Mn-prog-events Mailing List: Progressive Calendar 10.18.10

[David Shove (shove001]

              P R O G R E S S I V E   C A L E N D A R   10.18.10

1. Women/cancer     10.18 9am
2. Call State reps  10.18
3. Peace walk       10.18 6pm RiverFalls WI
4. HennCo sheriff   10.18 6:30pm
5. Green Party 3CD  10.18 7pm
6. Ramsey judge     10.18 7pm
7. KFAI board       10.18 7pm

8. RNC 8 hearing    10.19 9am
9. Pentel/governor  10.19 9:45am
10. N Ireland/peace 10.19 11am
11. Talk salon      10.19 6:30pm
12. Erlich/terror   10.19 7pm
13. Laos/Bombies/f  10.19 7pm

14. Stephen Lendman - The Cuban 5: victims of US state terrorism
15. Maidhc Cathail  - Pentagon author on Zelikow's role in 9/11 cover-up
16. Glenn Greenwald - How propaganda is disseminated: WikiLeaks Edition
17. ed              - Bumpersticker

--------1 of 17--------

From: TruthToTell <andydriscoll [at] truthtotell.org>
Subject: Women/cancer 10.18 9am

TruthToTell Mon Oct 18 @9AM: WOMEN'S CANCER ACTION: A Very Different Race
- KFAI FM 90.3/106.7/Online @KFAI.org

For years, we have known of the environment's assault on our breathing and
other health issues, but not every neighborhood is afflicted with tar
companies, toxic run-offs from factories old and new whose owners have
ignored health concerns of employees and neighboring communities - more
often than not, low wealth communities and people of color, depending on
the state and locale - in the pursuit of cheaply earned profits.

Minneapolis-St. Paul is ranked 5th for the greatest number of contaminated
sites across the country (65,969 - one for every 48 people - plus 4,444
leaking storage tanks) with a mere 54 corrective action reports. We could
go on about how the MPCA ignores the reality of polluting facilities,
especially in this Metro Area. It's enough to know that our air and
groundwater, foods, drugs, etc., are likely killing us before our time.

[A fair price to pay for the local rich people to get richer and richer -
what do millions of us count versus dozens of them? This is America! Where
the rich do whatever they want! The American Dream! Them first and to hell
with us! If we don't like it, get rich - otherwise, TS! -ed]

But this is an even larger system issue our policymakers and regulators
and health care providers, especially pharmaceutical corporations, fail to
address adequately to protect our children as well as our adults and stop
the record number of cancer cases growing out of these toxic cities.

Although breast cancer runs rampant through the ranks of women for any
number of reasons, environmental catalysts are certainly a clear cause of
the majority of them. What else could yield such an epidemic as women have
experience over the last 40-50 years? Other cancers in both men and women,
not to mention children's leukemia cases, are decimating our ranks. These
are preventable cancers.

Toxicity and contamination from negligent corporations is not limited to
leaking tanks and factories sites, power plants and farmlands. It can be
found in our foods and cleaning products, our packaging and commercial
operations at all retail levels, to mention but a few.

But few organizations have been successful in addressing those real
causes, and why? Often co-opted by those corporations or needing to
survive as institutions rather than working themselves out of jobs as
cancer "preventers" and cure developers, they accept contributions from
and come to rely on major corporate interests for their sustenance and, in
the process, dispense with the soul of their existence. Has this happened
with the pink movement? Some claim it has in the usurpation of Breast
Cancer Awareness Month.

Back in April, Women's Cancer Action, formerly Women's Cancer Resource
Center, launched a non-profit organization and website,
womenscanceraction.org, focused on cancer prevention and support. A new
frontier in cancer resources and advocacy, WCA emerges uniquely grassroots
and independent.

With the website as its communication and organizing hub, WCA is focused
on exploring the link between cancer and the environment, connecting those
in need with support, and encouraging bold action to address the
political, personal, and societal challenges of cancer prevention.

Several women who have lived with cancer are the root of this movement and
organization and are prepared to pour resources and energy into getting
into the fight to install policies and processes to prevent cancer,
especially in women, but anything done for women will surely ripple into
all segments of the society.

TTT's ANDY DRISCOLLĀ andĀ LYNNELL MICKELSENĀ talk with the founders,
supporters and professionals involved in Women's Cancer Action and how and
why they came into being in the midst of a plethora of other groups
claiming to do the same.

