect the airspace. That which is inside that airspace are potential targets of symbolic value," FAA spokesman Greg Martin said.

Counterterrorism officials said the Disney parks have come up in interviews with al Qaeda operatives. Pictures and information about the parks have allegedly been found during some terror sweeps overseas. Martin, on the other hand, stated "there is no specific, credible threat for Disney."

George Lakoff updates his famous Metaphor & War talk for today.

http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=15414

Over at Rabble.ca, poet Angela Rawlings has compiled a list of links to Canadian and international blogs on the subject of the impending war with Iraq.

Authorities in California and New Jersey are making it very clear that a "red alert" during a war could result in the suspension of most civil liberties. The Press-Telegram is running a story about Homeland Security measures that begins with the sentence "Should war with Iraq erupt, Southern Californians could find themselves living in a world of restricted travel, constrained trade, closed schools and public buildings, canceled events and hypersecurity." The South Jersey News quotes Sid Caspersen, New Jersey's director of the office of counter-terrorism, as saying that if the nation escalates to "red alert" you will be assumed by authorities to be the enemy if you so much as venture outside your home. Plan to spend a lot of time in front of your computer.

Following a Space Daily story, Slashdot is reporting that the U.S. government may be degrading GPS satellite signals to hamper Iraqi forces' ability to use those systems during the war. This could potentially reduce accuracy from 3 meters to over 100 meters. The U.S. will do this by increasing the inaccuracies on the civilian C/A code, turning back on S/A (Selective Availability), by having the satellites deliberately and randomly return inaccurate information on where they are. S/A degrades GPS accuracy to only 100 meters 95 percent of the time and 300 meters the other 5 percent of the time.

People depending on GPS systems may want to do sanity checks on any data returned by those systems during the war.

As artist Joseph DeLappe discovered after staging readings from the works of WW1 poet Seigfried Sassoon during live sessions of the "Medal of Honor" WW2 first-person shooter, some people don't take kindly to poetry readings while getting their war on.

(DeLappe and associates have also staged entire episodes of Friends during live Quake III sessions).

by Thomas Walkom

There are many good reasons for Canada's decision not to join U.S. President George W. Bush's war against Iraq. The best is that such a war would be patently illegal.

Prime Minister Jean Chrétien hinted at this yesterday when he told Parliament that Canada would not support a U.S.-led invasion of Iraq because the U.N. Security Council has not authorized such an attack.

What he did not say, perhaps because he is too polite, is that in waging war without U.N. authorization, the U.S. and its ragtag "coalition of the willing" are putting themselves outside the boundaries of international law.

Or, to put it bluntly, they are transforming themselves into outlaw states.

"There is no legal basis for war," says Ted McWhinney, a former Liberal MP, professor and expert on international law. "None. That was clear from the beginning."

That the very nations which spearheaded efforts to rein in an outlaw state should themselves become outlaws is a rich, if tragic, irony. It will be appreciated as such in most countries, although possibly not in the U.S. where irony, like French toast, has been declared unpatriotic.

Yet this is what has happened. Iraq, a country that for 12 years did defy and obstruct the international community, is now seen by much of the world as a helpless victim. Even the villainous Saddam Hussein is viewed almost — almost — sympathetically.

The two men most responsible for this remarkable turnaround in world public opinion are Saddam and Bush.

Saddam's strategy was simple. When faced with pressure, he did what the Security Council told him to do. In the language of the U.N., he complied.

By contrast, Bush appeared capricious, arrogant and ever so slightly unhinged. The more Saddam complied, the more Bush complained that he wasn't. The more successes the U.N. weapons inspectors scored in their disarmament of Iraq, the more petulant Bush became.

Eventually, even those people who don't pay a great deal of attention to world affairs began to wonder which of the two was the madman.

Indeed, Bush's behaviour is difficult to fathom. For more than a year, he has seemed bent on invading Iraq, no matter what. Perhaps this single-minded focus on war explains his striking inability to win diplomatic support from the usually pliable members of the Security Council, most of whom are eager for American dollars. In the end, Bush couldn't even be sure of Mexico.

Which is why yesterday, the U.S., British and Spanish abandoned efforts to have the Security Council pass a resolution authorizing war. They now say they don't need one to invade Iraq legally. In fact, they do. Among experts, the overwhelming consensus seems to be that there is no legal authorization for an Iraq war.

Certainly, last fall's Security Council resolution 1441, the one that the U.S. cites to justify its actions, does not do the trick. Contrary to the common wisdom, it does not even threaten Iraq with "serious consequences" for non-compliance. It merely "recalls" that the council has warned of such consequences before.

Even Britain recognizes that resolution 1441 is a week reed. It insists that war is implicitly authorized by Security Council resolutions 678 and 687, both of which date from the early 1990s.

Nonsense, says McWhinney. Security Council resolutions are specific to time and place; they cannot be dragged out years later to justify unilateral actions.

"No country alone can be judge, jury and high executioner."

Besides, writes British lawyer Keir Starmer, the earlier Security Council resolutions don't quite work, either. Resolution 678 (1990) did authorize military action but only to force Iraq to abandon its occupation of Kuwait. And resolution 687 (1991), which established the ceasefire at the end of the first Gulf War, doesn't authorize force at all.

All of this is important in the context of the U.N. system set up by the U.S. and its allies after World War II to prevent war. Under the U.N. Charter, it is a crime for any nation to make war, except in self-defence or with the explicit approval of the council. Anyone in any country that makes war outside of these conditions is breaking international law.

This is not to suggest that Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair are about to be bundled into police vans — although there are precedents. Bush had foresight enough to refuse to recognize the new international war crimes court that is being set up in Holland. In any case, it's tough to arrest a man surrounded by nuclear weapons.

Still, says McWhinney, Bush — and indeed anyone involved in an illegal invasion of Iraq — would be wise to stay out of Belgium. That small country has aggressively pursued war criminals, arguing that it has the right to try them under its domestic law.

Theoretically, Bush could find himself sharing a Brussels cell with that other notorious international outlaw, Saddam Hussein.

Thomas Walkom's column appears on Tuesday.

Attack on Iraq Could Turn Bush into Criminal

[In from Bob Perelman -- pretty wild.]

Perhaps everyone has seen this Onion piece: "Our Long National Nightmare of Peace and Prosperity is Finally Over." January 18, 2001? The 'satire' is so factually accurate that it's hard to believe the date isn't a hoax.

http://www.theonion.com/onion3701/bush_nightmare.html

Dear friends in New York & Everywhere,

This Thursday 20 March at 9pm will be our second action! We hope that other crews in cities & towns in the US & around the World will poster on the same evening, acting in global solidarity as we continue to give people the opportunity to look into the faces of the citizens of Baghdad.

If you are interested in participating — PLEASE send us an email on Wednesday night about where we are meeting for this Thursday action: newyork2baghdad@riseup.net.

For more information about this project which seeks to share images of Baghdad citizens with people in other parts of the world - please visit our web site:

http://www.nationalphilistine.com

The next few days are fateful ones. The seeming inevitability of this reckless war can cause a sadness in our hearts that could begin to separate & immobilize us -- but it is precisely now at this moment when we must work together & strongly, visibility wage actions for justice.

For the NYC Baghdad Action, where the preparations stand & what you can do to help: As stated in the previous email, this time out we don't have a budget.

-- We need help making copies of the Snapshot Flyers & providing supplies for postering. If you can print any number out, or make copies, or contribute some cash to this please contact us asap.

-- Forward this to people you think might be interested in participating on Thursday bring supplies for postering:
wide clear tape
staple guns & staples
wheatpaste (or wall paper powder), buckets, brushes.

Bring your car, bring friends.

If you are busy, broke, carless, alone-- don't worry about it-- come!

Be sure to check email on Wednesday for meeting location information & other details.

As you can see we have a new email address, we have not been able to access the yahoo account. Many addresses have been lost, please forward this email on. Also, please reply to this address & in the subject line state where you live, so we have this demographic information.

Thank you. NO WAR.

The Baghdad Snapshot Action Crew
newyork2baghdad@riseup.net.

[There's another posting in the body of this one with suggestions for spontaneous vigils and things like that, pasted below.]

United for Peace and Justice NYC
http://www.unitedforpeace.org/nyc 212-603-3700
===============================================
EMERGENCY ANTI-WAR PROTEST TODAY!
Tuesday, March 18
5:00PM at Union Square
-----------------------------------------------
If war begins, CONVERGE ON TIMES SQUARE
5:00PM on the day the bombing starts
(the next day if bombing begins at night)
*important details below*
-----------------------------------------------

PROTEST TODAY!>>>
Against the wishes of the world, the Bush Administration seems almost certain to go to war by the end of this week. Speak out against this madness at an emergency NYC anti-war protest today, Tuesday, March 18, at 5:00PM in Union Square. Bring signs and make noise.

IF WAR BEGINS>>>
If the war does indeed begin, get out on the streets immediately and join with millions around the world in demanding an end to the bloodshed. There are many ways to express your opposition to war - from silent vigils to loud marches to nonviolent direct action.

In New York City, there will be a massive protest in Times Square at 5:00PM on the day the bombing starts (the next day if bombing begins at night).

Converge on Times Square from all directions. If the police have blocked access to the Square, we will flood the surrounding streets with our cries for peace.

*Bring a portable radio tuned to WBAI 99.5 for important news & updates. *Program the legal support numbers into your cellphone before you go, & call if you see arrests happen, or are arrested yourself: (212) 679-6018 and (917) 807-0658 *Carry a valid photo ID, and don't bring anything that the police could construe as a weapon (e.g., a pocketknife or Leatherman tool)

Organizations are strongly encouraged to meet at one of the following spots and proceed to Times Square in a group. We've listed the groups that have already signed up for different meeting spots; please call (212) 603-3700 or write laklak@erols.com to let us know where your group will be meeting, and to give us a cellphone contact so we can communicate with you during the protest. We will list the group names on our website, but we will keep your cellphone number confidential.

COLUMBUS CIRCLE (59th Street & Broadway)
Mobilize New York Reclaim the Streets Carnival Bloc Youth Bloc

CARNEGIE HALL (57th Street & 7th Avenue)
Peace Williamsburg

BRYANT PARK (42nd Street & 6th Avenue)

MAIN POST OFFICE (34th Street & 8th Avenue)
New Yorkers Say No to War MADRE

HERALD SQUARE (34th Street & Broadway)

After the Times Square protest has run its course, people will proceed to Washington Square Park for a candlelight vigil.

*To view or list New York City anti-war events, visit http://www.unitedforpeace.org/nyc

*For a complete listing of "day after" events around the country: http://www.unitedforpeace.org/calendar.php?caltype=8&old=old

*To view or list other New York "day after" events, go to http://www.unitedforpeace.org/calendar.php?area=33 and search under "day after" for "event type"

Keep checking our website at http://www.unitedforpeace.org/nyc for more details and updates, plus information about our Saturday, March 22 anti-war march.

As you may have heard, we have (finally) received a permit for the 3/22 anti-war march. Gather at noon on Saturday on Broadway between 36th & 42nd Streets for a march down to Washington Square Park. More details will follow later this week.

TO SUBSCRIBE to these alerts, visit http://www.unitedforpeace.org/email.php

TO VOLUNTEER with UFPJ NYC, send a blank email to nycvolunteers-subscribe@yahoogroups.com you'll receive specific requests for volunteer assistance (approx one email per day)

LEAFLETS, STICKERS, & POSTERS are available at the UFPJ office, 330 West 42nd Street, 15th floor, 9-8 weekdays, 12-5 weekends
----------------------------------------------------

WHAT WILL WE DO WHEN BUSH GOES TO WAR?

While millions of people around the world and throughout this country continue to do everything possible to prevent the Bush administration from going to war against Iraq, the latest news is bad.

In every corner of the U.S. -- and all around the globe -- many people are already planning protests for the day a war begins, or the day after. We urge you to contact your local groups to find out what is planned and how you can help. If nothing is planned, it is not too late to organize an event. The most important thing is that hundreds of anti-war protests take place in cities and towns all across the country!

*Post information about your protest at http://www.unitedforpeace.org Look for the yellow "ADD" button on the left side of the page, under "Anti-War Related Events"

*Find out about protests in your area by searching the "Anti-War Related Events" listings at http://www.unitedforpeace.org

Some ideas for action:

1) A candlelight vigil in the center of town or in front of a federal building (court house, post office, military installation, any other federal facility).

2) A rally in a central location.

3) A march through a populated part of your city, which could start or end with a rally.

4) Meetings at schools, universities, places of work, community centers, religious institutions.

5) Walk-outs from schools and/or work places...people can then join a march or rally with others.

6) Vigils, picket lines or other protests at the local offices of your Congressional representatives demanding they use the power of their office to stop the president.

7) Non-violent civil disobedience at any appropriate locations: a federal building, a defense contractor, the office of a politician who voted for war, key streets or intersections in your city. If this war begins, we should find creative ways to interrupt the "normal" flow of life. For more information on nationally coordinated, local civil disobedience efforts, contact http://www.peacepledge.org/resist

It is critically important that we move quickly, in the most unified ways possible, and that we project to the media the strong opposition to this war. United for Peace and Justice will do whatever we can to let the media know what is happening throughout the country. But for us to do this work we must hear from you. Please be sure to post the information about your local actions on our web site....and do so immediately: http://www.unitedforpeace.org

For more information please call us at 212-603-3700, or at 202-862-9740, ext. 3038.

Also, now is a key time to show your support for United for Peace and Justice by making a financial contribution. Please make the most generous donation you can, so we can intensify our work in the days ahead. You can make a secure online credit card donation right now at http://www.unitedforpeace.org/donate

or send a check made payable to "United for Peace and Justice" to:

United for Peace and Justice
P.O. Box 607
Times Square Station
New York, NY 10108

(Your check of $100 or more will be tax deductible if you make it out to "Peace Action Education Fund" and mail it to United for Peace and Justice at the post office box above.)

Finally, these are difficult days for everyone, but we must not become discouraged. If this war begins it will be even more important that we redouble our efforts to bring the war to an end as quickly as possible. Now is not the time to stop!

Wired reports that foreign news websites are seeing large volumes of traffic from America, as U.S. citizens increasingly seek news coverage about the coming war.

According to Nielsen/NetRatings, 49 percent of the Guardian's 1.3 million unique visitors (that's the number of different visitors, not the site's total traffic) in January originated from the Americas. Likewise, Nielsen said a quarter of the visitors to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's website in January were from the Americas.

According to Richard Goosey, NetRating's international chief of measurement science, traffic from the Americas was not the result of an across-the-board increase in news consumption.

Jon Dennis, Guardian Unlimited deputy news editor, said U.S. readers are visiting his site for the range of opinions it publishes, and to engage in vigorous debate. Media outlets in the United States, he said, are not presenting the issues critically.

"As a journalist, I find it quite strange that there's not more criticism of the Bush administration in the American media," he said. "It's as though the whole U.S. is in shock (from Sept. 11). It's hard for (the media) to be dispassionate about it. It seems as though they're not thinking as clearly as they should be [ ... ] Weblogs are doing all the work that the U.S. media did in the past," Dennis said. "That's an interesting development."

[See story earlier today linking to the blog the BBC has set up to keep track of British political resignations.]

Cook received a standing ovation. Here is the full text of Robin Cook's resignation speech in the House of Commons, which won applause from some backbenchers in unprecedented Commons scenes.

This is the first time for 20 years that I have addressed the House from the back benches.

I must confess that I had forgotten how much better the view is from here.

None of those 20 years were more enjoyable or more rewarding than the past two, in which I have had the immense privilege of serving this House as Leader of the House, which were made all the more enjoyable, Mr Speaker, by the opportunity of working closely with you.

It was frequently the necessity for me as Leader of the House to talk my way out of accusations that a statement had been preceded by a press interview.

On this occasion I can say with complete confidence that no press interview has been given before this statement.

I have chosen to address the House first on why I cannot support a war without international agreement or domestic support.

Backing Blair

The present Prime Minister is the most successful leader of the Labour party in my lifetime.

I hope that he will continue to be the leader of our party, and I hope that he will continue to be successful. I have no sympathy with, and I will give no comfort to, those who want to use this crisis to displace him.

I applaud the heroic efforts that the prime minister has made in trying to secure a second resolution.

I do not think that anybody could have done better than the foreign secretary in working to get support for a second resolution within the Security Council.

But the very intensity of those attempts underlines how important it was to succeed.

Now that those attempts have failed, we cannot pretend that getting a second resolution was of no importance.

French intransigence?

France has been at the receiving end of bucket loads of commentary in recent days.

It is not France alone that wants more time for inspections. Germany wants more time for inspections; Russia wants more time for inspections; indeed, at no time have we signed up even the minimum necessary to carry a second resolution.

We delude ourselves if we think that the degree of international hostility is all the result of President Chirac.

The reality is that Britain is being asked to embark on a war without agreement in any of the international bodies of which we are a leading partner - not NATO, not the European Union and, now, not the Security Council.

To end up in such diplomatic weakness is a serious reverse.

Only a year ago, we and the United States were part of a coalition against terrorism that was wider and more diverse than I would ever have imagined possible.

'Heavy price'

History will be astonished at the diplomatic miscalculations that led so quickly to the disintegration of that powerful coalition.

The US can afford to go it alone, but Britain is not a superpower.

Our interests are best protected not by unilateral action but by multilateral agreement and a world order governed by rules.

Yet tonight the international partnerships most important to us are weakened: the European Union is divided; the Security Council is in stalemate.

Those are heavy casualties of a war in which a shot has yet to be fired.

I have heard some parallels between military action in these circumstances and the military action that we took in Kosovo. There was no doubt about the multilateral support that we had for the action that we took in Kosovo.

It was supported by NATO; it was supported by the European Union; it was supported by every single one of the seven neighbours in the region. France and Germany were our active allies.

It is precisely because we have none of that support in this case that it was all the more important to get agreement in the Security Council as the last hope of demonstrating international agreement.

Public doubts

The legal basis for our action in Kosovo was the need to respond to an urgent and compelling humanitarian crisis.

Our difficulty in getting support this time is that neither the international community nor the British public is persuaded that there is an urgent and compelling reason for this military action in Iraq.

The threshold for war should always be high.

None of us can predict the death toll of civilians from the forthcoming bombardment of Iraq, but the US warning of a bombing campaign that will "shock and awe" makes it likely that casualties will be numbered at least in the thousands.

I am confident that British servicemen and women will acquit themselves with professionalism and with courage. I hope that they all come back.

I hope that Saddam, even now, will quit Baghdad and avert war, but it is false to argue that only those who support war support our troops.

It is entirely legitimate to support our troops while seeking an alternative to the conflict that will put those troops at risk.

Nor is it fair to accuse those of us who want longer for inspections of not having an alternative strategy.

For four years as foreign secretary I was partly responsible for the western strategy of containment.

Over the past decade that strategy destroyed more weapons than in the Gulf war, dismantled Iraq's nuclear weapons programme and halted Saddam's medium and long-range missiles programmes.

Iraq's military strength is now less than half its size than at the time of the last Gulf war.

Threat questioned

Ironically, it is only because Iraq's military forces are so weak that we can even contemplate its invasion. Some advocates of conflict claim that Saddam's forces are so weak, so demoralised and so badly equipped that the war will be over in a few days.

We cannot base our military strategy on the assumption that Saddam is weak and at the same time justify pre-emptive action on the claim that he is a threat.

Iraq probably has no weapons of mass destruction in the commonly understood sense of the term - namely a credible device capable of being delivered against a strategic city target.

It probably still has biological toxins and battlefield chemical munitions, but it has had them since the 1980s when US companies sold Saddam anthrax agents and the then British Government approved chemical and munitions factories.

Why is it now so urgent that we should take military action to disarm a military capacity that has been there for 20 years, and which we helped to create?

Why is it necessary to resort to war this week, while Saddam's ambition to complete his weapons programme is blocked by the presence of UN inspectors?

Israeli breaches

Only a couple of weeks ago, Hans Blix told the Security Council that the key remaining disarmament tasks could be completed within months.

I have heard it said that Iraq has had not months but 12 years in which to complete disarmament, and that our patience is exhausted.

Yet it is more than 30 years since resolution 242 called on Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories.

We do not express the same impatience with the persistent refusal of Israel to comply.

I welcome the strong personal commitment that the prime minister has given to middle east peace, but Britain's positive role in the middle east does not redress the strong sense of injustice throughout the Muslim world at what it sees as one rule for the allies of the US and another rule for the rest.

Nor is our credibility helped by the appearance that our partners in Washington are less interested in disarmament than they are in regime change in Iraq.

That explains why any evidence that inspections may be showing progress is greeted in Washington not with satisfaction but with consternation: it reduces the case for war.

Presidential differences

What has come to trouble me most over past weeks is the suspicion that if the hanging chads in Florida had gone the other way and Al Gore had been elected, we would not now be about to commit British troops.

The longer that I have served in this place, the greater the respect I have for the good sense and collective wisdom of the British people.

On Iraq, I believe that the prevailing mood of the British people is sound. They do not doubt that Saddam is a brutal dictator, but they are not persuaded that he is a clear and present danger to Britain.

They want inspections to be given a chance, and they suspect that they are being pushed too quickly into conflict by a US Administration with an agenda of its own.

Above all, they are uneasy at Britain going out on a limb on a military adventure without a broader international coalition and against the hostility of many of our traditional allies.

From the start of the present crisis, I have insisted, as Leader of the House, on the right of this place to vote on whether Britain should go to war.

It has been a favourite theme of commentators that this House no longer occupies a central role in British politics.

