As our thoughts turn not only to to those soldiers who have died but to those now alive that sadly, will have to be remembered next and subsequent Memorial Days thanks to Bush’s war of choice, it is important that even as we pay respects, we need to keep the truth at the forefront of out hearts and minds. I read this op-ed in the Chattanoogan today, and it said something that needs to be screamed from the rooftops, as it should have been a few years ago when the propaganda was in full swing (emphasis mine):

The only way to truly honor our war dead and those that have fought in our wars would be to tell the truth about why they died and why they fought and why there must come a day – in honor of them – when we must put a stop to needless war and the killing and maiming, the ruining of lives and the heartbreak and suffering that comes from it.

The last time an American soldier died or fought for our freedom was World War II. That is the plain fact and the plain truth. To say that any soldier since World War II fought or gave up his life in order that we might enjoy our freedom is a horrible mistake in reasoning.

It is a horrible mistake because it is not just a mistake but a mistake that perpetuates and promotes our insatiable appetite for needless war and needless death and suffering under the guise that it was all for the cause of freedom.

No, it wasn’t. Every soldier that has died or fought under the American flag since World War II has done it because of the immoral and wrong-headed policies of our presidents and government leaders, backed by the ignorant and phony patriotism of the masses…those same masses that still believe even to this day that each one of our war dead gave up their lives for our freedom.

Other than reiterating how important and obvious the above statement should be to anyone with half a brain stem, there’s nothing else to say except as you remember those who have died, remember that many of them didn’t have to, and we should be never be afraid of reminding those who feel otherwise about that fact.

Crossposted from Reason and Brimstone:

The Bush administration (that may be an oxymoron) would have you believe that we’re in Iraq to damp down terrorism, that they are the soaring eagles with their watchful eye.  When you get down to the details, however, it doesn’t quite work like that.  Years ago, my students asked me what I thought of the invasion of Iraq, shortly after it begun.  I told them that from my point of view, it was a “strategic blunder” and that it would lead to a major groundswell in support in the Mideast for terrorist causes and it would, in the long run, do us much more harm than good. 

Sometimes, I really hate being right.  Per The New York Times:

Militants Widen Reach as Terror Seeps Out of Iraq
[…]
The Iraq war, which for years has drawn militants from around the world, is beginning to export fighters and the tactics they have honed in the insurgency to neighboring countries and beyond, according to American, European and Middle Eastern government officials and interviews with militant leaders in Lebanon, Jordan and London.
[…]
Last week, the Lebanese Army found itself in a furious battle against a militant group, Fatah al Islam, whose ranks included as many as 50 veterans of the war in Iraq, according to General Rifi. More than 30 Lebanese soldiers were killed fighting the group at a refugee camp near Tripoli.
[…]
Militant leaders warn that the situation in Lebanon is indicative of the spread of fighters. “You have 50 fighters from Iraq in Lebanon now, but with good caution I can say there are a hundred times that many, 5,000 or higher, who are just waiting for the right moment to act,” Dr. Mohammad al-Massari, a Saudi dissident in Britain who runs the jihadist Internet forum, Tajdeed.net, said in an interview on Friday. “The flow of fighters is already going back and forth, and the fight will be everywhere until the United States is willing to cease and desist.”
[…]
In an April 17 report written for the United States government, Dennis Pluchinsky, a former senior intelligence analyst at the State Department, said battle-hardened militants from Iraq posed a greater threat to the West than extremists who trained in Afghanistan because Iraq had become a laboratory for urban guerrilla tactics.

“There are some operational parallels between the urban terrorist activity in Iraq and the urban environments in Europe and the United States,” Mr. Pluchinsky wrote. “More relevant terrorist skills are transferable from Iraq to Europe than from Afghanistan to Europe,” he went on, citing the use of safe houses, surveillance, bomb making and mortars.