GUESTS:
 BARBRA WIENER - Chair of the Board, Women's Cancer Action; Founder,
Women's Cancer Resource Center (has lived with cancer)
 REP. KAREN CLARK, RNĀ - (has lived with cancer) State Representative and
Volunteer Executive Director, Women's Environmental Institute
 KAREN EINESMAN - Program Director, Women's Cancer Action
 OTHERS TBA


--------2 of 17--------

From: WAMM <wamm [at] mtn.org>
Subject: Call State reps 10.18

WAMM Action alert-call State Representatives Today

On Monday, October 18th, a Special Session will be held at the Minnesota
State Capitol.  Representative Karen Clark and Senator Linda Berglin will
be introducing resolutions in the House and Senate to support local
anti-war and labor activists and to speak out against the recent FBI
harrassment and intimidation.

Call your Legislators and tell them to sign on to and support the
Resolution to Support local Anti-War and Labor Activists and to Disavow
FBI Practices and Policies that Threaten Civil Liberties!

Make your calls today through Monday Oct 18th To find out who your
legislator is Call: For State Representative:  651-296-2146 For State
Senator:  651-296-0504 or go to district finder at:
http://www.gis.leg.mn/OpenLayers/districts/

Background info:
The FBI raided on five homes and an anti-war office on Friday,
September 24, 2010. The FBI also handed subpoenas to testify before a
federal grand jury to nine activists in Minnesota.  The activists in
the Twin Cities who have been targeted include 8 women and one man
ranging in age from 29 to 71. Four are parents of children ranging in
age from 18 months to 6 years of age. One is a great grandmother. Six
are union members, five of them members of AFSCME Council 5, which
passed a resolution in support of them. All have been involved in
building the anti-war, international solidarity and peace and justice
movements in the Twin Cities for more than a decade each.

Please thank Rep Clark and Sen Berglin for offering these
resolutions!  (Rep Clark 651-296- 0294; Sen Berglin 651-296-4261)


--------3 of 17-------

From: Nancy Holden <d.n.holden [at] comcast.net>
Subject: Peace walk 10.18 6pm RiverFalls WI

River Falls Peace and Justice Walkers. We meet every Monday from 6-7 pm on
the UWRF campus at Cascade Ave. and 2nd Street, immediately across from
"Journey" House. We walk through the downtown of River Falls. Contact:
d.n.holden [at] comcast.net. Douglas H Holden 1004 Morgan Road River Falls,
Wisconsin 54022


--------4 of 17-------

From: Facebook <notification+kr4ma254ennx [at] facebookmail.com>
Subject: HennCo Sheriff 10.18 6:30pm

Event: 2010 Hennepin County Sheriffs Debate or Kitten Party Downtown!
Start Time: Monday, October 18 at 6:30pm
End Time: Monday, October 18 at 7:30pm
Location: Outside City Hall

To see more details and RSVP, follow the link below:
http://www.facebook.com/n/?event.php&eid=153348624701684&mid=31debc6G5af33cc48ac6G53a6edG7&bcode=iTtgk&n_m=shove001%40tc.umn.edu


--------5 of 17--------

From:    "Allan Hancock" <3rdcdgreenparty [at] gmail.com>
Subject: Green Party 3CD 10.18 7pm

With elections in just 3 weeks we need to bring people together to plan on
how we can support our Green Party candidates.  Hope you can join us.

3rd Congressional District Green Party Local Meeting 7PM Monday, October
18th

Everyone is invited to the 3rd Congressional District Green Party Local
meeting at the Ridgedale Library Rm 172 located at:  12601 Ridgedale Dr.,
Minnetonka , 55305.  Phone: 952-847-8800

Agenda: Candidate Support, Election Strategy
Need a ride, or info: call 763-561-9758
Allan Hancock, Chair 3rd Congressional District, Green Party Minnesota


--------6 of 17--------

From: Karen Cole <krcole18 [at] msn.com>
Subject: Ramsey judge 10.18 7pm

Candidate forums are coming up in the next couple weeks for the Ramsey
county attorney candidates and for the judge candidates in contested
Ramsey county races.

The county attorney forum will be on Wednesday October 13 and the judicial
candidate forum will be on Monday October 18.
Both events start at 7:00 pm at Hamline Law School.