Nothing could better demonstrate that they are wrong than for this House to stop the commitment of troops in a war that has neither international agreement nor domestic support.

I intend to join those tomorrow night who will vote against military action now. It is for that reason, and for that reason alone, and with a heavy heart, that I resign from the government.

BBC NEWS | Politics | Cook's resignation speech

Peter Turnley's photographs of the first Iraq War.

http://digitaljournalist.org/issue0212/pt_index.html

The Guardian has an extensive series of excerpts from Marine Lance Corporal Anthony Swofford's book Jarhead, detailing his expereinces as a sniper during the last Gulf War. Swofford came from a military family. He was a US marine to the bone. But when he was sent to fight in the 1991 Gulf war and saw the devastation he was part of, doubts and despair set in. What were they fighting for? He tells how it felt to be a soldier on the ground, under fire from the enemy, and, worse, from his own side. Sobering stuff.

Then we send a few guys downtown to rent all of the war movies they can get their hands on. For three days we sit in our rec room and drink beer and watch all of those damned movies [...]

There is talk that many Vietnam films are anti-war, that the message is war is inhumane and look what happens when you train young American men to fight and kill. But, actually, Vietnam war films are all pro-war, no matter what Kubrick or Coppola or Stone intended. Mr and Mrs Johnson in Omaha or San Francisco will watch the films and weep and decide war is inhumane and terrible, but Corporal Johnson at Camp Pendleton and Sergeant Johnson at Travis Air Force Base and Lance Corporal Swofford at Twentynine Palms Marine Corps Base watch the same films and are excited by them, because they celebrate the terrible and despicable beauty of their fighting skills.

(Gothic News Service, 03/17/03) The "National Purge & Shape" Sculpture Competition has just awarded Salty Dog Productions this year's Prize for a proposal to create salt encrusted figures of President George Bush, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, and Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar that will be placed together on the edge of the Great Salt Lake. In today's Press Release, it is announced that "The sculptures -- absolutely realistic in height and shape -- will be composed of crystals filtered and hardened from a special processing plant that sits on a barge in the middle of the lake. The Lake's crystals--especially under full sunlight--are noted for the way they absorb, refract and distill translucent light in a manner described by many as "purifying."

Salty Dog Productions--in a joint statement with the National Purge & Shape Foundation--declared that the sculptures will be sited on a flat steel base on a beach within easy driving distance from Salt Lake City. Asked why the sculpture was not located closer to the Spiral Jetty - the Lake's world renown sculpture by the late Robert Smithson -- Salty Dog representatives indicated that they did not want to sew any visual or critical confusion with the other work. "Our platform of the figures of Bush, Blair and Aznar will only resemble the Jetty experience in the way the seasonal level of the Lake's water will also rise up to cover the work. Occasionally the public will not be able to see the figures at all. As the work's principle figures re-emerge, additional salt will have further encrusted their shapes and re-introduce them into another cycle of purification. It will be a process that the American and International public can take years to witness and appreciate."

According to the Press Release, site Drawings and Location will be released as soon Utah State authorities hold hearings to approve the plans and location.

18.03.03, Bilkent University, Ankara, Turkey
 
There's a lot of talk here, as there is everywhere, about what Americans are made of. How much manifest stupidity and malice can there be in a nation's will to violence? I keep telling my students to be as exacting in their denunciations of the actions of the Bush administration as they are in their affections for American films and music.

As a Canadian teaching American culture and literature in Turkey, I feel strangely caught in the middle. My students see me as quasi-American and as an ersatz spokesperson for American values. What could be more ridiculous than that? And yet, here I am, teaching American culture to students who, most of them anyway, love and hate America in almost equal measure. That I can understand.
 
All of the missile launchers have left the Mediterranean and have passed through the Suez canal bound for the Red Sea where they can send their weapons without having to violate Turkish airspace. No doubt the dozens of cargo ships loaded with jeeps and tanks and artillery will turn tail soon, if they haven't already.
 
Euan, who was born three months before we came here, is learning to walk. We are mobbed by incredibly affectionate well-wishers whenever we step out in public. His blue eyes.
 
My former student Levent wrote to me recently to say that he wouldn't be able to drop by for a long time. He was passed over by the military. Instead he will join a Turkish company and work as a guide and translator for American soldiers in Diyabikir, near the Iraq border. As all Turks do, he asked me to kiss the baby for him and give his best wishes to my wife.
 
All this recent protracted talk about the Americans hit a high pitch around the time that the Turkish parlaiment voted down the government's resolution to allow the US to use Turkish air bases in the eastern part of the country. It also coincided with the section of my American Poetry class on counter-cultural modernism (a designation I use to characterize works that turn from literature and attempt to interpellate techniques and strategies from other media and other art practices (cubism, oral performance, documentary, etc.). I thought the subject and the times called for something different so I read from The Making of Americans for 45 minutes. I have been reading The Making of Americans to Euan since before he was born. I was also thinking, when I came up with this crazy idea, of Stein's descriptions of American soldiers in France during the wars she lived through.
 
I began to read, moving the text closer and closer to my face in order to bear down on the syntax and maintain the rhythm. I wanted my students to HEAR Stein. I thought that if they just sat there and listened they would break through their resistence to it. I have been moved to the brink of tears by reading The Making of Americans. If my students could get the rhythm they might slide into a groove and go with that. That that mightnot happen hadn't occurred to me.
 
At first I felt stupid and manipulative for doing this, but I hadn't prepared anything else so I had to go on. Eventually, I worked myself into a mythic kind of dry-mouthed trance, swaying back and forth, sucking the words off the page and setting them down in the ether in front of me. They seemed to hang there a moment before vanishing. I had tunneled into the text and there was no need to look up. Something like the "perpetual present," which I had always thought of as bollocks, "came athwart me", as Wordsworth says. There was no there there.
 
When I stopped, the stupid feeling returned to me. Some of my students were clearly also in a trance, others sat with their arms crossed, others, I realized, had spent the time text-messaging their friends. The students who felt like talking said it sucked, that they hated all that repetition, it irritated them.
 
I felt like my experiment was a failure. I walked home mildly scolding myself for winging it yet again. The next day I received this response from one of my students:

--

The Making of Americans: In class, repetition of words was criticized. Respecting these ideas, I declare that I am against such a view. Mind and deliverance, in other words mantra is a word which is repeated over and over. Instead of fooling or mocking, it brings full concentration against disruption, so in a way it eases identification. I think The Making of Americans comes with many mantras. My views are based on hearing. Within a short time of period, while listening to it I am evoked by the sound and the repeated words help me to initiate. I am sure if there were no paper sounds and laughs, I could easily meditate. While reading it, I received deliverance, because the flow of the language activated Asmita. If you ask me what I got from the novel(?), I cannot give you a summary, but if you ask me what I got from it, I can say that my mind was set free from material inclinations.

--

"Onward!" as Creeley says.

People in Britain are leaving the David Blair Labour government rapidly enough that the BBC is maintaining a weblog to keep track of the dissenters. Watch for the vote later today ...

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article1248.shtml

Rachel Corrie, 23 year old peace activist from Olympia, Washington, was murdered in Gaza while opposing the bulldozing of a Palestinian home. The photos that accompany the story make it quite clear that her death was, in fact, murder.

(Gothic News Service, 03/14) The White House Cabinet DJ today was asked to change the music that greets Bush Cabinet Members before opening the morning meeting.

In recent weeks -- in the spirit of creating a "Coalition of the Willing" -- officials typically arrive and tap their shoes and shake their padded shoulders while Mick Jagger and The Rolling Stones belt out multiple choruses of "Under My Thumb."

The week at the United Nations, however, has been a United States' embarrassment and public relation's disaster. "A Non-starter" is how Bush's aides privately sum up the Administrations attempt to coerce and/or finance six practically bankrupt countries into supporting the British/US Resolution to eliminate UN Inspections.

"Jagger is no longer on the menu," Bush told the Cabinet DJ. "Unfortunately, all of us have to get into the spirit of letting Blair know that we are about to hang him out to dry.  Make the song as sad as you want."

Arriving at this mornings meeting, Cabinet Members soon pulled out their tissues, sat down and hung their heads over the table and listened to repeated cuts of Neal Young singing, "Helpless, Helpless, Helpless."

"That's just what I wanted," the President nodded approvingly to the DJ. "Helpless is it."

"I think he's a whiner," Rumsfeld announced. .

"If the shoe don't fit, Mr. Secretary," the President shot back, "Dont wear it. Let's Pray!"

Presidential spokespersons refused to confirm or refute the story, particularly whether or not Cabinet members were actually shedding tears. "We do not -- in any way, shape or form -- ever approve of or comment on Cabinet leaks."

(Stephen Vincent)

[This post refers to an earlier piece on Circulars by Charles Bernstein and Kent Johnson's reply on Skanky Possum.]

I am always surprised to hear resistance to the simple observation that politics, ethics and aesthetics are necessarily joined. Kent Johnson's anger that Charles Bernstein would continue to insist so looks out of place when claiming that the way something is said or presented determines what is meant and what is understood, is at this point, almost a matter of stating the obvious. It is no different than observing that if you say "I love you" while rolling your eyes you mean something very different than if you say "I love you" with a smile. How we speak and write is what we mean—aesthetics are never secondary.

Allowing that aesthetics and ethics are one recognizes that naming constitutes difference. A politics that rejects aesthetics as argument only names differences. The former confronts political violence at the moment of its creation; the later arrives to late, screaming thief after the money is gone.

Reading Bernstein's statement carefully, it is clear that he is not suggesting that poets should refrain from engaging in political activity within the community at large. Rather he speaks to the role of poets, as poets—what their poems should be doing in and for that community. Labeling Bernstein's position as "fundamentalist" because it is not "multifarious" can only acknowledge positions that claim no other truth than heterogeneity as an idea. Such a critique fails when it attempts to escape the burden of debate, demonstrating as it does that it is too easy to call people fundamentalists only because they insist that something, anything, is true.

More dangerously, a leftist politics that rejects belief is perilous because it is a politics that creates the possibility of its own irrelevance. Witness President Bush's response to the recent war protesters. In embracing the democratic rhetoric of free speech President Bush could say, in plain words, "protesters certainly have the right to express their opinion, but I respectfully disagree." He could ignore nearly 40 percent of the population by appearing to listen. Of course there is nothing respectful in his tolerance of such voices, and his "Patriot Act" dismisses any real allegiance to the Constitution, but what is crucial about his response is that it turns war protest into a mere voicing of preference. As with all such simple 'differences of opinion,' the administration need no longer account for dissent among its constituents; it elides a government by the people for the people through the rhetoric of liberal democracy. President Bush uses the sound of tolerance to turn the differences between himself and his opposition into the same thing as the differences of opinion at a cocktail party—everybody gets to say what they believe, nobody changes their mind or really listens, and everyone leaves feeling polite and self-congratulatory.

Measuring poetry's success as political resistance by its ability to last, or move beyond aesthetic concerns, then, does not account for the manner in which political violence now occurs in our country. Which is to say that the Bush Administration's aggression rests on a constant abuse of language. Early in his war on terror we saw this type of language molestation when President Bush named his Afghan prisoners "detainies" rather than prisoners of war. What our country could do to these people in our name depended completely on their name.

While such indignity is not new to the current administration, the success of this abuse of words depends on our willingness to engage in an issues debate rather than our contesting the way the debate is carried out—an aesthetic concern if there ever was one. The difference between these two options is crucial because once we agree to argue over the issues only, the Administration can dismiss us altogether. We must not be willing, as poets, as keepers of language, to engage in such a discharge of words' significance. We cannot agree to name differences rather than using naming to constitute difference. We cannot hope to be relevant if we agree to a political debate that turns our position into mere opinion and takes away our most powerful weapon—the ability to understand and reveal how words come to mean what they do.

Maintaining that aesthetic partisanship for innovative writing is vain poetic infighting and not actual political work sides with the forces that believe words don't matter in the first place, that say nit-picking over what words mean is elitist and exclusionary rather than necessary for the health of our Republic.

Poets should take a leading role in political resistance, but this resistance should occur in more than one manner. We can speak out in 'normal' speech in any number of political situations, but we must also resist on the level of discourse itself; it is only on this level that we can mount a serious challenge to Bush's politics on his terms, terms that force us and our antagonists to fight over the same thing—the meaning a word like 'freedom' is going to have, and the way such a word can be used. We must insist, in our poems, as well as in our protests, letters, and speeches, that Bush take better care of his words. We can for our part not give into his desire that we limit our debate to civil disagreement, or at worst, fix our ourselves in ideologies so we may stare across the table and think the other person is the devil. By continuing to insist that words like 'justice' and 'freedom' occur in the way we use them, and that we are responsible to these definitions, not the other way around, we can begin to see how words are abused by others or by ourselves for the sake of power and control. It is here that we can ground or physical, worldly, resistance to that abuse. Aesthetics are not a matter of taste, a matter of preferring right angles over curves, bright colors over dull; aesthetics are that which shape our world.

Poetry helps us reshape that world by asking us to examine the way we use language in the first place. As Bernstein argues, to turn a poem into a political speech is to say poetry is not relevant as poetry. While the temptation to only speak 'plainly' is great, to do so is also to abandon what is most politically useful about our cultural position as people who dedicate themselves to investigating how words determine and represent all of our lives. When we give up aesthetics we give up the ability to make our cultural and political realties for ourselves. When it examines method of its production, poetry is the ability to act on the tools that would make us other than what we wish to be.

The world stands on the brink of war. It appears increasingly likely – though not certain – that the Bush administration will trigger an assault against Iraq within the next few days, despite the disapproval of the vast majority of citizens in virtually every country in the world. Such an attack would be an unjust war, in violation of international law, and an immoral refusal to seek peaceful resolution of conflict when such a resolution is possible.

UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) has declared March 21 to be World Poetry Day, with an emphasis on poetry with “topical themes like the culture of peace, non-violence, tolerance, etc.” (See www.unesco.org/culture/creativity/literature/html_eng/poesie1.shtml)

Poets Against the War calls upon poets everywhere to transform March 21, World Poetry Day, into a day of poetry against the war, to organize readings of poetry against the war in cities, towns, villages, and homes, and to present the 13,000 poems that have been published on the poetsagainstthewar.org web site to governments everywhere.

To create a reading for World Poetry Day, go to
poetsagainstthewar.org/createreading.asp.

To create a presentation to a government or organization of 13,000 antiwar poems, plus a list of 12,000 poets and a chapbook of 35 highlighted poems from poetsagainstthewar.org, go to poetsagainstthewar.org/downloadpoems.asp.

Yours for peace,
Poets Against the War

-----------------------------------------------

**We still need your help. Please donate now!**

We have current large debts and some very large future expenses to pay for,
and we still need your help to make a powerful statement against the war.
Please make the most generous donation you can to Poets Against the War.
Visit poetsagainstthewar.org, and click on Donate.

Or send checks payable to "Poets Against the War" to:

Poets Against the War
Box 1614
Port Townsend, WA 98368

For more information about donating to Poets Against the War, contact
donate@poetsagainstthewar.org. Peace and thanks.

[Bob Perelman sent me this link... I haven't read it yet.]

I usually think Perry Anderson is great. His piece on Iraq assumptions, though, seems awfully slanted toward Bush's p-o-v. Surprising. There's a good rebuttle on the Counterpunch website:

http://www.counterpunch.org/neumann03102003.html

I grieve for our nation, and the untold suffering that will be wrought. As history has shown, you can possess the greatest armaments in the world, but if your cause and motives are not right, only catastrophe will result.

Jack Walters

P.O. Box 512, Columbia, MO 65205 - 573-474-4449 - Email: rapid.press@verizon.net

OUR COUNTRY ABOVE POLITICS

As the Bush administration moves toward certain war in the Middle East—a war which I believe nothing good will come from, a war which is unjust, unnecessary, and a war which will undoubtedly widen, perhaps even into world war, thereby placing our nation in dire peril—I have made a decision regarding my position as Boone County Republican Chairman.

Wars are easy to get into, but very difficult to get out of. They can sap the moral and spiritual fiber of a nation, squander lives and resources, deplete scarce funds, cause undue hardship on all involved, destroy families, and engender hopelessness.

I have questioned both the motives for military action at this time, and the ever-changing, illogical justifications presented to us in what has to be one of the greatest media propaganda blitzes ever force-fed a populace. Any time ground troops are deployed, serious questions must be asked and real answers demanded. The jingoistic rhetoric we are receiving does not constitute legitimate answers.

The consequences of our planned attack on Iraq (and also probably Iran, given the size of our forces and their location in proximity to Iran), should cause us all to pause. The Pentagon has announced that we will hit Baghdad with a force almost equal to the bombing of Hiroshima. Obviously many thousands of civilians will perish, with untold thousands maimed. And for what? To liberate them? To bring them freedom? Or democracy? Or is it to really secure the world’s second largest oil reserve and establish a base from which to subjugate other Middle Eastern nations? Is it also the plan for Israel to use the cover of war to forcibly relocate the Palestinian population (as has been publicly stated by some members of Israel’s current government)?

How on earth have we arrived at this crucial juncture in our country’s history? How has a war on terrorism been converted into an attack on Iraq? What threat does Iraq pose to us? We must lay the blame squarely on our congress, who according to our Constitution, only has the power to declare war. For congress to cede it’s war-making power to the executive branch is unconstitutional on the very face of it and effectively destroys our three branches of government. Circumventing our Constitution is very bad, and the undeclared wars, which have resulted in our recent history, have had disastrous results. Undeclared wars have no declared objectives, and therefore can widen at will, and our foray into the Middle East will likely set in motion a long-term wave of retaliation. Indeed, I believe that the administration would like to entice Iraq into firing the first blow so some justification could be paraded at the United Nations. If the United States government can adopt this unreal doctrine of preemptive attack on any nation, anywhere, at any time, so can other nations! This is how world wars begin. If the President goes into Iraq alone without a UN resolution, he will be in violation of the war powers given him last October by congress which was contingent on UN approval. A constitutional crisis will occur.

What we are about to do in the Middle East is abhorrent to me. It is made doubly so since this is a contrived and fraudulently justified war with hidden objectives. The coming mass slaughter of innocents, the harm our own troops are being placed in, and the potential for wars on several fronts have brought home to me the sobering realization that by remaining Boone County Republican Chairman, I would be giving tacit approval to this imminent war, and tacit approval to the belligerent and reckless language coming from the White House. The safety and integrity of our country outweighs politics.

I therefore resign as Chairman of the Boone County Republican Central Committee effective at noon, March 10, 2003. I do not wish to be Chairman when this tragedy starts. I am not resigning to placate those who have demanded same. I do not fear them in the least. I was quite willing to stand and face an ouster vote. I am resigning because I cannot support the Republican position on this war. I only sought the position of Chairman originally in the hope that I could recruit God-fearing, thinking, pro-life believers in our Constitution to stand for office.

I grieve for our nation, and the untold suffering that will be wrought. As history has shown, you can possess the greatest armaments in the world, but if your cause and motives are not right, only catastrophe will result.

Jack Walters, March 8, 2003

The War of Misinformation Has Begun

All across the Middle East, they are deploying by the thousand. In the deserts of Kuwait, in Amman, in northern Iraq, in Turkey, in Israel and in Baghdad itself. There must be 7,000 journalists and crews "in theatre", as the more jingoistic of them like to say. In Qatar, a massive press center has been erected for journalists who will not see the war. How many times General Tommy Franks will spin his story to the press at the nine o'clock follies, no one knows. He doesn't even like talking to journalists.

But the journalistic resources being laid down in the region are enormous. The BBC alone has 35 reporters in the Middle East, 17 of them "embedded" – along with hundreds of reporters from the American networks and other channels – in military units. Once the invasion starts, they will lose their freedom to write what they want. There will be censorship. And, I'll hazard a guess right now, we shall see many of the British and American journalists back to their old trick of playing toy soldiers, dressing themselves up in military costumes for their nightly theatrical performances on television. Incredibly, several of the American networks have set up shop in the Kurdish north of Iraq with orders not to file a single story until war begins – in case this provokes the Iraqis to expel their network reporters from Baghdad.

The orchestration will be everything, the pictures often posed, the angles chosen by "minders", much as the Iraqis will try to do the same thing in Baghdad. Take yesterday's front-page pictures of massed British troops in Kuwait, complete with arranged tanks and perfectly formatted helicopters. This was the perfectly planned photo-op. Of course, it won't last.

Here's a few guesses about our coverage of the war to come. American and British forces use thousands of depleted uranium (DU) shells – widely regarded by 1991 veterans as the cause of Gulf War syndrome as well as thousands of child cancers in present day Iraq – to batter their way across the Kuwaiti-Iraqi frontier. Within hours, they will enter the city of Basra, to be greeted by its Shia Muslim inhabitants as liberators. US and British troops will be given roses and pelted with rice – a traditional Arab greeting – as they drive "victoriously" through the streets. The first news pictures of the war will warm the hearts of Messrs Bush and Blair. There will be virtually no mention by reporters of the use of DU munitions.

But in Baghdad, reporters will be covering the bombing raids that are killing civilians by the score and then by the hundred. These journalists, as usual, will be accused of giving "comfort to the enemy while British troops are fighting for their lives". By now, in Basra and other "liberated" cities south of the capital, Iraqis are taking their fearful revenge on Saddam Hussein's Baath party officials. Men are hanged from lamp-posts. Much television footage of these scenes will have to be cut to sanitize the extent of the violence.