A top American military official who tracks terrorism in Iraq and the surrounding region, and who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the topic, said: “Do I think in the future the jihad will be fueled from the battlefield of Iraq? Yes. More so than the battlefield of Afghanistan.”
[…]

Way to go!  We’ve got ourselves a training ground.

crossposted @ rednalsiofvermont.blogspot.com

Yep that’s right folks you heard about it here first. That tiny town in Vermont on a small island in Lake Champlain signed a settlement agreement with their former town clerk and treasurer. After being involved in litigation and lawsuits, and being raked over the coals by the Burlington Free Press, it looks like the town might be able to regain some sense of normalcy.

This past Wednesday the settlement was passed by the selectboard, with one abstention which we all know counts toward the majority. With the addition of some words at an executive session the night before, the lawyer for the townspeople suing the town and selectboard members, said it would appease his clients. May that poor town once again return to its sleepy existance.

( – promoted by odum)

(Also posted at DailyKos)

Today is the Centennial of Rachel Carson’s birth, and event that deserves to be recognized, especially in these times of struggle to speak truth to power and to overturn the damaging decisions being made by powerful corporate interests.

Rachel Carson proved that a single person can rally a country to see the truth. Even more important than her accomplishments towards banning the use of DDT, she showed the nation that People Power can be a force to be reckoned with.

Do we have a new Rachel Carson in our midst? My thoughts on that after some quotes about Carson below…

Today is the Centennial of Rachel Carson’s birth, and event that deserves to be recognized, especially in these times of struggle to speak truth to power and to overturn the damaging decisions being made by powerful corporate interests.

Rachel Carson proved that a single person can rally a country to see the truth. Even more important than her accomplishments towards banning the use of DDT, she showed the nation that People Power can be a force to be reckoned with.

Do we have a new Rachel Carson in our midst? Thoughts on that after some quotes about Carson below…

Her main accomplishments and her legacy are her books. They are well worth the read, both her first 3 “naturalist” books and her epic, activist Silent Spring.

Books Written By Rachel Carson

The biography by Linda Lear also adds a perspective on how remarkable and inspiring it was that Carson was able to move so many readers through her words.

This rather quiet spoken woman used the power of eloquently written words to literally change the world.

Time Top 100 Most Important People of the 20th Century

Before there was an environmental movement, there was one brave woman and her very brave book

Her legacy endures, with Republicans fighting her still:

Boston Globe article

Her place in the American imagination is enduring: “Silent Spring,” published in 1962, led to the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency and to banning the pesticide dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, or DDT.

…

But revisionists are busy besmirching Carson’s legacy. In Washington, Senator Tom Coburn, an Oklahoma Republican, has placed a stop on an innocuous resolution praising Carson on the centennial occasion. The resolution notes her “legacy of scientific rigor coupled with poetic sensibility.”

Al Gore has been mentioned as the “new Rachel Carson” for his work on Global Climate Change with “An Inconvenient Truth”. I think that’s a fair comparison. I wonder if his newest book, “The Assault on Reason” will be another significant voice on the state of our political “ecosystem”?

Greg Palast, author and progressive journalist, has joined the list of speakers for the 4th Annual DemocracyFest. Other speakers include Sen. John Edwards, Gov. Howard Dean (free and open to the public), Sen. Mike Gravel, Bev Harris, and more! See the schedule and get your tickets at http://www.Democracy…

Trainings and panels offered include Impeachment, Creating Community Websites, Service Politics, Anatomy of a Grassroots Campaign, Framing, Peak Oil, Election Law, Democracy and the Religious Right, Pollworker Training, Making the Most of Grassroots Volunteers, the DFA Training Academy, and more!

All this plus lots of live music, films, and most importantly, networking with liberal activists from across the country. Don’t miss this chance to form working relationships that will have a lasting effect on our issue-based activities and our efforts to elect fiscally responsible and socially progressive candidates.

The 4th Annual DemocracyFest will take place June 9-10 at the Wayfarer Inn near Manchester, NH. More information is available at http://www.Democracy…

( – promoted by odum)

Imagine two scenarios.