JUDICIAL CANDIDATE FORUM
Monday, October 18
7:00  8:30 pm
Hamline University School of Law Moot Court Room

Gloria Bogen, Mark Ireland, Connie Iversen and William Leary, candidates
in contested Second District Court elections, have been invited to
participate in a forum sponsored by the RCBA and Hamline University School
of Law. The forum will be moderated by Hamline Professor David Schultz.
This event is free and open to the public.


--------7 of 17--------

From: lydiahowell [at] comcast.net
From: "Andy A." <andy.kfai [at] gmail.com>
Subject: KFAI board 10.18 7pm

Dear KFAI'ers:
I have volunteered to assist the KFAI's Board of Directors in announcing
their meetings to the KFAI community. For those interested in attending,
the Board of Directors meet this coming Monday, October 18th, 7:00 p.m. -
9:00 p.m. at the Humphrey Institute's Conference Room 186, 301 19th Avenue
South, Minneapolis, MN 55454. Board meetings are open to the public. The
Board of Directors meets on the 3rd Monday of every month, and has been
including public comment periods in recent meetings.


--------8 of 17--------

From: info [at] rnc8.org
Subject: RNC 8 hearing 10.19 9am

It is with strong and mixed emotions that we bring important news: there
appears to be a major change in the cases of the four remaining RNC 8
defendants - Garrett, Max, Nathanael and Rob.  The four have tentatively
reached a plea agreement with prosecutors, likely avoiding trial. The
agreement, if it goes according to plan, significantly reduces the charge,
calls for favorable sentencing, and is non-cooperating.

We wish to thank you for being there for the 8 and for us all along. You
raised funds, raised consciousness of the fight against criminalization of
dissent, and raised the next generation of rebels and revolutionaries to
keep the struggle going. You were there at the jail vigil and the very
first hearings; you were there in the kitchen and the dining room at our
community meals; you were there at our rallies and actions. You were there
at meetings, you were there at fundraisers, and you were there in the
courtroom, through thick and thin.

Now, please be there in the courtroom for what we expect to be one final
time:

* When: Tuesday, October 19, at 9am
* Where: Ramsey County Courthouse, 15 W. Kellogg Blvd., St. Paul

Check our updates or the monitors in room 131 for the courtroom number.
Please stay afterwards for a press conference and address immediately upon
conclusion of the hearing.

We understand this news may well be surprising. Many of us feel the same
and much, much more, but above all, we personally support all the
defendants in their difficult decision and will continue to support them
through whatever hurdles remain. We will release more information,
analysis and logistical updates to you all after details are confirmed on
Tuesday. We ask that, until then, speculation or rumor be kept to a
minimum.

Again, thank you for your continued support and struggle.
In solidarity,
the RNC 8 Defense Committee


--------9 of 17--------

From: PRO826 [at] aol.com
Subject: Pentel/Governor 10.19 9:45am

Ken Pentel for Governor
Tuesday, October 19th
9:45-10:10-Southwest High School, 3414 47th Ave S. Minneapolis

Help spread the word, by placing campaign events from the
www.kenpentel.org Events page on your personal FaceBook sites

If we can get $5.00 from 200 people, we can buy 25 minutes of radio ads
It;s easy, donate online at:  Billing Information - PayPal
or send payment to:
Ken Pentel for Governor
P.O. Box 3872
Minneapolis, MN  55403


--------10 of 17-------

From: Erin Parrish <erin [at] mnwomen.org>
Subject: N Ireland/peace 10.19 11am

October 19: American Association of University Women St. Paul Branch
Meeting. 10 AM: Book Discussion. 10:45 AM: Meeting Begins. 11 AM:
Fighting for Peace- Conflict Resolution in Northern Ireland with Andrea
Nelson. 1 PM: Great Decisions, Chapter 7- The U.S. and the Persian Gulf.


--------11 of 17--------

From: patty <pattypax [at] earthlink.net>
Subject: Talk salon 10.19 6:30pm

After a month off from salons, we begin again Tuesday, October 19th with
Open Conversation.  I bet we all have much to "converse" about.  From the
happy Chilean event to other real news. So, hope to see you.

Pax Salons ( http://justcomm.org/pax-salon )
are held (unless otherwise noted in advance):
Tuesdays, 6:30 to 8:30 pm.
Mad Hatter's Tea House,
943 W 7th, St Paul, MN

Salons are free but donations encouraged for program and treats.
Call 651-227-3228 or 651-227-2511 for information.