Far better for the US and British governments will be the macabre discovery of torture chambers and "rape-rooms" and prisoners with personal accounts of the most terrible suffering at the hands of Saddam's secret police. This will "prove" how right "we" are to liberate these poor people. Then the US will have to find the "weapons of mass destruction" that supposedly provoked this bloody war. In the journalistic hunt for these weapons, any old rocket will do for the moment.

Bunkers allegedly containing chemical weapons will be cordoned off – too dangerous for any journalist to approach, of course. Perhaps they actually do contain VX or anthrax. But for the moment, the all-important thing for Washington and London is to convince the world that the causus belli was true – and reporters, in or out of military costume, will be on hand to say just that.

Baghdad is surrounded and its defenders ordered to surrender. There will be fighting between Shias and Sunnis around the slums of the city, the beginning of a ferocious civil conflict for which the invading armies are totally unprepared. US forces will sweep past Baghdad to his home city of Tikrit in their hunt for Saddam Hussein. Bush and Blair will appear on television to speak of their great "victories". But as they are boasting, the real story will begin to be told: the break-up of Iraqi society, the return of thousands of Basra refugees from Iran, many of them with guns, all refusing to live under western occupation.

In the north, Kurdish guerrillas will try to enter Kirkuk, where they will kill or "ethnically cleanse" many of the city's Arab inhabitants. Across Iraq, the invading armies will witness terrible scenes of revenge which can no longer be kept off television screens. The collapse of the Iraqi nation is now under way ...

Of course, the Americans and British just might get into Baghdad in three days for their roses and rice water. That's what the British did in 1917. And from there, it was all downhill.

Weasel words to watch for

'Inevitable revenge' – for the executions of Saddam's Baath party officials which no one actually said were inevitable.

'Stubborn' or 'suicidal' – to be used when Iraqi forces fight rather than retreat.

'Allegedly' – for all carnage caused by Western forces.

'At last, the damning evidence' – used when reporters enter old torture chambers.

'Officials here are not giving us much access' – a clear sign that reporters in Baghdad are confined to their hotels.

'Life goes on' – for any pictures of Iraq's poor making tea.

'Remnants' – allegedly 'diehard' Iraqi troops still shooting at the Americans but actually the first signs of a resistance movement dedicated to the 'liberation' of Iraq from its new western occupiers.

'Newly liberated' – for territory and cities newly occupied by the Americans or British.

'What went wrong?' – to accompany pictures illustrating the growing anarchy in Iraq as if it were not predicted.

If you live in the San Francisco Bay Area and are interested in learning about or participating in non-violent protests readied for the morning following the onset of war against Iraq, click here. You'll also find coverage of recent protests, and other useful links.

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v25/n05/print/ande01_.html

Perry Anderson, whom many will recognize from his writings in New Left Review, on the assumptions that the anti-war coaltion shares with Bush & Blair & how to think beyond them.

The most powerful state in history has proclaimed that it intends to control the world by force, the dimension in which it reigns supreme.

President Bush and his cohorts evidently believe that the means of violence in their hands are so extraordinary that they can dismiss anyone who stands in their way.

The consequences could be catastrophic in Iraq and around the world. The United States may reap a whirlwind of terrorist retaliation -- and step up the possibility of nuclear Armageddon.

Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and company are committed to an "imperial ambition," as G. John Ikenberry wrote in the September/October issue of Foreign Affairs -- "a unipolar world in which the United States has no peer competitor" and in which "no state or coalition could ever challenge it as global leader, protector and enforcer."

That ambition surely includes much expanded control over Persian Gulf resources and military bases to impose a preferred form of order in the region.

Even before the administration began beating the war drums against Iraq, there were plenty of warnings that U.S. adventurism would lead to proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, as well as terror, for deterrence or revenge.

Right now, Washington is teaching the world a dangerous lesson: If you want to defend yourself from us, you had better mimic North Korea and pose a credible threat. Otherwise we will demolish you.

There is good reason to believe that the war with Iraq is intended, in part, to demonstrate what lies ahead when the empire decides to strike a blow -- though "war" is hardly the proper term, given the gross mismatch of forces.

A flood of propaganda warns that if we do not stop Saddam Hussein today he will destroy us tomorrow.

Last October, when Congress granted the president the authority to go to war, it was "to defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq."

But no country in Iraq's neighborhood seems overly concerned about Saddam, much as they may hate the murderous tyrant.

Perhaps that is because the neighbors know that Iraq's people are at the edge of survival. Iraq has become one of the weakest states in the region. As a report from the American Academy of Arts and Sciences points out, Iraq's economy and military expenditures are a fraction of some of its neighbors'.

Indeed, in recent years, countries nearby have sought to reintegrate Iraq into the region, including Iran and Kuwait, both invaded by Iraq.

Saddam benefited from U.S. support through the war with Iran and beyond, up to the day of the invasion of Kuwait. Those responsible are largely back at the helm in Washington today.

President Ronald Reagan and the previous Bush administration provided aid to Saddam, along with the means to develop weapons of mass destruction, back when he was far more dangerous than he is now, and had already committed his worst crimes, like murdering thousands of Kurds with poison gas.

An end to Saddam's rule would lift a horrible burden from the people of Iraq. There is good reason to believe that he would suffer the fate of Nicolae Ceausescu and other vicious tyrants if Iraqi society were not devastated by harsh sanctions that force the population to rely on Saddam for survival while strengthening him and his clique.

Saddam remains a terrible threat to those within his reach. Today, his reach does not extend beyond his own domains, though it is likely that U.S. aggression could inspire a new generation of terrorists bent on revenge, and might induce Iraq to carry out terrorist actions suspected to be already in place.

Right now Saddam has every reason to keep under tight control any chemical and biological weapons that Iraq may have. He wouldn't provide such weapons to the Osama bin Ladens of the world, who represent a terrible threat to Saddam himself.

And administration hawks understand that, except as a last resort if attacked, Iraq is highly unlikely to use any weapons of mass destruction that it has -- and risk instant incineration.

Under attack, however, Iraqi society would collapse, including the controls over the weapons of mass destruction. These could be "privatized," as international security specialist Daniel Benjamin warns, and offered to the huge "market for unconventional weapons, where they will have no trouble finding buyers." That really is "a nightmare scenario," he says.

As for the fate of the people of Iraq in war, no one can predict with any confidence: not the CIA, not Rumsfeld, not those who claim to be experts on Iraq, no one.

But international relief agencies are preparing for the worst.

Studies by respected medical organizations estimate that the death toll could rise to the hundreds of thousands. Confidential U.N. documents warn that a war could trigger a "humanitarian emergency of exceptional scale" -- including the possibility that 30 percent of Iraqi children could die from malnutrition.

Today the administration doesn't seem to be heeding the international relief agency warnings about an attack's horrendous aftermath.

The potential disasters are among the many reasons why decent human beings do not contemplate the threat or use of violence, whether in personal life or international affairs, unless reasons have been offered that have overwhelming force. And surely nothing remotely like that justification has come forward.

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0313-07.htm

Noam Chomsky is a political activist, professor of linguistics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and author of the bestseller "9-11." He wrote this article for the New York Times Syndicate.

(Gothic News, 3/13/03) A t a first time, private meeting in Washington, D.C. is said to be now taking place between a group called the "Light Sculpture Collective" and Leaders of the Peace Movement. The meeting with the artists is to consider emergency proposals for a "Shock & Awe" Candle Light Procession to take place on the Capitol Moll this Sunday evening, March 16. At the moment rumors are cyber-flying around the globe that President Bush ­ unilaterally and/or with a couple of other client states ­plans early next week to launch devastating "Shock & Awe" attacks on Baghdad.

The Light Sculpture Collective ­ it¹s been learned ­ is introducing an urgent proposal to attract at least 40,000 people with "long burning" candles for a Procession to start on the grounds below the Capitol. Monitors will align participants in columns ­ stretching from one side of the Mall to the other ­ and walk West towards the Washington Monument. A central phalanx ­ 5 columns wide and 160 rows deep ­ is to be "manned" by participants who will carry 10 foot high replicas of the 800 Cruise Missiles, the number set to be unleashed on Baghdad during the opening days of the attack. The black fiberglass Missiles will symbolize attacks to be made under the cover of darkness. The Missile noses are illuminated by a red LED flashing out the letters "NO".

The Procession will start at nightfall and begin with a ritual lighting of the candles and include a bow toward Congressional Offices that Members immediately reconsider their vote in support of the War. After walking silently to the Washington Monument, the columns will reconfigure for a Casting of the Light into the White House and, in particular, President George Bush. Each Procession member is invited to walk as close as possible to the back of the White House and point and shake their candle toward the President¹s windows.

"In the manner of the President¹s Christian faith, if 40,000 of us can get Mister Bush to take in the accumulations of light ­ the "Shock and Awe" of it ­ we will have at least a slim chance at reconfiguring his and the Pentagon¹s plans for an Iraqi slaughter," a Light Sculpture Artist is quoted as saying.

The Procession will finish with a configuring of the 800 Cruise Missiles in a circle of "NO" noses pointed in toward the Washington Monument.

The Meeting is expected to reach a decision by late this afternoon.

(Stephen Vincent)

[Here's the photo Ron Silliman alludes to below, which is hard to find on the site...]

www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Weapons_of_mass_deception

Iraqi President Saddam Hussein greets Donald Rumsfeld, then special envoy of President Ronald Reagan, in Baghdad on December 20, 1983.

rabble.ca has posted a petition that offers George W. Bush, his entire family and all of his closest advisors asylum in Canada.

CLICK HERE TO VIEW/SIGN PETITION.

www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Disinfopedia_Main_Page

Check out the 1983 photo of Rummy shaking Saddam Hussein's hand, on the Weapons of Mass Destruction page.

DIALOGUE THROUGH POETRY / WORLD POETRY DAY

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Prominent Poets and High School Students Celebrate World Poetry Day in New York City and Read Poems About Peace.

CONTACT: Ram Devineni, Program Coordinator

1-212-560-7459 / 1-212-723-4125 or devineni@dialoguepoetry.org

Renowned poets Robert Creeley, Marilyn Hacker, Vijay Seshadri, Grace Schulman, Amiri and Amini Baraka join High School students from around the world to celebrate UNESCO’s World Poetry Day and the United Nation’s “Dialogue Among Civilizations” on Wednesday, March 19, 2003 at 8:00 PM at Mason Hall, Baruch College, 17 Lexington Ave. at 23rd St. in New York City. The event is free and open to the public. In addition, UN Ambassadors will also read their poems.

High School students from around the world were asked to write poems about the United Nations and how it can foster peace in these troubling times. The free competition was organized by the CCNY Poetry Outreach Center, which has hosted the Spring Poetry Festival for over 30 years, Rattapallax magazine, and Baruch College Performing Arts Center. The New York City winners include Katarzyna Kozanecka from Stuyvesant High School and Mohammed Abbasi from Brooklyn Technical High School.

Also, prominent women poets will join Swami Ramananada for a reading dedicated to the United Nations’ Declaration on the “Elimination of All Forms of Violence Against Women” on March 20, 2003 at 8:00 PM at the New York Open Center, 83 Spring Street, New York City. Some of the featured poets include Veronica Golos, Haale, Maria Terrone, D.H. Melhem, Flavia Rocha, Elaine Schwager, Daniela Gioseffi, Ruth Nolan, and many others. The reading coincides with a three-day program organized by Nela Rio at St. Thomas University, Fredericton, Canada.

Robert Creeley has published more than sixty books of poetry in the United States and abroad, including Just in Time: Poems 1984-1994. His honors include the Lannan Lifetime Achievement Award, the Frost Medal, the Shelley Memorial Award, a National Endowment for the Arts grant, a Rockefeller Foundation grant, and fellowships from the Guggenheim Foundation. Marilyn Hacker is the author of nine books, including Presentation Piece, which received the National Book Award in 1975. Her Selected Poems was awarded the Poets' Prize in 1996. She now lives in New York and Paris, and is director of the M.A. program in English literature and creative writing at the City College of New York. Vijay Seshadri was born in India and lives in Brooklyn, NY. Graywolf Press published a collection of his poetry, Wild Kingdom. He is Chair, Writing Program in Non-Fiction at Sarah Lawrence College. Grace Schulman's The Paintings of Our Lives, was released by Houghton Mifflin in February, 2001. She is Poetry Editor of the Nation, and former director of the Poetry Center, 92nd Street Y. Amiri Baraka’s wrote the play the Dutchman, which won an Obie Award for "best off-Broadway play" and was made into a film. In 1983, he and Amina Baraka edited Confirmation: An Anthology of African-American Women, which won an American Book Award and in 1987 they published The Music: Reflections on Jazz and Blues. Amiri Baraka’s literary prizes and honors include fellowships from the Guggenheim Foundation and the National Endowment for the Arts, the PEN/Faulkner Award, the Rockefeller Foundation Award for Drama, and the Langston Hughes Award.

For more information about the program please visit http://www.dialoguepoetry.org

National campaign of civil disobedience in Washington DC, and throughout the country, starting on March 17

Dear Friends,

The world stands on the cusp of war - or peace. Each day the Bush Administration becomes more isolated in the United Nations and in the court of world opinion. Now, their one major ally, Tony Blair, is losing his grip on power and it is very unlikely the U.S. can win even a symbolic majority in the UN Security Council.

It would be foolish of us, however, to become too hopeful, to feel any certainty that we can stop a blizzard of "precision-guided munitions" raining down on innocent Iraqi families. The president and his advisors have gambled so much on this disastrous strategy that they may go to war simply to save face.

What can we do to tip the balance?

Three days ago, on March 9, United for Peace and Justice convened an emergency national meeting in Washington, DC, attended by 100 people from over 40 national organizations and local coalitions, to answer this question. We agreed on a short-term program, including coordinated local actions, strong responses if Bush does go to war, and doing the work needed to strengthen United for Peace and Justice and build a permanent campaign.

Most importantly, we enthusiastically united around an Emergency Action Plan to Stop the War--over the next two weeks. The highlight of the plan is a national campaign of civil disobedience in Washington DC, and throughout the country, starting on March 17.

To be successful, we need your help to carry it out. If every one of the 31,000 people receiving this email takes at least one of the actions below, and forwards it to everyone they know, we can begin to reclaim our democracy as we generate a storm of protest and visible outrage aimed at Congress and the media.

NOW IS TO THE TIME TO DO ALL WE CAN TO STOP THIS WAR.

A. Immediate Congressional Pressure

This week, on Thursday, March 13 and Friday, March 14, call, email, fax or visit the office of your Congressional Representative and Senators. Demand their immediate action to block the president's rush to war. Tell them you will be at their office on Monday, March 17 and will stay as long as necessary to get their agreement. What kind of action should they take? Sign on to Rep. Peter DeFazio¹s HJ Res. 20, to repeal the war resolution, or Senators Kennedy's and Byrd's S.Res. 32, to require the President to return to Congress for authorization to use force.

B. Join Anti-War Protests in Washington, DC this Weekend.

If you can, come to Washington, DC for the March 15 rally organized by International ANSWER at the Washington Monument, and stay over for March 17. On that day, United for Peace and Justice will blockade the Capitol. The National Youth and Student Peace Coalition, the Iraq Pledge of Resistance and the National Peace Lobby Project (all part of United for Peace and Justice) have taken a lead role in organizing this important action. We will demand that Congress rescind its war resolution of last October and call for a peaceful resolution of the Iraq situation. Contact reclaimthecapitol@yahoo.com and see www.unitedforpeace.org for more information on this emergency nonviolent direct action protest, including the time and location of the civil disobedience training on March 16. We also urge you to participate in the worldwide candlelight vigil at 7 PM on March 16, organized by Win Without War and MoveOn (go to http://www.globalvigil.org ww.globalvigil.org/> for more information).

C. Make Your Voice Heard at Home on March 17th

If you cannot come to Washington, convene your local coalition - or create one right now - and plan to sit-in at your Member of Congress' office this coming Monday, March 17. And right away post your action on the United for Peace and Justice website: www.unitedforpeace.org The power of our collective action is magnified one hundred times by our ability to bring it all together and "project" it out to the mass media. The media want to hear from us, so please let us know what you're doing.

D. Make a Much Needed Donation

Go to http://www.unitedforpeace.org/article.php?id=160 and make an immediate donation to United for Peace and Justice. We've set up an Action office in Washington DC, we're mobilizing nationwide to make March 17 the loudest possible cry of distress, and we're working to ensure the best media coverage possible. Your financial support is critical to the success of this campaign. Send whatever you can, as much as you can--$5 or $50 or $500, but please send something today.

Time is very short, and we're counting on you. Think about our responsibilities, as the people of this country, to the rest of the world and to the children of Iraq. Let us not waste a moment to do all we can to stop this war.

In peace and hope,

Andrea Buffa
Leslie Cagan
Bill Fletcher, Jr.
Co-Chairs, United for Peace and Justice

by Alastair Hay
The Guardian

The US wants to use potentially lethal chemicals against Iraq - despite the fact that this would contravene international law

The US secretary of defence, Donald Rumsfeld, recently argued that the military should again be allowed to use chemicals as weapons of war in Iraq - not the tonnes of lethal nerve gases, such as sarin or tabun, which the US possesses, or its supply of mustard gas, which causes severe injuries and sometimes kills; no, Rumsfeld wants to take advantage of the US's stockpile of the misleadingly named "non-lethal" chemical agents, particularly those used for riot control. These cause temporary incapacitation for the majority, but can be lethal in confined spaces.

What Rumsfeld is proposing is illegal. The rules are set down by the chemical weapons convention (CWC), which became international law in 1997. It states that "any chemical which through its chemical action on life processes can cause death, temporary incapacition or permanent harm to humans or animals" is forbidden as a method of warfare. The US, along with some 140 other countries, including the UK, has signed this treaty and is pledged to uphold it.

Rumsfeld, in his testimony to the House of Representatives armed services committee last month, referred to the CWC as a "straitjacket" limiting US options in war. What the US should be able to do, Rumsfeld claims, is resort to the use of non-lethal agents in combat situations when there are civilians present and there is a need to preserve life. He gave two examples. The first was "when transporting dangerous people in a confined space", such as an aircraft. The second was when "women and children" are trapped with enemy troops "in a cave".

Such action is forbidden by international law. The CWC explicitly forbids the use of riot-control agents except for domestic law enforcement purposes. Under the CWC these and other chemicals can also be used for policing operations if the country's own laws permit them. The exemption applies only to those policing operations and not to any external armed conflict. It would be stretching credulity to argue that any prospective conflict with Iraq was a simple, policing operation.

Rumsfeld's desire to protect civilians is, in any case, totally impractical. In a confined space - an aircraft, or a cave - there is no way to guarantee that civilian exposure to the chemicals will always be low, and in high concentrations they kill.

Another group of chemicals Rumsfeld may be thinking of using are the so-called calmatives. There are a vast number of possible chemicals in this category based on the known substances used to relieve anxiety, treat depression or reduce pain. Precisely what calmatives the US possesses is not known.

Here, too, there are great risks, particularly in war. The recent Moscow Opera House siege was ended through the use of a calmative fed into the building through the air conditioning system. The Russian special forces are said to have used an opiate-based compound, a derivative of a chemical fentanyl, which is generally used in operations. But as we all now know it may have ended the siege, but at a terrible cost involving over 120 dead.

Why so many died is still a matter of dispute. What is incontestable is that many people were exposed to lethal concentrations. Although calmatives are effective at non-lethal concentrations, it is extremely difficult to ensure that everyone is only exposed to those amounts. To guarantee that individuals in the middle of a large room are sedated it is inevitable that those at the periphery and near air vents will be exposed to lethal amounts. Deaths are inevitable and if emergency services are not equipped to counteract the effects of the chemicals, the death toll will rise. The Moscow siege would appear to exemplify all these problems. In a war the situation would be even worse. Guaranteeing low exposure to chemicals would be very difficult, and as for providing emergency medical help in time, this is a forlorn hope.

The CWC is meant to be a straitjacket. Its provisions, elaborated over nearly 30 years of negotiations exist precisely to constrain combatants in war. There is, or should be, a mutual recognition that certain codes of conduct are important to uphold, such as accepting the surrender of an enemy and protecting prisoners and civilians. The CWC rules are an attempt to civilise war, if that is possible, and to protect non-combatants. This one group is increasingly vulnerable to the use of chemical warfare agents because it is always likely to have no protection against them.

The irony of all this is that should Rumsfeld persuade President Bush to authorise use of non-lethal agents (riot-control and/or others) Iraq would be entitled under the 1925 Geneva protocol to retaliate in kind. This protocol (of which both Iraq and the US are signatories) forbids first use of chemicals in war. And if, as is likely, use of chemicals resulted in deaths, Iraq could arguably resort to the use of lethal agents in its arsenal. In the heat of battle it would be difficult for Iraq's forces to discern that only non-lethal agents were being used against them. It would be understandable therefore, that they might resort to whatever was available to them to use. If, of course, they have any.

Should the US resort to the use of non-lethal agents it will seriously undermine the CWC. This fledgling disarmament treaty is universally cited as a model set of rules which we will all benefit from. Because a few members of the current US administration object to its constraints, this treaty may be about to be holed below the waterline.

Alastair Hay is professor of Environmental Toxicology at Leeds University

Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | Alastair Hay: War analysis: Out of the straitjacket

(Gothic News Service, 3/12/03)

Ashington, the small Florida community next to yesterday’s MOAB (Massive Ordinance Air Blast) test site on which the Air Force exploded an 18,000 pound bomb became the center of actions by a group known as the Banana Relief Collective. The MOAB - which is considered almost as "as good" as an atomic bomb - is designed to send a devastating wave of fire over hundreds of yards to kill troops and civilians, flatten trees, destroy buildings and take out significant portions of cities. These potential effects were not lost on the shattered nerves of the Ashington community. About 20 Banana Collective Relief members arrived in the village shortly after the bomb’s detonation. Each Member mostly in their twenties and early thirties - was easily and somewhat humorously identifiable by a conical-shaped, single banana leaf hat, carefully held together by a white and lavender pen inscribed with the words, "Relief Not Bombs."