In the first, your electric company charges you a premium rate for power when demand is highest – typically on a super-hot summer afternoon when air conditioners everywhere are churning out cold air.

In the second, the utility gives you a refund for not consuming electricity during those peak-demand hours.

Which one would you be more likely to accept?

This is the question being asked by Robert Letzler, as reported in the Santa Rosa Press Democrat, and its a fascinating one. 

What do you think would be more motivational?  How do you think this sort of approach could be used to influence how we deal with the task of encouraging people to be more responsible in their consumption habits?

I ask about all of this because it’s clear that something needs to change and while people, in the abstract, seem to like the idea of conservation, we don’t seem to be motivated in the more concrete fashions.  I’d like to see what people think in terms of what we can do to change things. 

The photo shown, by the way, is of a long-tailed duck.  It’s from earlier this week, the first time I’ve ever managed to successfully photograph one.

You can learn a lot about the effects of climate change by getting into bird watching.  Every thing is happening much earlier this year (i.e., nesting and breeding) than usual and who knows what effect that’s going to have on the broader ecosystem? 

 Loading ...

Although he received wide praise across the blogs when he stated unequivocally his intention to vote against the Iraq, no-strings-attached, give-Bush-what-he-wants supplemental bill, the question of the rule that essentially streamines and fast tracks the bill through the floor process by insuring no amendments that aren’t friendly to the President’s no-strings-attached demand was hanging.

Presumably, Democratic supporters of the President’s Iraq agenda (which is what voting for this bill expresses, regardlesss of any hemming and hawing) want to guarantee that they will be on record as little as possible in support of Bush’s demands, and David Sirota (and others) speculated that this rule gives them that cover in a fairly underhanded way.

But the fact is that the rule has changed – and not simply in that it provides for another up-or-down vote on the war itself in Septemeber (as Sirota already noted). The final rule severed the provisions of the bill into two distinct votes; seperating the appropriation provision from the domestic spending elements (for example $6.4 billion in hurricane relief and $3 billion in agricultural assistance) of the bill, which many progressive legislators support. In this way, the rule passed by attracting the votes of the most solid anti-war liberals in the caucus, such as Reps. Woolsey, Lee, and yeah, Welch.

So the rule passes (and of course, the supplemental does too – which was inevitable), but I can’t get too bent out of shape. I can’t help but think I would’ve done the same thing, albeit grudgingly.

Via email:

There is much that I support in this bill — including assistance for Afghanistan and funding we added to help the National Guard address equipment shortages — but it contains a serious flaw that I simply cannot vote for:  It does not begin the withdrawal of our troops from Iraq.

The original supplemental bill that passed the Senate and was sent to President Bush’s desk last month paralleled the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, recommendations that would have fundamentally changed the course of our military mission in Iraq.

Unfortunately, the President vetoed the original supplemental bill and has refused any meaningful compromise that would give us a clear path toward ending of our military involvement in Iraq.

This brings us to the current version of the supplemental bill.  In short, the Iraq War funding provisions in this bill represent little more than a continuation of the failed status quo — a continuation that I find unacceptable. The current bill will not begin to redeploy our troops from Iraq, it does not put adequate pressure on the Iraqis to stand up both politically and militarily, and it does not put a stop to President Bush’s escalation plan.

I’m not on Bernie’s list (not sure why not, actually). If anybody gets something from him on the matter, I encourage you to post it.

( – promoted by odum)

Heard a report today from someone in Burlington whom I have nothing but the deepest of respect for that the police are once again hassling people who are living homeless in encampments in the area, forcing them to move on (to where they are supposed to live, I have not a clue), something I find very disheartening.

Thus it came to mind to post up the following item [cross-posted from the recently reactivated and revamped North American Homeless News Network (NAHNN) blog, here].

During an online search within the archives of the Homeless People’s Network discussion listserv for items from around this time of year back in 2002 concerning people living in homeless encampments within Burlington, Vermont, I managed to stumble upon an old op-ed of mine posted there, one which I had completely forgotten about.