--------12 of 17--------

From: Friends for a Non-Violent World <info [at] fnvw.org>
Subject: Erlich/terror 10.19 7pm

Reese Erlich Book-signing and Conversation
October 19th Event Features Newest Book
Oct 19th, 7pm
FNVW Office, 1050 Selby Ave, St Paul, MN

Journalist/author Reese Erlich will be discussing his most recent book
Conversations with Terrorists which tackles this decade's key foreign
policy issue: the global war on terror. Erlich offers critical portraits
of six Middle Eastern leaders, sometimes vilified as terrorists, to probe
the U.S. war on terror and its media reception. He argues that by falsely
labeling virtually every opponent as a "terrorist," the U.S. creates new
enemies and makes fighting the real terrorists all the more difficult.

Please join us for this timely presentation and following discussion. A
booksigning will follow. Books will be available for purchase at the
event. Questions? Contact FNVW at info [at] fnvw.org, or 651-917-0383.


--------13 of 17--------

From: Intermedia Arts <julie [at] intermediaarts.org>
Subject: Laos/Bombies/f 10.19 7pm

Legacies of War Film Screenings at Intermedia Arts |

Nearly a half-century has passed since the United States conducted a
covert bombing of the Laos nation making it the most densely bombed
country in history.  As dangerous today as when they were dropped, modern
day Laos is littered with un-detonated reminders of war.  On Tuesday,
October 12 and Tuesday, October 19, critically-acclaimed films Bombies and
Bomb Harvest will screen at Intermedia Arts as part of the Legacies of War
nationally touring exhibition. These films show what it looks like to live
in the aftermath of a war, and detail the efforts of those brave enough to
clean up the tragedy left behind.

Bombies
October 19, 2010 | $5 suggested donation
7PM at Intermedia Arts
Award-winning film portrays the aftermath of the carpet-bombing of Laos
with made-in-Minnesota cluster bombs and includes local footage of
demonstrations at Honeywell and Alliant Techsystems (ATK). Special guest
speaker Marv Davidov, featured in the film as the founder of the MN-based
Honeywell Project to end weapons manufacturing during the Vietnam War.

Intermedia Arts is located at 2822 Lyndale Ave South, Minneapolis, MN
55408

Legacies of War is presented in conjunction with the Refugee Nation
National Traveling Performance. Part of Intermedia Arts' Catalyst Series.


--------14 of 17--------

The Cuban 5: Victims of US State Terrorism
by Stephen Lendman
October 15th, 2010
Dissident Voice

In September 1998, Miami FBI agents arrested Gerardo Hernandez, Ramon
Labanino, Antonio Guerrero, Fernando Gonzales, and Rene Gonzalez on
spurious charges, including conspiracy to commit espionage. For days,
however, no formal notification was given until a complicit media campaign
smeared them falsely and maliciously.

At a June 2, 2010 Washington National Press Club press conference, the
National Committee to Free the Cuban Five's coordinator, Gloria La Riva,
announced new Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) obtained evidence
revealing names of 14 journalists who "were receiving covertly (paid)
monies from the US government".

Included was Pablo Alfonso who received $58,600 for 16 articles published
in (the south Florida Spanish language) El Nuevo Herald newspaper. La Riva
explained that "During the pre-trial period, there were hundreds of
articles on the Cuban Five and not one was favorable". Journalists were
bribed to write them. [And the US used to ridicule USSR's Pravda... -ed]

According to the National Lawyers Guild, Heidi Boghosian, "This shows that
the US Government was an accomplice to manipulating the jury by bribing
journalists that violated the principles of impartiality and accuracy".

She also affirmed that the Five's Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial
was violated, federal authorities corrupting the process to convict them.

On September 9, 2006, New York Times writer, Abby Goodnough, headlined,
"US Paid 10 Journalists for Anti-Castro Reports," saying:

"The Bush administration's Office of Cuba Broadcasting paid (them) to
provide commentary on Radio and TV Marti, which transmit" anti-Castro
propaganda to Cuba. Journalists named included Pablo Alfonso getting
almost $175,000 since 2001 and Armstrong Williams (a notorious right wing
liar) receiving $240,000 to write on various issues, including privatizing
public education.

On September 14, 1998, a Florida grand jury accused the Five of
infiltrating terrorist groups, charging them with 26 offenses, including
conspiracy to commit crimes against the United States and espionage. For
lack of evidence, the latter charge became conspiracy to commit it.

Gerardo Hernandez was separately accused of voluntary homicide, relating
to the February 24, 1996 Brothers to the Rescue plane shot down for
illegally entering Cuban air space, though no evidence linked him to the
event. Other charges involved using false documents and for not
registering as foreign agents.