The Collective’s members each standing besides shoulder-high stacks of banana leaves on several of Ashington’s downtown corners generously offered to make and put hats on each of the local adults and children. In an hour’s time, the streets, local groceries, ice cream and coffee shops were filled with the sight of a wave of bobbing green hats as citizens worked to dispell MOAB’s intense vibrations and aftershocks. (Gothic News Services’ Google investigation of healing oriented web sites revealed that the banana leaf is, in fact, alleged to absorb heat and anxiety among traumatized populations.)

One of the most popular distribution sites was the parking lot outside the local drugstore where the pharmacist, Dale Rogers, reported a huge run on Kaopectate. "Incidents of diarrhea are epidemic and affect every age," he reported. "There is also a run on tranquilizers. People are almost too nervous to count their change. Maybe the banana leaves will work just as good as the pills."

"We welcome the efforts of the Banana Relief Collective," a Public Health Services Officer announced to a small gathering of reporters. Without elaborating, he continued, "We realize a Government bomb of this size sends all of us including the Iraqis - a message. Anything this group with its banana leaf hats can do to absorb the current epidemic of psychic apprehension, terror and physical fear this Administration’s plans for war is deeply appreciated."

Banana Relief Members as is apparently their custom refused to take questions from reporters and offered no web site contact information. One Ashington citizen, pushing back on the top of his hat cone, publicly spoke out against the test. "First it’s the election that turns Florida upside down. I still don’t know if that was legal or not, but this is worse. First we are maybe cheated, and now the President permits the Air Force to practically drop a bomb on us. Don’t they have any sense of decency, consideration or respect?"

As evening darkened, and the supply of banana leaves was exhausted, Collective members disappeared as quietly as they arrived. No one at the White House or Elgin Air Force Base claimed to have information on the group or whether or not the Collective has plans to go to work in a similar manner in Iraq and Baghdad.

(Stephen Vincent)

There were some glitches in the notifications sent from the blog so some of you were receiving tons of repetitive emails from us... sorry. New policy: no emails from Circulars unless it's cumulative accounts like the following list of new stories (or if the house is on fire).

News: the site has been averaging about 2,000 hits a day, sometimes peaking at 3,000+. It also has a search engine. I'll be rearranging the categories and such things to make it more cogent.

Thanks to all of you who have appreciative emails about the site, and apologies if some of the links and stories sent in have not made it up in a timely fashion.

Please try to pass this email on to friends of yours who want to test our eclectic mix of plagiarized news stories, tasteless political humor, the most oblique (but best) political poetry out there and a really, really lively comments section -- I highly recommend perusing through it.

Following is a list of some of the items from the present homepage. I'm too tired right now to write anything more than this bland preamble but so be it. Take care.

Letter of Resignation by John H. Brown, Foreign Service Officer
http://www.arras.net/circulars/archives/000314.html#000314
To: Secretary of State Colin Powell
March 10, 2003
Dear Mr. Secretary:
I am joining my colleague John Brady Kiesling in submitting my resignation from the Foreign Service (effective immediately) because I cannot in good conscience support President Bush's war plans against Iraq.

BAGHDAD SNAPSHOT ACTION: Court Appearance
http://www.arras.net/circulars/archives/000313.html#000313
So, Emilie and Lytle, who were arrested for posting pictures of Iraqis in Soho, will have their day in court tomorrow morning at the Criminal Court of Manhattan. The Baghdad Snapshot Action Crew will be their to support them. You should show up with your friends and support them too. Info below...

Charles Bernstein: Enough!
http://www.arras.net/circulars/archives/000312.html#000312
In these difficult times, let us not draw away from our poetics in an attempt to redress the ominous possibilities of future U.S. government policies or the onerous effects of current government policies. As poets, we need to pursue our own forms of ethical and aesthetic response rather than engage in the sort of pronouncement by fiat and moral presumption of President Bush and his partisans.

UPI: Pentagon Papers Leaker Seeks Leaks on Iraq
http://www.arras.net/circulars/archives/000311.html#000311
WASHINGTON -- Daniel Ellsberg, who in 1971 leaked the Pentagon Papers, on Tuesday called on government officials to leak documents to Congress and the press showing the Bush administration is lying in building its case against Saddam Hussein.

Gothic News: New Bush Portrait Found Hanging Upside Down from Mount Rushmore
http://www.arras.net/circulars/archives/000307.html#000307
(Gothic News Service, 3/10/03) Early Sunday morning visitors to Mount Rushmore reported that they were astonished to find they could not look up the 5,725-foot mountain and see the 60-foot high carved stone heads of U.S Presidents George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt, and Abraham Lincoln. Instead, they found themselves looking at a large painted portrait of President Bush hanging upside down on a cable stretched several hundred feet between the barely exposed foreheads of Lincoln and Washington.

Salt Publishing: 100 Poets Against The War
http://www.arras.net/circulars/archives/000301.html#000301
The most talked-about and successful ebook of recent years is published here for the first time in paperback. “100 Poets Against The War,” a trilogy of downloadable electronic chapbooks was first published online on January 27, 2003 and has since made world-wide news from the LA Times to the Moscow dailies. This book holds the record for the fastest poetry anthology ever assembled and disseminated; first planned on January 20, 2003 and published in this form on March 3, 2003.

Russell Mokhiber: Ari & I
http://www.arras.net/circulars/archives/000288.html#000288
[One of the nice features of commondreams.org are the postings by Russell Mokhiber of his unedited interactions with White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer during the daily press briefings. Here's the latest one.]

Doug Rokke: Depleted Uranium, the War Against Ouselves (interview)
Traprock Peace Center
http://www.arras.net/circulars/archives/000286.html#000286
QUESTION: Any viewer who saw the war on television had the impression this was an easy war, fought from a distance and soldiers coming back relatively unharmed. Is this an accurate picture?
ROKKE: At the completion of the Gulf War, when we came back to the United States in the fall of 1991, we had a total casualty count of 760: 294 dead, a little over 400 wounded or ill. But the casualty rate now for Gulf War veterans is approximately 30 percent. Of those stationed in the theater, including after the conflict, 221,000 have been awarded disability, according to a Veterans Affairs (VA) report issued September 10, 2002.

Gothic News: Burning Man Festival Site in Protest Ritual
http://www.arras.net/circulars/archives/000291.html#000291
(Gothic News Service, 3/9/03) Two Rangers at Black Rock Desert – the annual site in Nevada for the Burning Man Festival - were greeted by a strange vision this morning. Talking to a Reno newspaperman, one of the Rangers reported, "It was sunrise across the playa and we were on our first patrol. When we looked down from the perimeter ridge, we initially saw an astonishingly large grid of either body or garbage bags. Through our binoculars, against the rising sun, we could still see that they were definitely filled - it could have been potatoes or anything big and lumpy. Each bag was spaced about 30 feet away from the next one - about 50 parallel lines going north and south, and about 40 going east and west. The whole thing made a large rectangular space, about a mile long and a kilometer wide. Frankly I can’t say if was just spooky, or both spooky and spectacular, to see all those black bags begin to get the first rays of the sun."

rabble.ca: A Better Idea
http://rabble.ca/everyones_a_critic.shtml?sh_itm=593a76151ffe0657cbe5860c119a8079&r=1
[Excerpted from an article by Judy Rebick recently posted on rabble.ca, a Canadian alternative online media source. rabble.ca has a special anti-war coverage section as well, featuring great articles, columnists, and events around Canada.]
from A Better Idea by Judy Rebick:
The Lysistrata Project, one of the many anti-war actions sweeping the globe, reminds us that women’s opposition to war goes back a long way in human history. While I am glad to see a revival of the ancient comedy of women refusing sex to men if they go off to war, I would a prefer a more modern version of women’s resistance. How about a story where women form a global non-violent army and rise up against the men in power?

USA Today's Tips for American Tourists
http://www.arras.net/circulars/
A survey in the February issue of Conde Nast Traveler states that according to a recent Gallup poll, a declining number of Americans (54% today vs. 79% a year ago) believes that the USA enjoys a favorable image abroad. Further, a majority of Americans (64%) cite a fear of unfriendliness as the top concern of traveling abroad during wartime.

Currency War
http://www.arras.net/circulars/archives/000261.html
Many analysts believe that the real reason for the upcoming US war on Iraq is the Bush administration's goal of preventing further Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) movement toward the euro as an oil transaction currency standard (Iraq has already made the switch). As long as oil is traded predominantly in US dollars, it's easier for the US to maintain economic control over world oil reserves. Following are links to a number of stories on this subject...

Joshua Clover: What Is Called Violence
http://www.arras.net/circulars/archives/000260.html#000260
[This is largely in response to Keston's Short Critique of Pacifism. I am making a new post rather than a comment since in part I hope to use this as a sort of informal poll on a specific question (at the end of this post). All links open new window]
Keston's critique is a concise and articulate distillation of a long and long-elaborated debate. I admire it for that, and I should say that I also agree with its central beliefs. It has two lacunae worth talking about, which I hope will lead from its abstract clarity to a pragmatic discussion of direct action tactics.

Ron Silliman: On The Social Mark Symposium
http://ronsilliman.blogspot.com/
[I'd like to reproduce Ron Silliman's recent post on The Social Mark symposium on Circulars but it's proving to hard to format, so I advise going to his blog to read the post -- which goes on to consider Ginsberg and various aspects of affect and content in "political" poetry -- in its entirety.]
"Like its cousin ambiguity, empathy is something that is exceptionally difficult to communicate in any function of life, let alone a poem. It is absolutely not possible in a text that seeks agreement, or which seeks to demonize anyone..."

The Observer: Revealed: US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war
Secret document details American plan to bug phones and emails of key Security Council members
http://www.arras.net/circulars/archives/000254.html#000254
[A useful reminder, perhaps, that the new possibilities for organized resistance presented by better communications technology are at the same time new possibilities for the defense of imperialism. -- Keston Sutherland]
The United States is conducting a secret 'dirty tricks' campaign against UN Security Council delegations in New York as part of its battle to win votes in favour of war against Iraq. Details of the aggressive surveillance operation, which involves interception of the home and office telephones and the emails of UN delegates in New York, are revealed in a document leaked to The Observer.

A Mini-Anthology of Anti-War Poems
[Taken from Enough! from O Books]
http://www.arras.net/circulars/archives/000253.html#000253
Rod Smith
TED’S HEAD
So there’s this episode of Mary Tyler Moore where Ted’s trying to get a raise & after finagling and shenaniganizing he puts one over on Lou & gets his contract changed to non-exclusive sos he can do commercials which is not cool WI Lou & the gang because Ted’s just a brainless gimp & it hurts the image of the news to have the anchorman selling tomato slicers & dogfood so Lou gets despondent because the contract can’t be rescinded but then he gets mad & calls Ted into his office & says, you know his voice, “You’re going to stop doing commercials, Ted” & Ted says “why would I do that Lou?” & Lou says ‘Because if you don’t I’ll punch your face out” & Ted says “I’ll have you arrested” & Lou says “It’ll be too late, your face will be broken, you’re not gonna get too many commercials with a broken face now are you Ted?” & Ted buckles under to force & everybody loves it that Lou’s not despondent anymore he’s back to his brustling chubby loud loveable whiskey-drinking football-loving ways. Now imagine if Ted were Lou, if Ted were the boss. You know how incredibly fucking brainless Ted is, but let’s imagine he understands & is willing to use force. That’s the situation we’re now in as Americans.

U.S. Diplomat John Brady Kiesling: Letter of Resignation
http://www.arras.net/circulars/archives/000245.html#000245
[The following is the text of John Brady Kiesling's letter of resignation to Secretary of State Colin L. Powell. Mr. Kiesling is a career diplomat who has served in United States embassies from Tel Aviv to Casablanca to Yerevan.]
Dear Mr. Secretary:
I am writing you to submit my resignation from the Foreign Service of the United States and from my position as Political Counselor in U.S. Embassy Athens, effective March 7. I do so with a heavy heart. The baggage of my upbringing included a felt obligation to give something back to my country. Service as a U.S. diplomat was a dream job. I was paid to understand foreign languages and cultures, to seek out diplomats, politicians, scholars and journalists, and to persuade them that U.S. interests and theirs fundamentally coincided. My faith in my country and its values was the most powerful weapon in my diplomatic arsenal.

Scott Pound: The Other War That's in the Works
http://www.arras.net/circulars/archives/000238.html#000238
[Scott Pound has been posting to the Buffalo Poetics List a running diary of his time in Turkey which I will start posting here also. If I get inspired I'll go back and pick up some of the prior ones.]
2.27.03, 13:00, Bilkent University, Ankara, Turkey
A former student of mine who recently graduated came back to campus to see me the other day. He was making the rounds announcing his impending marriage. Delighted for him, I said, “Congratulations! When?” He looked down at his feet for a few seconds and when he looked back up at me all the happiness had left his face. “I don’t know,” he said. “We will wait.” Standing between him and married life is 8-16 months of compulsory military service, and potentially an extended period of conflict in the region, conflict in which he may be personally involved. He thinks a U.S. invasion of Iraq would just be the beginning. He’s probably right.

____

A R R A S: new media poetry and poetics
http://www.arras.net

Hinka cumfae cashore canfeh, Ahl hityi oar hied 'caw taughtie!

"Do you think just because I come from Carronshore I cannot fight? I shall hit you over the head with a cold potatoe

To: Secretary of State Colin Powell

March 10, 2003

Dear Mr. Secretary:

I am joining my colleague John Brady Kiesling in submitting my resignation from the Foreign Service (effective immediately) because I cannot in good conscience support President Bush's war plans against Iraq.

The president has failed...

--To explain clearly why our brave men and women in uniform should be ready to sacrifice their lives in a war on Iraq at this time;

--To lay out the full ramifications of this war, including the extent of innocent civilian casualties;

--To specify the economic costs of the war for ordinary Americans;

--To clarify how the war would help rid the world of terror;

--To take international public opinion against the war into serious consideration.

Throughout the globe the United States is becoming associated with the unjustified use of force. The president's disregard for views in other nations, borne out by his neglect of public diplomacy, is giving birth to an anti-American century.

I joined the Foreign Service because I love our country. Respectfully, Mr. Secretary, I am now bringing this calling to a close, with a heavy heart but for the same reason that I embraced it.

Sincerely,

John H. Brown
Foreign Service Officer

John H. Brown, a Princeton PhD, joined the Foreign Service in 1981 and has served in London, Prague, Krakow, Kiev, Belgrade and, most recently, Moscow.

A senior member of the Foreign Service since 1997, he has focused his diplomatic work on press and cultural affairs. Under a State Department program, he has, up to now, been an Associate at the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University, where he was assigned in August 2001.

Letter of Resignation by John H. Brown, Foreign Service Officer

[Just got this in from Paul Chan, essentially covering what was said in an earlier post but with the gritty details and some useful links.]

So,
Emilie and Lytle, who were arrested for posting pictures of Iraqis in Soho, will have their day in court tomorrow morning at the Criminal Court of Manhattan. The Baghdad Snapshot Action Crew will be their to support them. You should show up with your friends and support them too. Info below.

---------------------------------------------
The Criminal Court of Manhattan,
100 Center Street (near Franklin and Leonard)
9am on Thursday, March 13.
---------------------------------------------

Our appearance is scheduled for 9:30. We think it's in a section of this building called Part DAT, though we don't know, yet, where this is. Which is why we're suggesting meeting outside.

Also, we've now spoken to lawyers who have advised us that the many emails we've gotten from people all over the country (and world, in fact) should be produced in court.

So if you feel outraged by what happened but have not yet written anything about it, this may me a good time for a brief note to us.

The immediate goal is a successful not-guilty plea. But we may also sue the city.

Please email us if you have questions.
emilie@sharkbooks.com
shark@erols.com

BAGHDAD SNAPSHOT ACTION
http://www.nationalphilistine.com

IRAQ PEACE TEAM
http://www.iraqpeaceteam.org

RECENT PROFILE OF BSA in NYPRESS
http://www.nypress.com/16/11/nyc/

[Here's Charles Bernstein's statement for the reading for the Enough! anthology -- I've posted a few poems from the book on Circulars already -- that took place at the Bowery Poetry Club last Saturday. It's already caused some controversy; a short response by Kent Johnson can be found at Skanky Possum.]

In these difficult times, let us not draw away from our poetics in an attempt to redress the ominous possibilities of future U.S. government policies or the onerous effects of current government policies. As poets, we need to pursue our own forms of ethical and aesthetic response rather than engage in the sort of pronouncement by fiat and moral presumption of President Bush and his partisans.

In his “State of the Union” message on January 28, 2002, Mr. Bush said, “America's purpose is more than to follow a process; it is to achieve a result.” This statement alone provides sufficient evidence to oppose his policies. What our America stands on, its foundation, is a commitment to process over results, to finding by doing, to thinking by responding. Solutions made outside of an open-ended process compound whatever problems we face.

If this statement does not seem forceful enough, if it appears too uncertain or insufficiently categorically, so be it. If we are to talk of “poets” against the war, then what is it in our poems -- as opposed to our positions as citizens -- that does the opposing? Perhaps it might be an approach to politics, as much as to poetry, that doesn’t feel compelled to repress ambiguity or complexity nor to substitute the righteous monologue for a skeptic’s dialogue.

At these trying time we keep being hectored toward moral discourse, toward turning our work into digestible messages. This too is a casualty of the war machine, the undermining of the value of the projects of art, of the aesthetic.

Art is never secondary to moral discourse but its teacher.

Art, unregulated by a predetermined message, is all the more urgent in a time of crisis. Indeed, it is a necessary response to crisis, exploring the deeper roots of our alienation and offering alternative ways not only to think, but also to imagine and indeed to resist.

A decade ago, just after the previous Persian War, Leslie Scalapino, the convener of today’s session, sent Dead Souls, a series of searing indictments of that war, to a number of newspapers, who declined to publish, as editorial matter, a kind of writing they found inaccessible. But the task for poetry is not to translate itself into the language of social and linguistic norms but to question those norms and, indeed, to explore the ways they are used to discipline and contain dissent.

Poetry offers not a moral compass but an aesthetic probe. And it can provide a radical alternative to the outcome-driven thinking that has made the Official Morality of the State a mockery of ethical thinking and of international democratic values.

We all saw the effect of outcome-driven thinking in Florida during the Fall of 2000, when the Republican National Committee launched a unilateral, anti-democratic campaign, capturing the state power of the executive branch from the winner of the popular vote for President. To achieve their goal, Mr. Bush and his partisans had to turn against their own espoused belief in states’ rights. In the course of their righteous zeal to win at any cost, the Bush faction turned against the will both of the Supreme Court and the electorate of the State of Florida. The prestige and integrity of the United State Supreme Court was collateral damage to Mr. Bush’s determined insistence that ends justify means. The Supreme Court, which we once thought of as a guarantor or liberty, was exposed as a tool of the ultra-right wing agenda of the Republican National Committee. This past week, we have seen this same Supreme Court rule that 50 years of incarceration is not cruel and unusual punishment for a string of three petty crimes. Once again, we see the contempt the Chief Justice, Mr. Rehnquist, and his Star Chamber cohorts, Justices Scalia and Thomas, have for the shared meaning of our common language, shared meanings that are the foundation for the system of laws to which we have given consent through the Bill of Rights to the Constitution.

“Unilateralism” is not just the course the Executive Branch is pursuing, with disastrous consequence, in foreign policy, but also the policy it pursues domestically, in its assault on our liberties, on the poor, and indeed on our aspirations for a democratic society.

So I come here this afternoon, to the Bowery Poetry Club, to say, with all of you, ENOUGH!

Presented at the Enough reading and launch at the Bowery Poetry Club on March 9, 2003: Enough, an anthology of poetry and writings against the war, ed. Rick London and Leslie Scalapino (Oakland: O Books, 2003)

by Mark Benjamin

WASHINGTON -- Daniel Ellsberg, who in 1971 leaked the Pentagon Papers, on Tuesday called on government officials to leak documents to Congress and the press showing the Bush administration is lying in building its case against Saddam Hussein.

Ellsberg, an ex-Marine and military analyst, said he held out hope that exposing alleged lies by the Bush administration could still avert an unjust war. He warned that whistleblowers may face ruin of their careers and marriages and be incarcerated.

"Don't wait until the bombs start falling," Ellsberg said at a Tuesday press conference in Washington. "If you know the public is being lied to and you have documents to prove it, go to Congress and go to the press."

Ellsberg did not leak the Pentagon Papers to the New York Times until 1971, although he says he had information in the mid-1960s that he now wishes he had leaked then.

"Do what I wish I had done before the bombs started falling" in Vietnam, Ellsberg said. "I think there is some chance that the truth could avert war."

The thousands of pages in the Pentagon Papers showed the government's secret decision-making process on Vietnam since the end of World War II. Their publication -- the government sued and lost to prevent it -- is widely credited with helping to turn public opinion against the war in Southeast Asia.

Ellsberg's press conference comes a little more than a week after the London Observer reported on what it said is a top-secret memo showing that the United States planned to spy on U.N. delegates to gain an advantage in the debate over Iraq.

The Observer reported the electronic memo dated Jan. 31, by high-ranking National Security Agency operative Fank Koza, says the agency is "mounting a surge" of intelligence activities mostly focused on U.N. Security Council members for "information that could give U.S. policy-makers an edge in obtaining results favorable to U.S. goals or to head off surprises."