Since I was not blogging until later that same year, I have decided to reprint this particular version of my original The Many Hats of Homelessness essay here:

Sunday, July 14, 2002
Burlington Free Press
[Burlington, Vermont]
Editorial/Opinion section
“It’s My Turn”/Op-Ed segment
Homelessness is having no place to hang your hat

By Morgan W. Brown

If “home is where one hangs one’s hat,” where does a person who is living homeless hang their hat?

When a person hangs their hat someplace temporarily, are they no longer considered truly homeless even if, in fact, it is not really their home?

Being homeless myself, I know well how the smallest items of hope are always held onto very tightly.

Just like one’s own sense of dignity, self-respect, pride — which are equally cherished and held close, such hope can often prove extremely useful and even vital in the long journey being undertaken just in managing to survive as well as living independently.

These core parts of one’s self can also be key to what is needed to help find, obtain and then move into some form of safe, decent and affordable housing of one’s own; which is an essential part of what is needed to end homelessness.

As near as it may be to my becoming housed once again, after being homeless in its various forms for nearly five years this time around, one would think nothing could easily stand in my way.

Yet, there are many moments when it seems too daunting and so very far away to ever be accomplished on one’s own.

There are those days, and even weeks, which do not seem to pass by without a severe and persistent need to find and renew hope, inner strength as well as faith in everything.

Almost constantly, in many different ways, I remind myself that whatever the circumstances or, how they are experienced and felt, there are always other ways of thinking about them and other methods of accomplishing something when it is waited for a little while longer and, what is sought is looked for even deeper than we may believe is possible and, the support needed to do so is received.

Just as crucial though, the value of the smallest or seemingly least important thing to provide inspiration should never be underestimated; often found in what we may perceive to be the most unlikely of places or persons, especially when it is needed the most.

These are among the things which often help me to never, ever, give up on anything or anybody — and, most importantly, never on myself.

When I do find and move into a place of my own, my hat will be hung where it can be grabbed at ease when needed. Then whenever it is off of my head and in its usual resting place, I will know I am home.

Morgan W. Brown is living homeless in Montpelier.

[via HPN archives, here (2nd item posted; Sunday, July 14, 2002)]

The original version of my The Many Hats of Homelessness three-part essay was archived on HPN:

• Part One: The Many Hats of Homelessness (Monday, April 29, 2002)
• Part Two: Just How Bad Is It?
• Part Three: Opportunity Knocks

 Loading ...

The other day I wrote a diary entitled “fear”, describing how (IMHO), the Democratic Leadership in Washington (and to an extent in the states) is primarily motivated by fear in much of what they do. I discussed how that fear translates into weakness and capitulation.

It also can translate into sleaze. In a diary at dKos, David Sirota (who has done a great job researching and birddogging some of the creepy, behind-the-scenes stuff that some of the newly empowered Democratic Committee Chairs are trying to get away with) lays out the proposal to turn today’s expected capitualtion vote on Iraq into a craven capitulation vote on Iraq:

Here’s how it is expected to work today in a process only Dick Cheney could love (though you never know – it could change at the last minute). Every bill comes to the House floor with what is known as a “rule” that sets the terms of the debate over the legislation in question. House members first vote to approve this parliamentary rule, and then vote on the legislation. Today, however, Democrats are planning to essentially include the Iraq blank check bill IN the rule itself, by making sure the underlying bill the rule brings to the floor includes no timelines for withdrawal, and that the rule only allows amendments that fund the war with no restrictions – blank check amendments that House Democratic leaders know Republicans will have the votes to pass.

This means that when the public goes to look for the real vote on the Iraq supplemental bill, the public won’t find that. All we will find is a complex parliamentary procedure vote, which was the real vote.

With our lone Representative, Peter Welch, already on the right side on this, there’s little we in Vermont can do about it.

But it’s worth noting that such an action will be seen as the crudest sort of condescension and insult to the netroots across the country. An insult that could (and should) have consequences.