Throughout their 12 year ordeal, they've been horrifically treated.
Pre-trial for 17 months, they were isolated in a Special Housing Unit, for
many weeks in separate cells. After a successful legal motion, two each
per cell followed; one, however, still alone in isolation.

The five men were in America monitoring Miami-based, US funded, extremist
right-wing group terrorist activities against Cuba. Ongoing for decades,
declassified US documents showed that from October 1960-April 1961 alone,
CIA operatives smuggled in 75 tons of explosives and 45 tons of weapons.
During the period, 110 attacks were carried out, using dynamite and bombs
against 150 factories, 800 plantations, and six trains.

>From 1959-1997, US funded groups and CIA operatives committed around 5,800
terrorist acts, hundreds involving bombings that killed or injured
thousands of civilians. In addition, from 1959-2003, 61 planes or boats
were hijacked. From 1961-1996, 58 sea attacks were launched against dozens
of economic targets and the civilian population.

Evidence shows CIA recruitment and support for over 4,000 individuals and
300 paramilitary groups, responsible for murdering hundreds of Cubans and
injuring thousands, many permanently disabled. Fidel Castro, himself, was
targeted hundreds of times unsuccessfully.

Moreover, chemical and biological warfare was conducted. In 1971, a
biological attack contaminated half a million pigs, then killed to prevent
swine fever from spreading. In 1981, introduced dengue fever affected over
340,000 people, killing at least 158 including 101 children. On July 6,
1982 alone, around 11,400 cases were registered.

South Florida is a hotbed of anti-Castro extremism, CIA operatives
complicit in training and funding planned terrorist attacks, likely still
ongoing. On June 16, 1998, Cuban authorities asked FBI officials to
provide documents on known US-sponsored extremists to no avail. Three
months later, the Cuban 5 were arrested for risking their lives legally
for their country, monitoring subversive Americans to warn Havana of
impending attacks. They harmed no one, committed no crime, did nothing
illegal, had no weapons, nor did 119 volumes of testimonies and over
20,000 court pages of documents contain any evidence against them.

Beginning in November 2000, their politically-charged trial was
orchestrated to convict. Little more than a seven month show trial, the
South Florida venue alone prevented judicial fairness. Five times, in
fact, motions to change it were denied, despite clear evidence a fair
trial was impossible. As a result, on June 8, 2001, the men were
convicted, then in December sentenced to four life terms and 75 years.

For being loyal Cuban citizens serving their country heroically, they were
criminally charged, convicted in a witch hunt proceeding, and imprisoned.
Committing no crime, they legally monitored US-sponsored terrorist groups,
including Brothers to the Rescue, Omega 7, Alpha 66, Brigada 2506,
Comandos F4, and other anti-Castro elements.

So far, they've been denied justice, though on August 9, 2005, after seven
years in prison, a three-judge panel of the Eleventh Circuit Court of
Appeals overturned their convictions, ordering a new trial outside Miami.
However, on October 31, the entire Court halted the ruling, ordering an
"en banc" (full court) 12 judge hearing. In August 2006, the Court
reversed the 2005 decision (10-2), affirming the District Court ruling.

                   An Independent Legal Opinion

In December 2007, UK attorney Steve Cottingham, a partner at OH Parsons &
Partners Solicitors, titled an article on the case "Miami Five: Who Are
Terrorists," saying:

The trial was "profoundly flawed" their (prison) conditions... inhumane,
and they were fall guys in an attempt to cover up the US's support for
illegal activity to overthrow the (legitimate) government of the Republic
of Cuba".

With the trial venue in Miami, defense lawyers knew fair proceedings were
impossible. As a result, they commissioned a survey for proof. "The
Court-appointed defense expert on psychology, Dr. Gary Moran PhD,
testified that 69 per cent of all respondents (in Dade County) and 74 per
cent of all Hispanic (ones) were prejudiced against people charged with
the types of activities outlined in the indictment." In addition, 49% of
all those surveyed said a fair and impartial trial was impossible.

As a result, the defense requested a venue change several times, each
application denied. Prior to trial, the local media poisoned public
opinion with malicious accusations and more. Moreover, despite careful
jury selection, the charged atmosphere imposed overwhelming pressure to
convict.