NSA spokesman Patrick Weadon wouldn't comment on the authenticity of the e-mail memorandum. "We have no statement," he said.

U.N. ambassadors have mostly shrugged off the memorandum as reflecting the regular course of business at the United Nations.

Ellsberg said this story on spying at the United Nations is potentially more significant than the Pentagon Papers because it comes before a war has begun and it shows a desperate Bush administration. "This leak is potentially more significant than the release of the Pentagon Papers, since it is extraordinarily timely," Ellsberg said.

This past Sunday, the Observer reported that an employee at the top-secret British Government Communications Headquarters had been arrested following publication of the story. Ellsberg said reporters at the Observer told him the 28-year old woman arrested was not the source of the leak.

A second U.S. diplomat resigned yesterday in protest against the Bush administration's war stance. John H. Brown, who served in the diplomatic corps since 1981, said Bush's disregard for the views of other nations was giving birth to "an anti-American century." Last month, a senior U.S. diplomat based in Athens, political counselor John Brady Kiesling, resigned with similar complaints.

Last week, Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, rejected a Bush administration claim that Iraq had tried to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes to use in centrifuges for uranium enrichment.

Copyright © 2001-2003 United Press International

Pentagon Papers Leaker Seeks Leaks on Iraq

[Two more things I haven't had a chance to look into just yet, but on first glance very good...]
 
serious
http://www.guerrillanews.com/government/doc1148.html
 
and amusing
http://www.guerrillanews.com/redux/qt_hi.html

[Haven't had a chance to look at this yet...]

Jawad Metni, a wonderful documentary maker from Brooklyn, did a documentary on DU in 2001 --- you can get it from his website www.pinholepictures.com, where he also has a number of links to resources on DU, including a RAND report. The documentary includes interviews with army reps among others.

[Here is the website for the Project for the New American Century -- no joke, folks -- the organization Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Jeb Bush and others founded in 1997. Following is an analysis of the organization in the context of US foreign policy -- a project of "full spectrum dominance."]

http://www.newamericancentury.org/

The war in Afghanistan has plainly brought certain benefits to that country: thousands of girls have gone to school for the first time, for example, and in some parts of the country women have been able to go back to work. While more than 3,000 civilians were killed by the bombing, while much of the country is still controlled by predatory warlords, while most of the promised assistance has not materialised, while torture is widespread and women are still beaten in the streets, it would be wrong to minimise gains that have flowed from the defeat of the Taliban. But, and I realise that it might sound callous to say it, this does not mean that the Afghan war was a good thing.

What almost all those who supported that war and are now calling for a new one have forgotten is that there are two sides to every conflict, and therefore two sets of outcomes to every victory. The Afghan regime changed, but so, in subtler ways, did the government of the US. It was empowered not only by its demonstration of military superiority but also by the widespread support it enjoyed. It has used the licence it was granted in Afghanistan as a licence to take its war wherever it wants.

Those of us who oppose the impending conquest of Iraq must recognise that there's a possibility that, if it goes according to plan, it could improve the lives of many Iraqi people. But to pretend that this battle begins and ends in Iraq requires a wilful denial of the context in which it occurs. That context is a blunt attempt by the superpower to reshape the world to suit itself.

In this week's Observer, David Aaronovitch suggested that, before September 11, the Bush administration was "relatively indifferent to the nature of the regimes in the Middle East". Only after America was attacked was it forced to start taking an interest in the rest of the world.

If Aaronovitch believes this, he would be well-advised to examine the website of the Project for the New American Century, the pressure group established by, among others, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Jeb Bush, Paul Wolfowitz, Lewis Libby, Elliott Abrams and Zalmay Khalilzad, all of whom (except the president's brother) are now senior officials in the US government.

Its statement of principles, signed by those men on June 3 1997, asserts that the key challenge for the US is "to shape a new century favourable to American principles and interests". This requires "a military that is strong and ready to meet both present and future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles abroad; and national leadership that accepts the United States' global responsibilities".

On January 26 1998, these men wrote to President Clinton, urging him "to enunciate a new strategy", namely "the removal of Saddam Hussein's regime from power". If Clinton failed to act, "the safety of American troops in the region, of our friends and allies like Israel and the moderate Arab states, and a significant portion of the world's supply of oil will all be put at hazard". They acknowledged that this doctrine would be opposed, but "American policy cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council".

Last year, the Sunday Herald obtained a copy of a confidential report produced by the Project in September 2000, which suggested that blatting Saddam was the beginning, not the end of its strategy. "While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein." The wider strategic aim, it insisted, was "maintaining global US pre-eminence".

Another document obtained by the Herald, written by Paul Wolfowitz and Lewis Libby, called upon the US to "discourage advanced industrial nations from challenging our leadership or even aspiring to a larger regional or global role".

On taking power, the Bush administration was careful not to alarm its allies. The new president spoke only of the need "to project our strength with purpose and with humility" and "to find new ways to keep the peace". From his first week in office, however, he began to engage not so much in nation-building as in planet-building.

The ostensible purpose of Bush's missile defence programme is to shoot down incoming nuclear missiles. The real purpose is to provide a justification for the extraordinarily ambitious plans - contained in a Pentagon document entitled Vision for 2020 - to turn space into a new theatre of war, developing orbiting weapons systems that can instantly destroy any target anywhere on Earth. By creating the impression that his programme is merely defensive, Bush could justify a terrifying new means of acquiring what he calls "full spectrum dominance" over planetary security.

Immediately after the attack on New York, the US government began establishing "forward bases" in Asia. As the assistant secretary of state, Elizabeth Jones, noted: "When the Afghan conflict is over we will not leave Central Asia. We have long-term plans and interests in this region." The US now has bases in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgystan, Tajikistan and Georgia. Their presence has, in effect, destroyed the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation which Russia and China had established in an attempt to develop a regional alternative to US power.

In January, the US moved into Djibouti, ostensibly to widen its war against terror, while accidentally gaining strategic control over the Bab al-Mandab - one of the world's two most important oil shipping lanes. It already controls the other one, the straits of Hormuz. Two weeks ago, under the same pretext, it sent 3,000 soldiers to the Philippines. Last year it began negotiations to establish a military base in Sao Tome and Principe, from which it can, if it chooses, dominate West Africa's principal oilfields. By pure good fortune, the US government now exercises strategic control over almost all the world's major oil producing regions and oil transport corridors.

It has also used its national tragedy as an excuse for developing new nuclear and biological weapons, while ripping up the global treaties designed to contain them. All this is as the project prescribed. Among other policies, it has called for the development of a new generation of biological agents, which will attack people with particular genetic characteristics.

Why do the supporters of this war find it so hard to see what is happening? Why do the conservatives who go berserk when the European Union tries to change the content of our chocolate bars look the other way when the US seeks to reduce us to a vassal state? Why do the liberal interventionists who fear that Saddam Hussein might one day deploy a weapon of mass destruction refuse to see that George Bush is threatening to do just this against an ever-growing number of states? Is it because they cannot face the scale of the threat, and the scale of the resistance necessary to confront it? Is it because these brave troopers cannot look the real terror in the eye?

Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | A wilful blindness

[I just got this one a few days ago.]

(Gothic News Service, 3/10/03) Early Sunday morning visitors to Mount Rushmore reported that they were astonished to find they could not look up the 5,725-foot mountain and see the 60-foot high carved stone heads of U.S Presidents George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt, and Abraham Lincoln. Instead, they found themselves looking at a large painted portrait of President Bush hanging upside down on a cable stretched several hundred feet between the barely exposed foreheads of Lincoln and Washington.

Visitors reported that not only was the painted Bush upside down, but that his bright red cheeks and much ruffled dark hair indicated signs of considerable shaking, an effect that was amplified by the canvas rippling in the early March wind. Indeed it appeared had been picked him up by his feet and held him hanging down while the portrait was in progress.

"Drop The Thought" - the visitor went on to report - was painted in large block letters across the top of the canvas which hung down at least 60 feet to cover the sight of the other Presidential faces.

Before News reporters could be called to the scene, two what looked like Park Service or Military helicopters arrived to lift the cable and canvas from the Monument. "That was also quite something," a visitor reported. "The canvas shook terribly when they lifted Bushs face up into the air. It was as if he was having an exorcism or some kind of letting go. Then, when the helicopters got him balanced enough to leave, they turned the canvas around and, and on the back side, all we could see were big lavender colored letters saying, NO WAR IN IRAQ. Frankly, it was kind of powerful sight. Like a lot of people, I am not particularly for going into this war."

It was hard to find much other information. Mount Rushmore ? carved over a period of 14 years by sculptor Gutzon Borglum - was created to embody the spirit of the foundation, preservation, and expansion of the United States. Tight lipped, The National Park Service said it did not have any information on the perpetrators of the mornings event and no arrests had been made.

"At a time when the country and the President most need the support of the American people," Ari Fleischer at the White House was reported to have said, "It is disturbing to hear that there are individuals out there who will abuse an historic Monument that represents our nations ambition, power and democratic purpose. As to the alleged portrait, let it be known, one more time, this President will not be shaken in his resolve to go to war, if that is his decision."

(Gothic News Service, 3/11/03) The Heritage Foundation and the group called Project for the New American Century (PNAC) sought to dispel rumors of plans for a joint spring symposium under the auspices of MilleniumMoveOn, a new joint umbrella organization. According to rumors, Ariel Sharon and a group of associates have been invited to address two subjects: "Preemptive Assassinations: Furthering the Foundations of Civilization" and "Wall Materials and Strategies for Protecting and Serving Indigenous Populations."

The two non-profit Foundations - both of which are considered major Think Tanks and essential contributors to the development of Bush Administration global policies - are said known to be developing white papers on new administrative controls for Iraq once the planned war has achieved its immediate military aims.

Expertise  in "Preemptive Assassinations" is considered essential to eliminating the leadership of any internal Iraqi or outside groups that may aggressively challenge or terrorize the military and political authority of a United States led Occupation. Ariel Sharons example in dealing with the Hamas and other groups in the West Bank and Gaza has apparently been accepted by the Bush Administration and is being considered as an efficient way - when required - to deal with both armed and unarmed civilian opposition groups.

The interest in Israel's wall building materials and strategies is also seen as potentially essential in controlling potential conflicts between conflicting national and religious groups ? whether Kurdish, Sunni, or Shia Muslim. In the case of a Balkanized Iraq, it will be considered essential that the boundaries be under United States military control.  Its rumored that portable, sustainable walls are in development that can extend for hundreds of miles and be well used as population containers. The walls may also be built to contain complete surveillance and weapon needs. Their smooth Teflon surface is impossible for civilians to slip over and is considered grafitti resistant. Wall panels may also be conveniently unlocked to permit the passage of military and/or equipment for maintaining food delivery and oil operations.

"This is one more flagrant example," complained officials from both Foundations, "of the American and European left using Israels democratic leadership and totally false - and what some may interpret as anti-Semitic rumors -  to undercut the legitimate democratization objectives of President Bush. The world is going to deeply surprised by how well we are received by Iraqis who are innocent of the Saddam regime."

Neither the White House nor the Israeli Consultate  could not be reached for comments on what are still considered rumors.  The Internet has no current web site listiing for MilleniumMoveOn and there is no indication of a public mission statement for the organization.

(Stephen Vincent)

[Here's a story from this week that recounts the events that lead to Lytle and Emilie's arrests (see below), but also provides a global perspective of the Baghdad Snapshot Action.]

by Alexander Zaitchik

There are anonymous wedding pictures plastered on trashcans around Tokyo and Warsaw. On lampposts in Berlin and Melbourne, you will find stills of children riding a merry-go-round. Watch the newspaper boxes in Manhattan for a captionless image of two friends with their arms around each other, smiling.

This cryptic smattering of portraits from Palo Alto to Yukon seems to be a globally coordinated art project, but it’s not. The spreading phenomenon is an antiwar meme hatched by the Baghdad Snapshot Action Crew, a New York-based collective that’s been bombing the city with pictures of happy Iraqis since the middle of February. Their website, nationalphilistine.com, offers 30 of the images for download, and so far activists in 43 cities in nine countries have brought the faces home.

"We’re getting twenty emails a day from everywhere," says Tarikh Korula, a BSAC founder. "People are still using the pictures. It’s growing."

Like the New York-based Lysistrata Project, which inspired dozens of international solidarity productions of the Greek antiwar comedy, the BSAC started small. Korula got the idea when his friend Paul Chan returned from a two-month stint in Baghdad with the Iraq Peace Team, an humanitarian group. During his work, Chan took hundreds of images with his digital camera, all of ordinary people doing ordinary things in their home city: hanging out, playing, laughing.

Chan’s friends were so moved by the snapshots that they decided to turn them into an antiwar message in the run-up to the Feb. 15 protests. Inspired by the photo memorials to the dead that peppered Ground Zero after 9/11, Korula helped narrow Paul’s picture collection down to thirty images and then printed 9000 copies for postering around Manhattan, Brooklyn and Queens. The only text they placed beneath the images is the word "Baghdad" followed by the date the picture was taken.

"They reminded us of our friends and family," says Korula. "The people are just playing around, being normal. This is still possible in Iraq, but it won’t be when the bombs start falling. We didn’t want to add spin. The meaning is obvious: Come April 20th, could you find this person again? During a ‘shock and awe’ campaign, this woman isn’t going to be getting married. These kids aren’t going to be laughing."

The pictures are a departure from most antiwar imagery distributed on the left. Standard-issue antiwar agitprop tends to focus on mutilated Iraqi children dying from simple diseases (presumably a fault of the sanctions) or cancer patients made sick by the use of depleted uranium shells in the first Gulf War. "Those images [of suffering] are real," says Korula, "but it’s not the whole story. We wanted to restore some dignity to the people of Iraq, to humanize the people we’ll be bombing."

Korula and his friends began recruiting volunteers in late January. On the February night that the crew first hit the streets, it felt like 20 degrees below freezing, and the organizers were stunned when dozens of strangers turned out. "Even with the cold, 75 people showed up," says Elise Gardella, a photographer and crew organizer. "We started emailing our friends, then they emailed their friends and it just took off."

Volunteers were given a stack of pictures and clear packaging tape–not buckets of messy wheat paste–and assigned to a neighborhood. Most cops didn’t know what to make of the pictures, and volunteers experienced little harassment from authorities and passers-by.

Except for Lytle Shaw and Emilie Clark. While taping a poster to a lamppost at the corner of Mercer and Prince Sts., three plainclothes cops emerged from a nearby car and charged them with a "quality of life" infraction. Illegal postering is a criminal misdemeanor in New York, and offenders are usually given a court summons and a nominal fine. But Shaw and Clark–who is seven months pregnant–were instead handcuffed and taken to the First Precinct on Varick St., where they were booked and, after seven hours in jail, given a March 13 court date.

During their incarceration, the two were questioned about their antiwar activities and warned not to attend the protests that weekend. "The police emphasized that many of [the cops at the protest] would be rookies, and suggested that they’d be looking for violence," says Shaw, who is organizing a protest for his arraignment. "They said they wouldn’t want to read our names in the deaths column of the newspaper."

Despite the arrests and intimidation of Shaw and Clark, the Baghdad Snapshot Action Crew plans to keep postering. To help organize future missions, they’ve enlisted a veteran poster campaigner for Queer Nation and Dyke Action Machine. Although most of the pictures put up around the Upper East Side and Soho were taken down immediately, these wealthier neighborhoods remain earmarked for saturation bombing runs as the war drums grow louder.

By posting their pictures without comment, does the Baghdad Snapshot Action Crew run the risk of having their posters interpreted as prowar? Proponents of invasion argue that ordinary Iraqis–the very faces highlighted by the group–will be the beneficiaries of a war that topples Saddam Hussein, not its victims. But the group is confident in the clarity of its message and doubts observers could take the posters as showing the hopeful faces of the hawk position.

"In a war, they’ll be given liberty and death," says Gardella. "We should all know from the experience of the first Gulf War that there’s nowhere to hide in Baghdad. The shelters aren’t safe."

As the BSAC continues to poster and activists here and around the world follow their lead, Gardella stresses the importance of numbers in a successful postering campaign.

"Even 9000 pictures is just a drop in the bucket," she says. "New York turns over very quickly, that’s just the nature of the city."

Volume 16, Issue 11 - 3/12/2003

NYPress - New York City - Alexander Zaitchik - Vol. 16, Iss. 11 - 3/12/2003

Vancouverite blogger Caterina has dedicated a section of her blog to posting poems about war.

[Here's an email going around about the court appearance which Lytle gave me permission to post on Circulars. Accounts of their arrest can be found here and here.

Dear Friends,

After our arrest during the Baghdad Snapshot postering Feb 13 many of you have asked if you could support us at our court date, which is set for March 13.

We would very much appreciate that and are sending out this email to let you know where and when.

We're going to meet at The Criminal Court of Manhattan, 100 Center Street (near Franklin and Leonard) at 9am on Thursday, March 13.

Our appearance is scheduled for 9:30. We think it's in a section of this building called Part DAT, though we don't know, yet, where this is. Which is why we're suggesting meeting outside.

Also, we've now spoken to lawyers who have advised us that the many emails we've gotten from people all over the country (and world, in fact) should be produced in court.

So if you feel outraged by what happened but have not yet written anything about it, this may me a good time for a brief note to us.

The immediate goal is a successful not-guilty plea. But we may also sue the city.

Please email us if you have questions.

Thanks again,
Lytle Shaw and Emilie Clark

Todd Swift (Ed.)
204pp perfect bound
216 x 140mm, 8.5 x 5.5 inches
ISBN 1-876857-98-6
Australia $27.95 (including GST)
USA $13.95
UK £9.95

http://www.saltpublishing.com/

The most talked-about and successful ebook of recent years is published here for the first time in paperback. “100 Poets Against The War,” a trilogy of downloadable electronic chapbooks was first published online on January 27, 2003 and has since made world-wide news from the LA Times to the Moscow dailies. This book holds the record for the fastest poetry anthology ever assembled and disseminated; first planned on January 20, 2003 and published in this form on March 3, 2003.

The grass-roots appeal of peace poetry has seen this book shared by tens of thousands, and read at peace demonstrations from Seattle to the Middle East. It has spawned French, German and Brazilian versions, and continues to inspire those who oppose a unilateral, US-led strike against the people of Iraq. It marks a moment in the history of resistance to war.

Elmaz Abinader: from How It's Been;
Robert Adamson: My Collaboration with George Bush;
Antler: Pretending to Be Dead;
John Asfour: Mark the Day;
Rachel Bentham: War-the concise version;
Margo Berdeshevsky: Equinox, Africa;
Charles Bernstein: All Set;
bill bissett: war is gud 4 bizness in th 19th centur;
Pat Boran: A Natural History of Armed Conflict;
George Bowering: The Good Prospects;
Di Brandt: the killing fields;
Stephen Brockwell: Hyperbole for a Large Number;
Michael R. Brown: Priests' Skulls;
Tony Brown: What You Call It;
Minnie Bruce Pratt: After the Anti-War March;
Rip Bulkeley: transit;
Jason Camlot: Water Dragon;
J. R. Carpenter; Averse to War;
James Cervantes: I Dream of War;
Sherry Chandler: Haunted House, October 2002;
Patrick Chapman: Hot Milk;
Sampurna Chattarji: Easy;
Nuala N1 Chonchuir: Anna's Meal;
Conyus:blood in the snow;
Mahmoud Darwish: Other Barbarians Will Come Along;
Robert Davidson: The Red Beast;
Jennifer Dick: On Election Day;
Danika Dinsmore: on the night she didn't feel like it anymore;
Ana Doina: Press conference;
Michael Donaghy: The Tragedies;
Kate Evans:Unleashed;
Ruth Fainlight: The Garden of Eden;
Annie Finch: Gulf War and Child: A Curse;
Susan Freeman: Sim Shalom;
Myrna Garanis: the war is on the kitchen table;
Sandra M. Gilbert: January meadow;
Ethan Gilsdorf: The Land of Hope;
Daniela Gioseffe: The First Long Range Artillery Fire Over My City;
Graywyvern: Christendom;
Susan Gubernat: Women Washing Clothes in the Kabul River;
Marilyn Hacker: Letter to Hayden Carruth;
Nathalie Handal: Even;
David Harsent: Filofax;
John Hartley Williams: News Theatre;
Kevin Higgins: Talking with the Cat about World Domination the Day George W.
Bush almost Choked on a Pretzel;
Bob Holman: For The Birds;
Ranjit Hoskote: This Sky of Lost Miles;
Fadel K. Jabr: Waiting for the Marines;
Bruce A. Jacobs: Brainstorm;
Larry Jaffe: Mothers Cry;
Fred Johnston: No War Then;
Pat Jourdan: Sirens;
rYAN kAMSTRA: pEACE iCON 21c;
Wednesday Kennedy: Bubble Girl Song;
Mimi Khalvati: The Servant;
John Kinsella: Candle, Flame, Stained Glass and Prayer for Peace;
Kasandra Larsen: We Believe;
John B. Lee: A Dark Little Psalm Against War;
Tony Lewis-Jones: At Home, At War;
Robin Lim: Good Morning Middle Age;
Sue Littleton: Regime Change Begins at Home;
Jennifer LoveGrove: Untitled;
Leza Lowitz: Women in Black;
Susan Ludvigson: To a Veteran of the Last Wrong War;
Nadine McInnis: Crossing Kurdistan;
Susan McMaster: Against the War;
Jeffrey Mackie: What Did Adorno Say?;
Sarah Maguire: The Pomegranates of Kandahar;
devorah major: a short list of short lists;
Aoife Mannix: Taking Sides;
Fred Marchant: Imminent;
Clive Matson: Still True?;
Robert Minhinnick: The Tooth;
Adrian Mitchell: To Whom it May Concern;
Suzy Morgan: An Untitled Place;
David Morley: Nets at Gennesaret;
Sinead Morrissey: In Praise of Salt;
Colin Morton: Other Demands;
George Murray: The Field;
Meghan Nuttall Sayres: No Seasons, Only Weather;
Sean O'Brien: Ballad;
Mary O'Donoghue: Long Sleeve, Short Sleeve;
Lisa Pasold: let us step around this time;
Richard Peabody: Dubya Anabasis;
Tom Phillips: Life after wartime;
David Plumb: All Those Home Spun Places;
Robert Priest: Are There Children;
Dawna Rae Hicks: Bigger Than Time;
Michael Redhill: Architecture (Musee Des Beaux Arts, Montreal);
Peter Robinson: Calm Autumn;
Mark Rudman: N.O.T.R.O.T.C.;
E. Russell Smith: This is the War that George Fought;
Grace Schulman: The Border;
Rebecca Sellars: Dear Lady, Fear No Poetry;
Eric Paul Shaffer: The Flying Flag;
Jackie Sheeler: Collateral Damage;
Hal Sirowitz: The Hawk Who Became a Dove;
Sonja A. Skarstedt: Psychotic Sea;
Mr. Social Control: The Man of Principle;
Kathleen Spivack: Peace Pilgrim;
Sean Street: The Day After;
Yerra Sugarman: To Mikl‹s Radn‹ti;
Moez Surani: Untitled;
George Szirtes: The Palace of Art;
Edwin Torres: King Rat;
Rebecca Villarreal: The Paloma's Lament;
Ken Waldman: Where there's War;
Phyllis Webb: Still there are Wars and Crimes of War;
Eleanor Wilner: The White-Throated Sparrow Can't Compare;
Ghassan Zaqtan: Beirut, August 1

[Ok, another story about pop songs, but this one has a useful list of links, and it is arguably a guage of how "mainstream" anti-war sentiment has become when it infiltrates, for better or worse, the entertainment industry. Madonna's video -- sounds a bit like that Frankie Goes to Hollywood one of yore -- is still a long way from a public articulation of why the war shouldn't happen, but I'm sure it'll put it on the MTV radar, into the image-recycle of television.]