On December 2, 2000, the Nuevo Herald newspaper published an article,
saying:

"Fears of a violent reaction by Cuban exiles against the jury that decides
to acquit the Five men accused of spying for Cuba has caused many
potential jurors to ask the judge to excuse them from their civic duty".
One said, ""Sure I'm afraid for my safety, if the verdict doesn't suit the
Cuban community there". Clearly, the challenge for the defense was too
great to overcome, at trial producing the inevitable outcome.

Proceedings included 43 witnesses for the prosecution, 31 for the defense,
lasting nearly seven months, as well as hundreds of documents for jurors
to review. A key prosecution witness, General James R. Clapper (with 30
years experience in military intelligence) testified that they contained
no secret national defense information helpful to Cuba. Key defense
witnesses, including retired Rear Admiral Eugene Carroll, said the Cuban
military threat to America is "zero".

Nonetheless, on June 8, 2001, "Despite the lack of evidence of espionage
or damage to US interests, the jury took a remarkably short time to
convict all the Five on all counts".

Numerous legal violations and improprieties were committed from time of
arrests through proceedings, including:

 defendants had no immediate access to lawyers;
 they were interrogated for many hours without counsel;
 they were unjustly isolated for 17 months;
 thousands of pages of alleged evidence were kept secret;
 prosecutors threatened several witnesses with charges as accomplices if
they revealed any information to defense counsel;
 the Miami venue denied defendants a fair trial;
 the local and national media created a charged atmosphere to convict;
 reports indicated that jurors were threatened with death if they voted
for acquittal;
 and the entire process, including jurors, assured conviction,
proceedings, in fact, a travesty of justice sending innocent men to
prison.

Moreover, from arrest to incarceration, numerous domestic and
international laws were violated, including the Constitution, Federal
Bureau of Prisons regulations, the UN Convention against Torture and other
Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment, the Vienna Convention on Civil and Political Rights, the
Convention on Children's Rights, the UN Minimum Rules on the Treatment of
Prisoners, and the American Convention on Human Rights.

The Five were imprisoned in different parts of the country, their families
denied visas and visiting rights, and although model prisoners, they were
held in isolation.

They remain imprisoned, but not without hope. In February 2009, their
attorneys appealed to the Supreme Court for a new trial. The original one,
in fact, was the only judicial process in US history condemned by the UN
Human Rights Commission. Ten Nobel Prize winners also petitioned the US
Attorney General to free the Five. In 2009, however, the Supreme Court
declined to hear the case without comment.

Amnesty International (AI) strongly criticized US treatment as human
rights violations, saying in early 2006:

It was "following closely the status of the ongoing appeals of the five
men (with regard to) numerous issues challenging the fairness of the trial
which have not yet been addressed by the appeal courts".

In January 2007, AI called for US authorities to grant family members
visas to visit their loved ones, saying America's actions were
"unnecessarily punitive" by denying them.

In the UK, 110 MPs petitioned the US Attorney General in support of the
Five. In April 2009, the Brazilian human rights group, Torture Never
Again, awarded the men its Chico Mendes Medal, alleging their rights were
violated, including by having "their mail censored and their visiting
rights very restricted".

                          A Final Comment

On September 15, Bernie Dwyer, an Irish journalist and filmmaker,
interviewed Leonard Weinglass, a member of the Five's defense team,
saying:

The five should have been returned to Cuba shortly after their arrest, as
is the custom when foreigners are arrested in the United States on
missions for their home countries and their activities here caused no
harm.

Instead, they were "subjected to cruel conditions of confinement, unjustly
prosecuted in (an unfair venue) victimized by (prosecutorial)
misconduct...  and excessively and illegally punished with life
sentences..

After the Supreme Court declined to hear their appeal, "an outpouring of
public support (followed), including (from) 10 Nobel Prize winners, the
bar associations of many countries, the entire Mexican Senate, two former
(European Union) presidents," parliamentarians from other countries, heads
of state, trade union leaders, student associations, human rights
organizations, and dozens of distinguished figures globally.

On June 14, 2010, "We filed (and) will be filing a Memorandum of Law on
October 11. The government will be given 60 days to respond and then
presumably at the end of this year or in early 2011, we will have a
hearing on Gerado (Herandez's) claims in Miami". If denied, it will be
appealed, and if again, "once again (we'll) ask the Supreme Court to
review the case".

Asked whether worldwide free the Five campaigns have helped, Weinglass
said "Absolutely, (and they) should be continued and if anything
increased" as the best way to achieve justice for these unjustly
imprisoned men.