Artists Mount a Chorus for Peace

What if they gave a war and nobody sang?  

The music community, swift to react to the 9/11 terror attacks with benefit concerts and topical songs, has been slow to address the impending war in Iraq.

Though lagging behind the pace of military buildup, anti-war momentum is growing in pop's ranks. Reaction so far is more in gestures and statements than in music, perhaps because sporting a peace button requires less time and effort than writing, recording and distributing a protest song.

Music's loose anti-war alliance should get a vigorous push with the world premiere of Madonna's American Life video on MTV this month. Using a fashion show as a backdrop, the clip "examines the horrors of war" as an audience applauds grenade-lobbing models in haute-couture army fatigues, spokeswoman Liz Rosenberg says.

In a statement, Madonna disputes misconceptions about the video: "I am not anti-Bush. I am not pro-Iraq. I am pro-peace. I hope this provokes thought and dialogue."

Madonna is the first high-profile artist to directly confront the Iraq standoff in her work. Other efforts are falling beneath the pop-culture radar. Musician/poet Michael Franti performed his scathing Bomb da World ("You can bomb the world to pieces but you can't bomb it into peace") at a taping for the late-night Craig Kilborn show, but it was cut from the broadcast. Singer/songwriter Stephan Smith's The Bell, an anti-war record featuring a live version, a spoken-word rendition by Pete Seeger and a remix by DJ Spooky, was just issued on the tiny Synchronic label.

Other new tunes are circulating in cyberspace. Chuck D's Fine Arts Militia takes on the Bush agenda in A Twisted Sense of God, a rock/spoken-word diatribe available at slamjams.com. Folk singer Leslie Nuchow's An Eye for an Eye (Will Leave the Whole World Blind) is at slammusic.com. Musician Jynkz posted We Don't Want Your War at jynkz.com.

More songs are on the way. Singer Jonatha Brooke has revamped 1995's War, a biting retort to the Gulf War, to protest the current blueprint for battle. It went to radio recently and is a free download at jonathabrooke.com. Bay Area rapper Paris questions the wisdom of post-9/11 patriotism in What Would You Do, a track on his upcoming Sonic Jihad album.

British musicians have been far more vocal in criticizing hawks. Members of Massive Attack and Blur subsidized ads and posters protesting Britain's support for U.S. aggression. At February's Brit Awards in London, rising star Ms. Dynamite and George Michael performed an anti-war version of his Faith, and Coldplay singer Chris Martin blasted war plans: "We are all going to die when George Bush gets his way."

The tone was tamer at the Grammy Awards. Sheryl Crow, known to don a "war is not the answer" T-shirt, wore a guitar strap emblazoned with "no war." Bonnie Raitt proposed, "Let's build some peace," while Fred Durst of Limp Bizkit made an awkward statement suggesting, "This war should go away as soon as possible."

Activist artists overseas have been quicker to respond musically. The U.K.-based anarchist collective Chumbawamba is selling its antiwar single Jacob's Ladder (Not in My Name), a revised version of an earlier song, at chumba.com with the notation: "We are among the artists and activists refusing to stay silent as Bush pushes for war."

Peace Not War, a two-CD benefit compilation on Australia's Shock Records, boasts an international lineup of acts opposing the call to war in Iraq, including Public Enemy, Billy Bragg, Midnight Oil and Ani DiFranco. In the song Frijolero, Mexican rap-metal band Molotov condemns supporters of force for "burning money, making war on other countries."

Acts have been quieter north of the border, but that won't last. The U.S. music community "is waking up," says Def Jam founder Russell Simmons, who expects a quick expansion of anti-war activities among his colleagues. He and rapper Mos Def have recorded two 30-second TV ads attacking Bush's policies. Simmons helped launch Musicians United to Win Without War, a campaign supported by David Byrne, Rosanne Cash, Lou Reed, R.E.M., Dave Matthews and others that taken out ads in several major newspapers.

"We haven't paid attention to it the way we should have," says Simmons. He says the international debate "went over the heads of a lot of young people."

Though the standoff has left many conflicted, invading Iraq will do more harm than good, he says.

"Saddam Hussein is a horrible person, but that's Iraq's problem," he says. "George Bush -- that's America's problem. My concern is the war on poverty and ignorance. When are we going to adequately fund that war? All the people who will die fighting in Iraq are poor and young."

The young are beginning to rally, as are their musical idols, whether at a podium or in a melody.

P. Diddy "is more well known and well liked by young people across the world than George Bush," Simmons says. "Jay-Z is more well known than Colin Powell. These are powerful voices that can make a difference."

(Gothic News Service, 3/07/03) The White House sought to dispel rumors today that the National Endowment for the Arts was in the planning stages for a series of poetry readings by American poets in Occupied Iraq. For weeks it's been rumored that the Endowment was in consultation with Laura Bush's office on ways in which both contemporary and classic American authors could be best introduced into a post-Saddam Iraq.

The First Lady is apparently convinced that the transmission of American cultural values - especially as represented in the voices of American poets - is essential to building a country in which its citizens will be entitled to practice free expression. To best foster the most attention from the Iraqi public, it was said that the Endowment was trying to determine which one of Baghdad's symphony halls or museums would be an ideal performance location for the invited poets. Earlier on, a Pentagon consultant was reported to have suggested that the Food Distribution Centers would be more ideal since they - in terms of collateral damage - would be the least likely to be damaged or destroyed during the bombing of Iraq.

"First," in refuting these claims, the unnamed spokesman for the White House was quoted as saying, "Though we expect it to be soon forthcoming, there has been no final decision to either invade or occupy Iraq. Further, any such program would undoubtedly include other art forms, choirs and such. But, at this time, we want to remind you, any such planning is totally premature."

When asked whether or not poets to be invited will include those who have written poems against the war, the spokesman said, "When the time is right, you will have to refer that question to the head of the Endowment. It's a free country but we believe he has strongly held views on the questionable value of combining politics and poetry."

We know it's happening, but rarely give it a second thought -- some of the best political satire today is in the form of video games.

http://www.idleworm.com/nws/2002/11/iraq2.shtml

When you're done with that, find your Patriot Rating at Ashcroft Online:

http://www.idleworm.com/nws/2002/12/aol10.shtml

CNN.com - U.N.: Holes opened in Iraqi border fence - Mar. 7, 2003

Kuwaitis apparently following marks left by U.S. Marines

UNITED NATIONS (CNN) -- Kuwaiti workers have cut holes in the demilitarized zone fence between Iraq and Kuwait big enough to drive military vehicles through, United Nations officials said Friday.

The workers apparently are cutting areas marked by U.S. Marines who have been working inside the demilitarized zone for days, according to the United Nations.

Kuwaiti workers said they were told to make 35 holes in the fence by March 15, the United Nations said.

The development comes as U.N. chief weapons inspector Hans Blix reported Friday to the Security Council on Iraqi disarmament efforts.

About 100,000 U.S. and British troops are in Kuwait preparing for a possible air and ground attack aimed at dismantling Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. Iraq denies that it has any such weapons.

President George W. Bush said Thursday that he had not decided whether to invade Iraq, but he added that U.N. Security Council members would decide in a matter of days whether they would join the United States in forcibly disarming the country. (Full story)

The United Kingdom has presented a revised draft resolution to the Security Council that sets a March 17 deadline for Iraq to comply fully with previous Security Council disarmament resolutions. (Full story)

The United Nations said Kuwait has cut four holes in the fence along the demilitarized zone, revising an earlier report that the Kuwaitis had opened between 10 and 15 gaps -- some up to 330 yards [300 meters] wide -- in the electrified fence inside the DMZ, and that Kuwaitis and U.S. Marines had made marks for about 30 more.

In the latest report, a U.N. official said the workers told peacekeepers "they were employed by a commercial firm under a contract issued by the Kuwaiti Ministry of the Interior" and had been told to create holes "each 25 meters [82 feet] wide."

Security Council told of incursions
The United Nations sent a letter on the matter to the Security Council on Friday. It would be up to the Security Council to determine whether the activity violated the resolution that established the zone.

On Thursday, the Security Council was told that U.S. military had encroached into the zone.

By U.N. mandate, no military activity other than a police presence by Iraq and Kuwait can take place in the DMZ. Technically, if U.S. troops go through breaches in the demilitarized zone fence to enter Iraq from the south, they would be in violation of Security Council rules, and that would be reported to the United Nations

U.S. officials said that scenario was not a concern because any war with Iraq would be a justified attack because of Iraq's treatment of Kuwait in the past and possible mistreatment in the future.

CNN's Martin Savidge in Kuwait City said the U.S. military operations in the demilitarized zone could be scouting missions for possible military action against Iraq.

CNN's Gordon Robison reported from the edge of the DMZ on Friday that he saw two U.S. military Humvees pull several hundred meters into the zone and park. Robison said the occupants were upset that a CNN camera crew was videotaping them and soon left the area.

Diplomatic sources in Kuwait City said violations occur daily, and when observers tell members of the U.S. military that they are in violation of a U.N. mandate, they usually leave -- sometimes after saying they are lost.

Marine helicopters reported inside DMZ
Observers have also reported seeing U.S. Marine helicopters inside the zone.

U.N. spokesman Fred Eckhard said Thursday, "UNIKOM [the United Nations Iraq-Kuwait Observation Mission] has reported numerous violations of the demilitarized zone between Iraq and Kuwait since the 4th of March by personnel in civilian clothes in 4-by-4 vehicles, at least some of whom were armed and identified themselves as U.S. Marines."

U.S. military spokesmen in Kuwait had no immediate comment on the UNIKOM report, Reuters reported. The Kuwaiti mission to the U.N. said it was not aware of the story but played down its significance.

UNIKOM was established in 1991 after a U.S.-led coalition ejected Iraqi occupation troops from Kuwait in the Persian Gulf War. Its job is to monitor the demilitarized zone and to "deter border violations and report any hostile action," according to the United Nations.

Because of the activity, a U.N. official in Kuwait told CNN, UNIKOM forces inside the DMZ have requested permission to elevate their alert status from amber, or level 2, to red, level 3. At level 4, U.N. observers would be removed from the DMZ.

UNIKOM previously reported three breaches in the electric fence, Eckhard said.

Kuwaiti officials said construction under way on the Kuwaiti side of the demilitarized zone had encroached on the fence, Eckhard said.

A spokesman for the Kuwaiti Defense Ministry told CNN that though he had no comment on the reports of gaps in the fence, the structure is within Kuwaiti territory and was built by Kuwait, so any Kuwaiti modifications to it would be legal.

-- CNN's Richard Roth, Martin Savidge and Liz Neisloss contributed to this report.

http://www.counterpunch.org/

The Bush administration's relentless unilateral march towards war is profoundly disturbing for many reasons, but so far as American citizens are concerned the whole grotesque show is a tremendous failure in democracy. An immensely wealthy and powerful republic has been hijacked by a small cabal of individuals, all of them unelected and therefore unresponsive to public pressure, and simply turned on its head. It is no exaggeration to say that this war is the most unpopular in modern history. Before the war has begun there have been more people protesting it in this country alone than was the case at the height of the anti- Vietnam war demonstrations during the 60s and 70s. Note also that those rallies took place after the war had been going on for several years: this one has yet to begin, even though a large number of overtly aggressive and belligerent steps have already been taken by the US and its loyal puppy, the UK government of the increasingly ridiculous Tony Blair.

I have been criticised recently for my anti-war position by illiterates who claim that what I say is an implied defence of Saddam Hussein and his appalling regime. To my Kuwaiti critics, do I need to remind them that I publicly opposed Ba'athi Iraq during the only visit I made to Kuwait in 1985, when in an open conversation with the then Minister of Education Hassan Al-Ibrahim I accused him and his regime of aiding and abetting Arab fascism in their financial support of Saddam Hussein? I was told then that Kuwait was proud to have committed billions of dollars to Saddam's war against "the Persians", as they were then contemptuously called, and that it was a more important struggle than someone like me could comprehend. I remember clearly warning those Kuwaiti acolytes of Saddam Hussein about him and his ill will against Kuwait, but to no avail. I have been a public opponent of the Iraqi regime since it came to power in the 70s: I never visited the place, never was fooled by its claims to secularism and modernisation (even when many of my contemporaries either worked for or celebrated Iraq as the main gun in the Arab arsenal against Zionism, a stupid idea, I thought), never concealed my contempt for its methods of rule and fascist behaviour. And now when I speak my mind about the ridiculous posturing of certain members of the Iraqi opposition as hapless strutting tools of US imperialism, I am told that I know nothing about life without democracy (about which more later), and am therefore unable to appreciate their nobility of soul. Little notice is taken of the fact that barely a week after extolling President Bush's commitment to democracy Professor Makiya is now denouncing the US and its plans for a post-Saddam military-Ba'athi government in Iraq. When individuals get in the habit of switching the gods whom they worship politically there's no end to the number of changes they make before they finally come to rest in utter disgrace and well deserved oblivion.

But to return to the US and its current actions. In all my encounters and travels I have yet to meet a person who is for the war. Even worse, most Americans now feel that this mobilisation has already gone too far to stop, and that we are on the verge of a disaster for the country. Consider first of all that the Democratic Party, with few exceptions, has simply gone over to the president's side in a gutless display of false patriotism. Wherever you look in the Congress there are the tell-tale signs either of the Zionist lobby, the right-wing Christians, or the military-industrial complex, three inordinately influential minority groups who share hostility to the Arab world, unbridled support for extremist Zionism, and an insensate conviction that they are on the side of the angels. Every one of the 500 congressional districts in this country has a defence industry in it, so that war has been turned into a matter of jobs, not of security. But, one might well ask, how does running an unbelievably expensive war remedy, for instance, economic recession, the almost certain bankruptcy of the social security system, a mounting national debt, and a massive failure in public education? Demonstrations are looked at simply as a kind of degraded mob action, while the most hypocritical lies pass for absolute truth, without criticism and without objection.

The media has simply become a branch of the war effort. What has entirely disappeared from television is anything remotely resembling a consistently dissenting voice. Every major channel now employs retired generals, former CIA agents, terrorism experts and known neoconservatives as "consultants" who speak a revolting jargon designed to sound authoritative but in effect supporting everything done by the US, from the UN to the sands of Arabia. Only one major daily newspaper (in Baltimore) has published anything about US eavesdropping, telephone tapping and message interception of the six small countries that are members of the Security Council and whose votes are undecided. There are no antiwar voices to read or hear in any of the major medias of this country, no Arabs or Muslims (who have been consigned en masse to the ranks of the fanatics and terrorists of this world), no critics of Israel, not on Public Broadcasting, not in The New York Times, the New Yorker, US News and World Report, CNN and the rest. When these organisations mention Iraq's flouting of 17 UN resolutions as a pretext for war, the 64 resolutions flouted by Israel (with US support) are never mentioned. Nor is the enormous human suffering of the Iraqi people during the past 12 years mentioned. Whatever the dreaded Saddam has done Israel and Sharon have also done with American support, yet no one says anything about the latter while fulminating about the former. This makes a total mockery of taunts by Bush and others that the UN should abide by its own resolutions.

The American people have thus been deliberately lied to, their interests cynically misrepresented and misreported, the real aims and intentions of this private war of Bush the son and his junta concealed with complete arrogance. Never mind that Wolfowitz, Feith, and Perle, all of them unelected officials who work for unelected Donald Rumsfeld at the Pentagon, have for some time openly advocated Israeli annexation of the West Bank and Gaza and the cessation of the Oslo process, have called for war against Iraq (and later Iran), and the building of more illegal Israeli settlements in their capacity (during Netanyahu's successful campaign for prime minister in 1996) as private consultants to him, and that that has become US policy now.

Never mind that Israel's iniquitous policies against Palestinians, which are reported only at the ends of articles (when they are reported at all) as so many miscellaneous civilian deaths, are never compared with Saddam's crimes, which they match or in some cases exceed, all of them, in the final analysis, paid for by the US taxpayer without consultation or approval. Over 40,000 Palestinians have been wounded seriously in the last two years, and about 2,500 killed wantonly by Israeli soldiers who are instructed to humiliate and punish an entire people during what has become the longest military occupation in modern history.

Never mind that not a single critical Arab or Muslim voice has been seen or heard on the major American media, liberal, moderate, or reactionary, with any regularity at all since the preparations for war have gone into their final phase. Consider also that none of the major planners of this war, certainly not the so-called experts like Bernard Lewis and Fouad Ajami, neither of whom has so much as lived in or come near the Arab world in decades, nor the military and political people like Powell, Rice, Cheney, or the great god Bush himself, know anything about the Muslim or Arab worlds beyond what they see through Israeli or oil company or military lenses, and therefore have no idea what a war of this magnitude against Iraq will produce for the people actually living there.

And consider too the sheer, unadorned hubris of men like Wolfowitz and his assistants. Asked to testify to a largely somnolent Congress about the war's consequences and costs they are allowed to escape without giving any concrete answers, which effectively dismisses the evidence of the army chief of staff who has spoken of a military occupation force of 400,000 troops for 10 years at a cost of almost a trillion dollars.

Democracy traduced and betrayed, democracy celebrated but in fact humiliated and trampled on by a tiny group of men who have simply taken charge of this republic as if it were nothing more than, what, an Arab country? It is right to ask who is in charge since clearly the people of the United States are not properly represented by the war this administration is about to loose on a world already beleaguered by too much misery and poverty to endure more. And Americans have been badly served by a media controlled essentially by a tiny group of men who edit out anything that might cause the government the slightest concern or worry. As for the demagogues and servile intellectuals who talk about war from the privacy of their fantasy worlds, who gave them the right to connive in the immiseration of millions of people whose major crime seems to be that they are Muslims and Arabs? What American, except for this small unrepresentative group, is seriously interested in increasing the world's already ample stores of anti-Americanism? Hardly any I would suppose.

Jonathan Swift, thou shouldst be living at this hour.

Bible-Thumping War Drums

by Les Payne

The moment this time rode in on a question.

The 43rd president of the United States does not like questions. He avoids them as he avoids the thesaurus. And for good reason. George W. Bush is perhaps the least articulate president since Dwight D. Eisenhower, the most uninformed since Gerald Ford and the most provincial since, say, Warren G. Harding.

The question that brought the moment came toward the end of the president's Thursday night press conference. The tangled question was truly welcomed, as revealed by the president's eyes, as they unbeaded momentarily then nearly teared.

"How is your faith guiding you? What should you tell America or what should America do collectively as you instructed before 9/11? Should it pray?"

The magic word "pray" snapped Bush out of a tailspin of a depressed White House conference that must have sent his most devoted handlers to their rosaries.

"I appreciate that question a lot," Bush said.

Before getting to the studied answer, the president fumbled through snatches of remembered, trite briefing notes about failed Iraq diplomacy, the Saddam Hussein menace and the lessons of 9/11. Then he got down to the part of the question that got him enraptured.

"My faith sustains me," he uttered. "Because I pray daily. I pray for guidance and wisdom and strength. If we were to commit our troops ... I would pray for their safety. And I would pray for the safety of innocent Iraqi lives as well. One thing that's really great about our country is there are thousands of people who pray for me who I'll never see - be able to thank. But it's a humbling experience to think that people I will never have met have lifted me and my family up in prayer. And for that I'm grateful.

"I pray for peace, I pray for peace."

Seldom in modern times have we had a U.S. president speak so prayerfully while done up in his war paint. It recalled those memorial services at the Dover Air Base, or Jimmy Carter on Sunday mornings, or Billy Sunday anytime. One might be moved to snicker, or even to laugh, until one recalls what President Bush 41st said of his son.

"He is a man of the spirit," the father once said, trying to allay fears of his son's finger on the nuclear trigger. At one level, the former president meant that the current one is a born-again Christian. At another, more disturbing level, the father knew that his son had substituted the Bible for the bottle. In a timely article, Newsweek magazine detailed how President Bush wasted his young years in riotous living and how, at age 40, he went dry with the aid of a Bible-thumping, fundamentalist West Texas religious group. "It was goodbye Jack Daniels, Hello Jesus," according to a friend from those early days.

The problem with middle-aged drunks turned Christian is that they can't sleep without yakking about Jesus, and they won't let anyone else sleep, either. Instead of embracing their religion as a private matter, they flaunt it as a mission to convert. They can become a terrible nuisance, especially to those born into the religion.

The drunk-gone-zealot may be reassuring to the troubled family. But it is not altogether reassuring to a modern world facing such a fanatic on the trigger of weapons of mass destruction that are capable of destroying the Earth several times over.

Is it possible that through religious zealotry Bush might make himself a nuisance when facing a non-Christian menace? Already he shows signs of violating secular doctrine in this republic that constitutionally separates government and religion.

Already the religious talk has stirred the hard Christian right to expect their man to walk the walk and enact favorable legislation. Ministers of the evangelical movement, Newsweek points out, "form the core of the Republican Party, which controls all of the capital for the first time in a half century."

With war approaching, Newsweek stated, "This president - this presidency - is the most resolutely 'faith-based' in modern times, an enterprise founded, supported and guided by trust in the temporal and spiritual power of God."

Sept. 11 certainly shifted American foreign policy into high gear against global terrorism. Attacking Iraq, as Bush demands, is not, for many, the most effective way to answer that challenge.

The United Nations Security Council is split on the impending war against Iraq. The Congress may well oppose it, but it doesn't matter. This legislative body, so-called, has already ceded its war-making influence to the White House. Thus, opposition to the war has been left to the people of the Western world. And, by the millions, they have taken to the boulevards of France, Germany and Rome and the streets of the United States.

"We really don't need anybody's permission" to send American planes, missiles and troops into war against Iraq, Bush said at his press conference.

This is indeed true, and it is indeed scary.

[Someone told me that the Times had printed an editorial on the side of war, but this recent editorial, clearly anti-war, doesn't mention it. In any case, here it is...]

Saying No to War

Within days, barring a diplomatic breakthrough, President Bush will decide whether to send American troops into Iraq in the face of United Nations opposition. We believe there is a better option involving long-running, stepped-up weapons inspections. But like everyone else in America, we feel the window closing. If it comes down to a question of yes or no to invasion without broad international support, our answer is no.

Even though Hans Blix, the chief weapons inspector, said that Saddam Hussein was not in complete compliance with United Nations orders to disarm, the report of the inspectors on Friday was generally devastating to the American position. They not only argued that progress was being made, they also discounted the idea that Iraq was actively attempting to manufacture nuclear weapons. History shows that inspectors can be misled, and that Mr. Hussein can never be trusted to disarm and stay disarmed on his own accord. But a far larger and more aggressive inspection program, backed by a firm and united Security Council, could keep a permanent lid on Iraq's weapons program.

By adding hundreds of additional inspectors, using the threat of force to give them a free hand and maintaining the option of attacking Iraq if it tries to shake free of a smothering inspection program, the United States could obtain much of what it was originally hoping to achieve. Mr. Hussein would now be likely to accept such an intrusive U.N. operation. Had Mr. Bush managed the showdown with Iraq in a more measured manner, he would now be in a position to rally the U.N. behind that bigger, tougher inspection program, declare victory and take most of the troops home.

Unfortunately, by demanding regime change, Mr. Bush has made it much harder for Washington to embrace this kind of long-term strategy. He has talked himself into a corner where war or an unthinkable American retreat seem to be the only alternatives visible to the administration. Every signal from the White House is that the diplomatic negotiations will be over in days, not weeks. Every signal from the United Nations is that when that day arrives, the United States will not have Security Council sanction to attack.

There are circumstances under which the president would have to act militarily no matter what the Security Council said. If America was attacked, we would have to respond swiftly and fiercely. But despite endless efforts by the Bush administration to connect Iraq to Sept. 11, the evidence simply isn't there. The administration has demonstrated that Iraq had members of Al Qaeda living within its borders, but that same accusation could be lodged against any number of American allies in the region. It is natural to suspect that one of America's enemies might be actively aiding another, but nations are not supposed to launch military invasions based on hunches and fragmentary intelligence.

The second argument the Bush administration cites for invading Iraq is its refusal to obey U.N. orders that it disarm. That's a good reason, but not when the U.N. itself believes disarmament is occurring and the weapons inspections can be made to work. If the United States ignores the Security Council and attacks on its own, the first victim in the conflict will be the United Nations itself. The whole scenario calls to mind that Vietnam-era catch phrase about how we had to destroy a village in order to save it.

President Bush has switched his own rationale for the invasion several times. Right now, the underlying theory seems to be that the United States can transform the Middle East by toppling Saddam Hussein, turning Iraq into a showplace democracy and inspiring the rest of the region to follow suit. That's another fine goal that seems impossible to accomplish outside the context of broad international agreement. The idea that the resolution to all the longstanding, complicated problems of that area begins with a quick military action is both seductive and extremely dangerous. The Bush administration has not been willing to risk any political capital in attempting to resolve the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, but now the president is theorizing that invading Iraq will do the trick.

Given the corner Mr. Bush has painted himself in, withdrawing troops — even if a considerable slice remains behind — would be an admission of failure. He obviously intends to go ahead, and bet on the very good chance that the Iraqi army will fall quickly. The fact that the United Nations might be irreparably weakened would not much bother his conservative political base at home, nor would the outcry abroad. But in the long run, this country needs a strong international body to keep the peace and defuse tension in a dozen different potential crisis points around the world. It needs the support of its allies, particularly embattled states like Pakistan, to fight the war on terror. And it needs to demonstrate by example that there are certain rules that everybody has to follow, one of the most important of which is that you do not invade another country for any but the most compelling of reasons. When the purpose is fuzzy, or based on questionable propositions, it's time to stop and look for other, less extreme means to achieve your goals.

Donga is the title of an excellent South African poetry e-zine. The eighth issue just went live. From the perspective of the Circulars list, Toast Coetzer's column on global consumption & Nike is on target, but the entire issue is worth reading.

http://www.donga.co.za/

"Britain is seething with anti-war activity at the moment. Our presentation at Downing St was interrupted by hundreds of schoolchildren, who had taken the day off from school to as part of a day of childrens protest about the war. They came charging down the Mall with their banners, blocked the road at the end of Downing St and all sat down. A couple of them tried to storm the iron gates, but they were hauled down by the police, who eventually set up barriers across the street, and hauled them off behind it. Two 12 year olds were arrested."

http://www.mrwebby.com/members/anthginn/Poetsagainstwar/10,000poems.htm

*

Accounts from around the world of the presentations of the Poets Against the War anthology:

United States, Washington, DC

by Emily Warn

At the noontime press conference on Capitol Hill, the words of W.S. Merwin, Terry Tempest Williams and Sam Hamill cast a spellbound silence over reporters and film crews, over members of Congress and the European Parliament who had all packed into a small conference room on Capitol Hill. It was a brief and dignified ceremony.

http://www.poetsagainstthewar.org/March5reports.asp

*

And extensive press coverage collected on one page:

March 8, 2003 Tens of thousands have visited the Poets Against the War web site since it first appeared on Thursday, January 30th, and news stories have appeared in scores of newspapers/radio/TV, etc. nationally and internationally about PAW and the cancellation by the White House of Laura Bush's poetry tea party. Following are a few links to news stories about Poets Against the War.

http://www.poetsagainstthewar.org/news.asp

Anti-War Protest at Site of Burning Man Festival

(Gothic News Service, 3/9/03) Two Rangers at Black Rock Desert – the annual site in Nevada for the Burning Man Festival - were greeted by a strange vision this morning. Talking to a Reno newspaperman, one of the Rangers reported, "It was sunrise across the playa and we were on our first patrol. When we looked down from the perimeter ridge, we initially saw an astonishingly large grid of either body or garbage bags. Through our binoculars, against the rising sun, we could still see that they were definitely filled - it could have been potatoes or anything big and lumpy. Each bag was spaced about 30 feet away from the next one - about 50 parallel lines going north and south, and about 40 going east and west. The whole thing made a large rectangular space, about a mile long and a kilometer wide. Frankly I can’t say if was just spooky, or both spooky and spectacular, to see all those black bags begin to get the first rays of the sun."

"When we got down inside to the actual site," reported the other Ranger, "You can't believe what we found in each of those bags. Each one had a couple of breathing holes, thankfully, for otherwise they were tied down close with duct tape. I had to use my knife carefully so as not to cut anything inside. Lo and behold, when I opened the first one, it was a body. The first one a female and the next one a male, both in their twenties. Each body was in a fetal, curled up shape. Breathing, thankfully, but totally comatose, or so it seemed."

"Yep, not saying a thing," his fellow Ranger interrupted. "Nothing at all. But more strange, on the back of each body - and now we reckon there were over 1,000 - someone had scripted in large, lavender letters, "We Mourn for Iraq".

"When we cut open a few more bags, we realized that the people were of all ages and colors. I don’t know why, but we both started getting real sad and had to work real hard – opening one bag after another - to keep from breaking down and crying. I think we're still both pretty upset."

According to the Reno Newspaperman – apart from his interview - nobody from the local Press was allowed to visit, photograph or film the occasion. Park and Regional authorities in contact with Attorney General Ashcroft's office apparently decided that any published images of the comatose bodies might become a national security issue. The rangers did report that it took a full day to open the bags and deliver the bodies to a local, unidentified military base. It's not known whether any of the participants have begun to wake up, whether or not they will be charged with any crime and when or from where they will be released by the military.

Independent Media Center -

The Department of Defence has withdrawn advertising from all student media around Australia because of an ' adbust' done by Vertigo, the student newspaper of The University of Technology, Sydney (UTS). The move comes in response to a controversial full-page parody of Defence recruitment advertising, which features in the latest edition.

Vertigos "adbust" satirically portrays the Department of Defence as a political tool of an Australian government intent on participating in an unsanctioned invasion of Iraq.
Vertigo had earlier rejected Defence Department requests for advertising space, a move that instigated a boycott of Defence advertising by a number of student publications at major Australian universities. The "adbust" subtly highlights the hypocritical nature of a possible invasion of another country being undertaken by the Department of "Defence".
"We see it as a great victory that students are no longer being inundated with inaccurate representations of the Defence Force," said Vertigo spokesperson, Jano Gibson.

http://www.cs.wpi.edu/~sms/Blair.mpg

[One of the nice features of commondreams.org are the postings by Russell Mokhiber of his unedited interactions with White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer during the daily press briefings. Here's the latest one.]

Ari & I: White House Briefing - March 5, 2003

Mokhiber: Ari, you have said in the past that every step will be taken to protect innocent and civilian life in Iraq. During the first Gulf War, the United States intentionally bombed water storage facilities and sewage treatment plants. This led to the deaths of an estimated half million civilian Iraqis from cholera, hepatitis, and typhoid. In what sense is that protecting civilian and innocent life?

Ari Fleischer: In the event force is used, the United States military takes particular care to make certain that targets that are attacked are only military targets. There can never be an absolute guarantee in war, of course, but every care is taken by our military to make certain that every target is a military target with a military objective.

Mokhiber: Then why did we intentionally bomb the water treatment facilities?

Ari Fleischer: I don't know about your facts. I'm not certain in what you are saying. I didn't work here in 1991. You may want to talk to the Pentagon about anything that took place then.

For 92 years women around the world have been marking International Women’s Day with calls for a more peace and justice-centered world. We urge you to join in this rich tradition and COME TO WASHINGTON D.C. FOR THE WOMEN-LED ANTI-WAR MARCH ON SATURDAY, MARCH 8, 2003 (http://www.unitedforpeace.org/women) or organize an International Women’s Day Peace and Justice event in your community.

Post your events at
http://www.unitedforpeace.org

United for Peace and Justice and other groups have made International Women’s Day actions a priority both because of the impacts war has on women and children and because this year’s celebration falls on the day following Hans Blix’s next report to the United Nations Security Council.

MARCH 8 IN WASHINGTON, DC

11:00 a.m - RALLY at Malcolm X Park (16th St. between U and Euclid NW)

1:00 p.m. March to Encircle the White House

Join with Alice Walker, Maxine Hong Kingston, comedian Janeane Garofalo, Dr. Helen Caldicott, Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey, Granny D, Susan Griffith, Barbara Ehrenreich, Amy Goodman, Rania Masri, Michelle Shocked, feminist theologian Hyun Kyung, Nobel Peace Laureate Jody Williams, Cheri Honkala, Inga Muscio, Terry Tempest Williams, Medea Benjamin, Starhawk, and many others to say no to war and yes to policies that reflect the values of peace, compassion, generosity, and the recognition of the interconnectedness of the whole human family.

For details on the march and the week of women’s anti-war activities in Washington (including a lobbying day, teach-in, concert, and spiritual event), see www.unitedforpeace.org/women or www.codepink4peace.org or call The CodePink Women’s Peace Vigil at 202-393-5016.

For the past four months, women from around the country have traveled to Washington, DC to join CodePink to be a constant presence at the White House serving as a daily reminder to the Bush Administration that millions believe that a war on Iraq would be immoral, unjust, and would make United States citizens and service personnel less safe. This historic vigil will culminate on March 8th with the women-led rally and march to the White House

MARCH 8 AROUND THE WORLD

Global Women’s Strike

Women Say No War: Invest in Caring Not Killing
Strike to stop war on Iraq and All Wars

Join women (and men supporters) in 80 countries, from Venezuela to Nigeria. Activities in the U.S. are planned in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Philadelphia, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Salt Lake City, Utah, and several other cities. For more information, see http://womenstrike8m.server101.com

Second Annual International Women’s Day Global Peace Vigil

Last year more than 100 communities participated. The number this year is expected to be much larger. For more information, see
http://www.feministpeacenetwork.org/iwd.htm

Traprock Peace Center

QUESTION: Any viewer who saw the war on television had the impression this was an easy war, fought from a distance and soldiers coming back relatively unharmed. Is this an accurate picture?

ROKKE: At the completion of the Gulf War, when we came back to the United States in the fall of 1991, we had a total casualty count of 760: 294 dead, a little over 400 wounded or ill. But the casualty rate now for Gulf War veterans is approximately 30 percent. Of those stationed in the theater, including after the conflict, 221,000 have been awarded disability, according to a Veterans Affairs (VA) report issued September 10, 2002.

Many of the US casualties died as a direct result of uranium munitions friendly fire. US forces killed and wounded US forces.

We recommended care for anybody downwind of any uranium dust, anybody working in and around uranium contamination, and anyone within a vehicle, structure, or building that's struck with uranium munitions. That's thousands upon thousands of individuals, but not only US troops. You should provide medical care not only for the enemy soldiers but for the Iraqi women and children affected, and clean up all of the contamination in Iraq.

And it's not just children in Iraq. It's children born to soldiers after they came back home. The military admitted that they were finding uranium excreted in the semen of the soldiers. If you've got uranium in the semen, the genetics are messed up. So when the children were conceived-the alpha particles cause such tremendous cell damage and genetics damage that everything goes bad. Studies have found that male soldiers who served in the Gulf War were almost twice as likely to have a child with a birth defect and female soldiers almost three times as likely.

Q: You have been a military man for over 35 years. You served in Vietnam as a bombardier and you are still in the US Army Reserves. Now you're going around the country speaking about the dangers of depleted uranium (DU). What made you decide you had to speak publicly about DU?

ROKKE: Everybody on my team was getting sick. My best friend John Sitton was dying. The military refused him medical care, and he died. John set up the medical evacuation communication system for the entire theater. Then he got contaminated doing the work.

John and Rolla Dolph and I were best friends in the civilian world, the military world, forever. Rolla got sick. I personally got the order that sent him to war. We were both activated together. I was given the assignment to teach nuclear, biological, and chemical warfare and make sure soldiers came back alive and safe. I take it seriously. I was sent to the Gulf with this instruction: Bring 'em back alive. Clear as could be. But when I got all the training together, all the environmental cleanup procedures together, all the medical directives, nothing happened.

More than 100 American soldiers were exposed to DU in friendly fire accidents, plus untold numbers of soldiers who climbed on and entered tanks that had been hit with DU, taking photos and gathering souvenirs to take home. They didn't know about the hazards.

DU is an extremely effective weapon. Each tank round is 10 pounds of solid uranium-238 contaminated with plutonium, neptunium, americium. It is pyrophoric, generating intense heat on impact, penetrating a tank because of the heavy weight of its metal. When uranium munitions hit, it's like a firestorm inside any vehicle or structure, and so we saw tremendous burns, tremendous injuries. It was devastating.

The US military decided to blow up Saddam's chemical, biological, and radiological stockpiles in place, which released the contamination back on the US troops and on everybody in the whole region. The chemical agent detectors and radiological monitors were going off allover the place. We had all of the various nerve agents. We think there were biological agents, and there were destroyed nuclear reactor facilities. It was a toxic wasteland. And we had DU added to this whole mess.

When we first got assigned to clean up the DU and arrived in northern Saudi Arabia, we started getting sick within 72 hours. Respiratory problems, rashes, bleeding, open sores started almost immediately.

When you have a mass dose of radioactive particulates and you start breathing that in, the deposit sits in the back of the pharynx, where the cancer started initially on the first guy. It doesn't take a lot of time. I had a father and son working with me. The father is already dead from lung cancer, and the sick son is still denied medical care.

Q: Did you suspect what was happening?

ROKKE: We didn't know anything about DU when the Gulf War started. As a warrior, you're listening to your leaders, and they're saying there are no health effects from the DU. But, as we started to study this, to go back to what we learned in physics and our engineering-I was a professor of environmental science and engineering-you learn rapidly that what they're telling you doesn't agree with what you know and observe.

In June of 1991, when I got back to the States, I was sick. Respiratory problems and the rashes and neurological things were starting to show up.

Q: Why didn't you go to the VA with a medical complaint?

ROKKE: Because I was still in the Army, and I was told I couldn't file. You have to have the information that connects your exposure to your service before you go to the VA. The VA obviously wasn't going to take care of me, so I went to my private physician. We had no idea what it was, but so many good people were coming back sick.

They didn't do tests on me or my team members. According to the Department of Defense's own guidelines put out in 1992, any excretion level in the urine above 15 micrograms of uranium per day should result in immediate medical testing, and when you get up to 250 micrograms of total uranium excreted per day, you're supposed to be under continuous medical care.

Finally the US Department of Energy performed a radiobioassay on me in November 1994, while I was director of the Depleted Uranium Project for the Department of Defense. My excretion rate was approximately 1500 micrograms per day. My level was 5 to 6 times beyond the level that requires continuous medical care.

But they didn't tell me for two and a half years.

Q: What are the symptoms of exposure to DU?

ROKKE: Fibromyalgia. Eye cataracts from the radiation. When uranium impacts any type of vehicle or structure, uranium oxide dust and pieces of uranium explode all over the place. This can be breathed in or go into a wound. Once it gets in the body, a portion of this stuff is soluble, which means it goes into the blood stream and all of your organs. The insoluble fraction stays-in the lungs, for example. The radiation damage and the particulates destroy the lungs.

Q: What kind of training have the troops had, who are getting called upright now-the ones being shipped to the vicinity of what may be the next Gulf War?

ROKKE: As the director of the Depleted Uranium Project, I developed a 40-hour block of training. All that curriculum has been shelved. They turned what I wrote into a 20-minute program that's full of distortions. It doesn't deal with the reality of uranium munitions.

The equipment is defective. The General Accounting Office verified that the gas masks leak, the chemical protective suits leak. Unbelievably, Defense Department officials recently said the defects can be fixed with duct tape.

Q: If my neighbors are being sent off to combat with equipment and training that is inadequate, and into battle with a toxic weapon, DU, who can speak up?

ROKKE: Every husband and wife, son and daughter, grandparent, aunt and uncle, needs to call their congressmen and cite these official government reports and force the military to ensure that our troops have adequate equipment and adequate training. If we don't take care of our American veterans after a war, as happened with the Gulf War, and now we're about ready to send them into a war again-we can't do it. We can't do it. It's a crime against God. It's a crime against humanity to use uranium munitions in a war, and it's devastating to ignore the consequences of war.

These consequences last for eternity. The half life of uranium 238 is 4.5 billion years. And we left over 320 tons all over the place in Iraq.

We also bombarded Vieques, Puerto Rico, with DU in preparation for the war in Kosovo. That's affecting American citizens on American territory. When I tried to activate our team from the Department of Defense responsible for radiological safety and DU cleanup in Vieques, I was told no. When I tried to activate medical care, I was told no.

The US Army made me their expert. I went into the project with the total intent to ensure they could use uranium munitions in war, because I'm a warrior. What I saw as director of the project, doing the research and working with my own medical conditions and everybody else's, led me to one conclusion: uranium munitions must be banned from the planet, for eternity, and medical care must be provided for everyone, not just the US or the Canadians or the British or the Germans or the French but for the American citizens of Vieques, for the residents of Iraq, of Okinawa, of Scotland, of Indiana, of Maryland, and now Afghanistan and Kosovo.

Q: If your information got out widely, do you think there's a possibility that the families of those soldiers would beg them to refuse?

ROKKE: If you're going to be sent into a toxic wasteland, and you know you're going to wear gas masks and chemical protective suits that leak, and you're not going to get any medical care after you're exposed to all of these things, would you go? Suppose they gave a war and nobody came. You've got to start peace sometime.

Q: It does sound remarkable for someone who has been in the military for 35 years to be talking about when peace should begin.

ROKKE: When I do these talks, especially in churches, I'm reminded that these religions say, "And a child will lead us to peace." But if we contaminate the environment, where will the child come from? The children won't be there. War has become obsolete, because we can't deal with the consequences on our warriors or the environment, but more important, on the noncombatants. When you reach a point in war when the contamination and the health effects of war can't be cleaned up because of the weapons you use, and medical care can't be given to the soldiers who participated in the war on either side or to the civilians affected, then it's time for peace.

[Which color -- green, yellow, or red -- will you be? Read on...]

ACLU Online: March 7, 2003
The e-newsletter of the American Civil Liberties Union

A secretive new system for conducting background checks on all airline passengers threatens to create a bureaucratic machine for destroying Americans' privacy and a government blacklist that will harm innocent Americans.

The system, known as CAPPS II -- Computer Assisted Passenger Pre-screening System II -- will be tested at several airports around the United States starting sometime in March.

Like the Pentagon's controversial "Total Information Awareness" program, CAPPS II would collect information about individuals including "financial and transactional data," which could include credit card and other consumer data, housing information, communications records and health records. It would also make use of public source information such as law enforcement and legal records.

"This system threatens to create a permanent blacklisted underclass of Americans who cannot travel freely," said Katie Corrigan, an ACLU Legislative Counsel.

Under the program Americans will be labeled as a "green," "yellow" or "red" security risk. The red code would be reserved for those on terrorist watch lists. Far less clear is who would get a yellow code in their file; those passengers would be subject to extra-intensive security screening.

Details of the program reveal that a yellow code in a person's file could be shared with other government agencies at the federal, state and local level, with intelligence agencies such as the CIA and with foreign governments and international agencies -- all of which could use those designations for many purposes, including employment decisions and the granting of government benefits.

"Once the infrastructure for a system of government files and security ratings on American citizens is built, it won't be limited to air transportation for very long," added Barry Steinhardt, Director of the ACLU's Technology and Liberty Program. "Nothing like it has ever been done in this country."

Learn more:
http://www.aclu.org/Privacy/Privacy.cfmID=11956&c=130&Type=s&MX=728&H=0

----------------------------------------------------
United for Peace and Justice NYC
http://www.unitedforpeace.org/nyc 646-473-8935
----------------------------------------------------
On Saturday, March 22, New York is marching to stop the war in Iraq. United for Peace and Justice NYC has applied for a permit, and the Mayor and the NYPD have pledged to respect our right to march. We are negotiating with the City over the route, which will be in Midtown Manhattan.

WHAT: NYC March for Peace and Democracy
WHEN: Noon, Saturday, 3/22
WHERE: Midtown Manhattan

**stickers, posters, & leaflets are now available at the UFPJ office - details below**

We only have two weeks to get the word out. Here's how to plug in:

1) MATERIALS NOW AVAILABLE
Spread the word about the 3/22 Anti-War March at anti-war events, in front of subway stations, outside movie theaters, anywhere people congregate!

A bilingual (English/Spanish) leaflet is available for downloading at: http://www.unitedforpeace.org/nyc

Leaflets, stickers, and posters are now available at the UFPJ office, 330 W. 42nd Street, 8th fl., 646-473-8935; weekdays 9-7, weekends 12-5.

[note: we will be housed in new offices on the 15th floor beginning Monday -- we enormously grateful to SEIU 1199 for continuing to provide us with space]

Leafleting materials are also available at these distribution centers:

MANHATTAN
Cooper Square: 61 E. 4th St.; weekdays 9-5; 212-228-8210
Green Party office: 35 E. 1st St. (betw 1st & 2nd Ave). weekdays 5:30-9:30pm; weekends 11-7; 212-673-1323.

BROOKLYN
House of the Lord Church: 415 Atlantic Ave (materials should arrive by Friday afternoon); Mon-Fri 10-7, Sat 10-4 (call first on Saturdays); 718-596-1991.

More distribution centers will be added soon. If you are interested in leafleting or setting up a distribution center in your neighborhood, contact the street leafleting coordinator, Erich Strom, at erichstrom@mindspring.com or 646-473-8935.

2) VOLUNTEER PIZZA PARTY & MEETING
Come to the Volunteer Pizza Party and Planning Meeting on Friday (March 7th), 6:30pm at the UFPJ office: 330 W 42nd St., betw 8-9th Aves., 8th floor, 646-473-8935. Bring your friends!

If you can't make it to the meeting, drop by the office to pick up materials and join in with our massive leafleting campaigns.

3) OTHER WAYS TO GET INVOLVED
* Organizing listserve (low-volume, announcements only): ufpjnyc-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
* Volunteers listserve (average one email per day, containing specific requests for volunteer assistance) nycvolunteers-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
* Outreach working group: ufpj-nyc-outreach-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
* Musicians, street performers, artists: contact Arts & Culture working group: thomasg@speakeasy.net or greenelent@earthlink.net

IF WAR BEGINS >>>
Converge on Times Square at 5pm on the day the bombing starts (the next day if bombing begins at night)

TO RECEIVE UPDATES LIKE THIS ONE, VISIT
http://www.unitedforpeace.org/email.php
_____________________________________________________
To unsubscribe or update your listing go to:
http://www.unitedforpeace.org/email.php?id=32469&token=890282

Excerpted from an article by Judy Rebick recently posted on rabble.ca, a Canadian alternative online media source. rabble.ca has a special anti-war coverage section as well, featuring great articles, columnists, and events around Canada.

from A Better Idea by Judy Rebick:
The Lysistrata Project, one of the many anti-war actions sweeping the globe, reminds us that women’s opposition to war goes back a long way in human history. While I am glad to see a revival of the ancient comedy of women refusing sex to men if they go off to war, I would a prefer a more modern version of women’s resistance. How about a story where women form a global non-violent army and rise up against the men in power?

MORE...

[Helen Caldicott's letter to the Pope is at the end of this story.]

Peace Activist Implores Pope to be 'Ultimate Human Shield'

by Leslie Scrivener

Dr. Helen Caldicott, one of the world's most determined peace activists, is imploring Pope John Paul II to go to Baghdad as he is the "only person on earth who can stop this war" in Iraq. (see below)

Caldicott has organized a letter writing and e-mail petition, urging people around the world to write to the 82-year-old Pope asking him to travel to Baghdad and stay there until peace has been achieved.

"Your physical presence in Baghdad will prevent the impending slaughter of hundreds of thousands of human beings," her letter says.

The Australian-born Caldicott, who has written extensively on the nuclear threat, is a former Harvard professor, founder of Physicians for Social Responsibility and subject of the award winning film If You Love This Planet.

In her letter, circulated on the Internet, she urges ordinary people to make their opposition to war known and send a "mountain" of letters, e-mails, faxes and phone calls to the Vatican to persuade the Pope of the need for his immediate, unprecedented action.

"The Pope's presence in Iraq will act as the ultimate human shield," she writes. Though the Bush administration has shown "no reservations about slaughtering up to 500,000 innocents in Iraq, there is one person whose life they absolutely will not risk. That person is Pope John Paul II."

The Pope's travel schedule is usually set months, sometimes years in advance. He had hoped to travel to Iraq in 1999 and 2000, though trips were cancelled.

During Ash Wednesday services yesterday in Rome, the Pope called on Catholics to pray and fast for peace during Lent, the 40-day season of penitence leading to Easter.

And the Pope's emissary, Cardinal Pio Laghi, met with U.S. President George Bush in Washington yesterday. A White House spokesperson said Bush rejects the argument there's no moral justification for a war.

Canadian church leaders marked Ash Wednesday by releasing a letter to Prime Minister Jean Chrétien, asking him to redouble Canada's efforts to prevent a war in Iraq and announcing a March 22 ecumenical peace vigil at St. Michael's Cathedral.

The 18 leaders, including Archbishop Michael Peers, Primate of the Anglican Church, and Bishop Jacques Berthelet, President of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, stress their "firm belief that war on Iraq, even with explicit Security Council authorization, would be the worst option."
Copyright 1996-2003. Toronto Star Newspapers Limited

###

Urgent Appeal From Helen Caldicott

Dear Friends

I write this appeal for your help as a pediatrician, a mother, and a grandmother -- and I am writing about the lives of tens of thousands of children.

Although the current administration has demonstrated it has no reservations about slaughtering up to 500,000 innocents in Iraq, there is one person whose life they absolutely will not risk. That person is Pope John Paul II.

While the Pope has already formally denounced the proposed war, calling it a defeat for humanity, as well as sent his top spokesperson to meet with Saddam Hussein, he now must take a historically unprecedented action of his own and travel to Baghdad. The Pope's physical presence in Iraq will act as the ultimate human shield, during which time leaders of the word nation can commit themselves to identifying and implementing a peaceful solution to this war that the world's majority clearly does not support.

To persuade the Holy Father to take this unusual but potent action, he must hear from you and millions of others around the world who have already been inspired to stand up and speak out for peace. A mountain of surface mail, email, faxes, and phone calls are our devices to inspire him. Please understand that your taking just a few minutes right now to communicate with him may ultimately spare the lives of thousands of innocent people who at this moment live in complete terror from the threat of an imminent U.S.-lead military strike on their homeland.

So here is what you can do to be a part of this powerful final action to Stop the march to war in Iraq.

1. Do not forward the letter below. Its power depends upon your sending it directly, as a personal communication to the Pope.

2. Simply cut and paste the letter below into a new email. Also cut and paste the Vatican email address we have provided.

3. At the close of the letter, type in your name, city and state--no need to include your address.

4. Either email, (accreditamenti@pressva.va) FAX ([from USA] 011-39-06698-85378--from other countries drop the 011 prefix -- or send a hardcopy of this letter to the addresses in the letter below. DO NOT put "Italy" anywhere on the envelope, as this will send your mail into the Italian mail system which is independend of the Vatican system. Should you wish to phone the Vatican directly, (from USA) dial 011-39-06-69-82--all other countries must use their appropriate international prefix.

5. Pass this original email on to as many people you can so as to assure a critical mass is reached in this action.

6. Note that as you and others begin sending your letters, faxes and emails, there will be a simultaneous effort to alert the media of this action, so as to be sure it is publicly known throughout the world.

Thank you for participating in this formal request of the Pope.

We just may stop this war in Iraq -- and save these childrens' lives.

Dr. Helen Caldicott

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

His Holiness John Paul II

Apostolic Palace

00120 Vatican City State

Europe

"Father, why has thou forsaken me?"

Your Holiness:

I write to you today out of a sense of great urgency. As you know the United States of America is on the verge of launching what may be one of the most cataclysmic wars in history using weapons of mass destruction upon the Iraqi people, fifty percent of whom are less than 15 years of age.

Conservative estimates are that such a war will result in the death of 500,000 Iraqis. It seems clear that, at this time, you are the only person on Earth who can stop this war. Indeed, your physical presence in Baghdad, will prevent the impending slaughter of hundreds of thousands of human beings, and force the international community of nations to identify and implement a truly peaceful resolution to this unprecedented, preemptive aggression.

I implore you to travel to Baghdad and to remain there until a peaceful solution to this crisis has been implemented. The lives of the people of the people of Iraq rest in your hands - as does the fate of the world.

With hope,

(your name)

Troops 'Told of March 17 Invasion'

BRITISH troops had been told an invasion of Iraq would begin on March 17, with a huge bombing campaign being launched four days earlier, the Daily Express in London has reported.

The tabloid quoted a senior government source, who it reported had direct access to British military planning in Kuwait, as saying that "everything is being geared up towards a ground invasion beginning on Monday week".

British newspapers also reported that Britain and the US were considering an amended new United Nations resolution giving Iraq a short time to disarm or face imminent military action.

The Times said that London and Washington were to force a vote on a new resolution early next week, but were studying ways of luring wavering Security Council members into their camp.

One possible solution would be to introduce an ultimatum into the resolution, or a protocol alongside it. The intention would be to give Iraq a few more days to produce chemical and biological weapons, or furnish evidence of their destruction.

The pro-war Sun, Britain's biggest-selling daily, said that US President George W. Bush would give Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein a 72-hour ultimatum to disarm next week after a crucial Security Council vote.

The order to strike would be given even if France vetoed a new resolution that aimed to pave the way to military action, the tabloid added.

Action was expected to begin towards the end of next week, and senior allied commanders had set April 10 as the target date for the end of the war, before temperatures in Iraq soared and the cost of conflict spirals, The Sun said.

In an editorial, the tabloid renewed an attack on French President Jacques Chirac, calling him "Le Worm" for his "spineless" refusal to back the tough US stance on Iraq.

France and Russia on Wednesday dangled the threat of using their veto power on the Security Council to block a new US-British-Spanish resolution.

The Sun claimed Chirac was trying to protect his country's trade deals in the region, and "never meant it when he opposed military action".

France could do a "massive U-turn" if chief UN arms inspector Hans Blix delivered a negative report to the UN on Friday, and Chirac could "emerge with a vestige of respectability", the paper said.

The right-wing Daily Mail tabloid said that Bush would give Saddam a three-day final deadline to disarm next week, whether a new resolution in the Security Council passed, failed or was withdrawn.

The paper said on its front page that British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Bush's staunchest supporter in the Iraq crisis, had been dealt a "double hammer blow" by Blix saying that Iraq's destruction of a number of banned Al-Samoud missiles was "real disarmament", and by the declaration by France and Russia.

The following is an excerpt of an interview with Donald Rumsfeld by David Dimbleby of the BBC, on March 4, 2003. The complete interview can be read on the BBC website:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2819931.stm

DR: . . . The critical issue is the relationship between weapons of terrorist states, which Iraq is, by everyone's agreement -

DD: America took it off the list of terror states 20 years ago.

DR: I don't know that. I accept -

DD: When you - when you - sorry. When you visited Iraq and negotiated with Saddam Hussein, when America wanted Saddam Hussein for its own purposes, America took Iraq off the list of terrorist states and, indeed, supplied it with the wherewithal to make the chemical weapons they're now trying to remove.

DR: I've read that type of thing, but I don't know where you get your information, and I don't believe it's correct. They may have been taken off. I was a private businessman...

I was asked for a few months to assist after the 241 Marines were killed in Beirut, Lebanon. And I did meet with Saddam Hussein. I did not give him or sell him or bring him any chemical weapons or any biological weapons, as some of the European press likes to print. It's just factually not true.

Now, whether or not the United States at some point, when I was not part of the government, decided to take him off a terrorist list, you may be right. In fact, I -

DD: Are you saying you don't know, you didn't know when you went there whether he was on the list of terror states or not? You were trying to reopen -

DR: I believe he was.

DD: - a relationship between the United States and Iraq.

DR: That's right. And I believe he was on the list of terrorist states when I went there.

DD: We're being diverted a bit here, but let's just go into this, because it's another of the causes of a lack of credibility, or a credibility gap that you particularly have to fill, that you were there and met the man.

DR: I was there with the President and Secretary Shultz to meet with him and to see it was one of the few Middle Eastern countries that had not re-established relationships with the United States after the earlier Middle East war.

DD: But you aren't saying that you weren't aware that he was using chemical weapons, because the Secretary of State at the time had said they were using them.

DR: I was certainly aware of that. I didn't say I wasn't aware of that. I said I was not aware that the United States gave him, as you suggested, or I gave him, and that I had some burden to bear. That's just utter nonsense.

DD: I'm not suggesting you had a burden to bear. I was saying that there was one of the reasons you lacked -

DR: You said you particularly.

DD: No, you went and talked to the man.

DR: I did.

DD: But what I'm suggesting is that the United States in the world outside, over and over again people say, well, now they're trying to get rid of the weapons, as Jesse Jackson put it when he was at Hyde Park Corner a week ago, for which the United States has the receipts. I mean, that's the problem, that you created this monster, evil, as you know -

DR: You who?

DD: You, the United States, not you personally.

DR: Well, first of all, you're wrong. If you look at the record of the European countries, and the other technologically advanced countries of the world and the relationships with Iraq, I think you'll find that the United States ranks relatively low in terms of trading with Iraq and assisting Iraq with respect to weapons. I think that's correct. I don't have the data, but I think you'll find that's the case. And I think, furthermore, that if at some point a ground truth is achieved, it will be embarrassing to countries that have been providing Saddam Hussein's regime with a great deal of those technologies.

http://www.unitedforpeace.org/nyc
646-473-8935
---------------------------------------------------
reminder>> CANDLELIGHT MARCH FOR PEACE
WHEN: Wed., March 5, gather at 5:30PM
WHERE: Assemble at Hillary Clinton's office, 780 Third Ave. (47th & 48th)
BRING: Candles, signs and drums
Leaflets & more info:
http://www.unitedforpeace.org/calendar.php?calid=2394
-----------------------------------------------------
In this update:
1) March 5 Student Walkouts, Candelight March, & More
2) NYC City Council Anti-War Resolution
3) March 8 Intl Women's Day Action in DC
4) March 9 Nonviolent Civil Disobedience in DC
5) March 15 Protest at the White House
6) March 22 NYC Anti-War March
7) What to do if war begins
8) How to get more involved with UFPJ NYC
9) If you had a bad police experience on Feb. 15

------------------------------------------------------
1) WED., MARCH 5 DAY OF ANTI-WAR ACTION **NYC Student Walkouts and Convergence of Student Strikers: http://www.unitedforpeace.org/calendar.php?calid=2453 **National Student Strike: http://www.unitedforpeace.org/students and http://www.nyspc.net **Candlelight March for Peace: http://www.unitedforpeace.org/calendar.php?calid=2394

2) NYC CITY COUNCIL ANTI-WAR RESOLUTION The NYC City Council has been waffling on passing an anti-war resolution -- while 124 other cities and counties have voiced opposition to Bush's war. A strong majority of New Yorkers oppose war on Iraq; our Councilmembers need to hear how we feel about their inaction! A vote is scheduled March 12 -- we need to raise the pressure. To get involved, send a blank email to nycantiwar-subscribe@yahoogroups.com or write to Tim Eubanks, tim@abffe.com

3) SAT., MARCH 8: WOMEN'S PEACE ACTION IN D.C. On International Women's Day, thousands of people will converge on Washington for a women-led action to encircle the White House. More info: http://www.unitedforpeace.org/article.php?list=sub&sub=16

4) SUN. MARCH 9: NONVIOLENT CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE IN D.C. Protests with nonviolent CD are being planned for the morning and afternoon on Sunday, March 9, in Washington DC by the Iraq Pledge of Resistance. Please see www.peacepledge.org/resist for more information, or contact Pledge Coordinator at pledgecoordinator@starpower.net.

5) SAT., MARCH 15: MARCH ON THE WHITE HOUSE Emergency national demonstration against the war in Washington, D.C. More info: http://www.unitedforpeace.org

6) SAT., MARCH 22: NYC MARCHES AGAINST THE WAR Gather on Fifth Avenue at 59th Street at noon for a major New York City anti-war march, to promote peace abroad and civil liberties at home. Leaflets and more info available soon at http://www.unitedforpeace.org/nyc

7) WHAT TO DO IF WAR BEGINS Converge on Times Square at 5pm on the day the bombing starts (the next day if bombing begins at night)

8) SOME WAYS TO PLUG IN TO UFPJ NYC * Organizing listserve (low-volume, announcements only): ufpjnyc-subscribe@yahoogroups.com * Volunteers listserve (average one email per day, containing specific requests for volunteer assistance) nycvolunteers-subscribe@yahoogroups.com * Outreach working group: ufpj-nyc-outreach-subscribe@yahoogroups.com * Arts & Culture working group: contact thomasg@speakeasy.net or greenelent@earthlink.net * Outreach and mobilizing meeting, next Tuesday, March 4, 6:30PM at the UFPJ office, 330 W. 42nd St, 8th floor; 646-473-8935

9) BAD POLICE EXPERIENCE ON FEB. 15? The New York Civil Liberties Union still wants to hear from anyone who had a bad experience with the police on February 15: nyclu215@aol.com

And UFPJ NYC still wants your February 15 stories -- we apologize to everyone who had their emails bounce back to them, in our post-protest fatigue we let a few details slip. You can re-send them to feb15@unitedforpeace.org

The Times is reporting that new EU measures to deter computer hacking could pose problems because the new laws could also outlaw people who organize protests online, like the MoveOn "Virtual March on Washington" (mentioned elsewhere on this site).

The agreement, reached last week, obliges all 15 member states to adopt a new criminal offense: illegal access to, and illegal interference with an information system. It calls on national courts to impose jail terms of at least two years in serious cases.

If European Union citizens undertook a similar electronic bombardment of the e-mail, fax and phone lines of the British prime minister, Tony Blair, they might be liable for prosecution, said Leon de Costa, chief executive of Judicium, a legal consultancy based in London. The new code "criminalizes behavior which, until now, has been seen as lawful civil disobedience," Mr. de Costa said.

ABC News reports that late Monday, lawyer Stephen Downs, director of the Albany Office of the state Commission on Judicial Conduct, was arrested at the Crossgates Mall near Albany and charged with trespassing. The reason? He refused to take off a "Give Peace A C