On October 13, 2010 AI issued a report and sent a letter to Eric Holder on
the Five, expressing concerns about the fairness of their trial, while
taking no position on their guilt or innocence, a disturbing part of it as
their innocence is beyond question.

Nonetheless, AI asked the Justice Department "to review the case and
mitigate any injustice through the clemency process or other appropriate
means, should further legal appeals prove ineffective". It also reiterated
concerns about the wives of two of the prisoners (Rene Gonzales and
Gerardo Hernandez) denied temporary visas to visit their husbands.

On October 19 at the US Embassy in London, a Vigil for the Five will be
held. Noted speakers include UK MPs, labor leaders, lawyers, musicians,
and many others. Those attending are urged to "Bring candles to this
peaceful vigil for the Five and their families to mark the 12th year of
their unjust imprisonment".

The Five and many hundreds of other US political prisoners bear testimony
to America's judicial unfairness, imprisoning innocent men and women for
political advantage in violation of constitutional and fundamental
international human rights laws, ones US authorities repeatedly flout with
impunity.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. Contact him at:
lendmanstephen [at] sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site and listen to The
Global Research News Hour on RepublicBroadcasting.org Mondays from
11AM-1PM US Central time for cutting-edge discussions with distinguished
guests. All programs are archived for easy listening.


--------15 of 17--------

Pentagon Author Exposes Zelikow's Key Role in 9/11 Cover-Up
by Maidhc Cathail
October 16th, 2010
Dissident Voice

In an interview on the Fox Business Network, a retired U.S. intelligence
officer accused the official in charge of the 9/11 Commission of a
cover-up of intelligence failures leading up to the terrorist attacks on
September 11, 2001.

Appearing on the political talk show Freedom Watch, Lt. Col. Anthony
Shaffer, a former Defense Intelligence Agency officer and the author of
Operation Dark Heart, a much-hyped new book on the war in Afghanistan,
spoke about his mid-October 2003 encounter with Dr. Philip Zelikow, then
executive director of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon
the United States.

During a fact-finding mission to Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan, Zelikow's
team was briefed by Shaffer on Able Danger, a DIA data mining project that
had allegedly identified Mohammed Atta as a threat to the U.S. a year
before 9/11.

Parenthetically, the "Mohammed Atta" identified by Able Danger may have
been an imposter operating under a stolen identity, as occurred in the
assassination of a senior Hamas official in Dubai. In an interview with a
German newspaper, reported by the Guardian, Mohammed Atta's father claimed
that his son had nothing to do with the attacks and was still alive a year
after 9/11.

Whichever Mohammed Atta was referred to by Shaffer in Bagram, Zelikow
reportedly "fell silent with shock at the news".

According to Shaffer, Zelikow came to him at the end of the meeting, gave
him his card, and said: "What you said today is critically important, very
important. Please come see me when you return to Washington D.C".

On his return to Washington in January 2004, Shaffer immediately contacted
Zelikow's office and was told to "stand by". After a week passed, Shaffer
called again, and this time was told by Zelikow's staff: "We don't need
you to come in. We have all the information on Able Danger we need. Thank
you anyway".

None of the information provided by Shaffer appeared in the 9/11
Commission's 585-page report, however.

In September 2005, more than a year after the publication of the 9/11
report, Shaffer said he met with one of the 9/11 commissioners in
Philadelphia. Over lunch, he told the commissioner what he had told
Zelikow in Afghanistan. The commissioner said that "he had never heard any
of this," adding that, "had he heard of it, it would have been something
that was very much of interest to he [sic] and the commission".

"So there's a lot of things that never made it in that 9/11 report?" asked
Judge Andrew Napolitano, the host of Freedom Watch.

"Things were either by negligence left out, or, and I believe, by purpose
left out," Shaffer replied.

Another guest on the show, Michael Scheuer, who headed the CIA's bin Laden
unit from 1996 to 1999, spoke of a similarly frustrating experience with
the 9/11 Commission staff director.

Describing the 9/11 Commission Report as "a whitewash, and a lie from top
to bottom," Scheuer said he provided Zelikow with over 400 pages of
official government documents detailing intelligence failures before 9/11.

"I never heard one word back from Zelikow," he said.

"They all seemed very interested in what you had to say," the former CIA
officer added, referring to meetings he had with Zelikow and his staff,
"but at the end of the day, it didn't make it into the report".

This is not the first time that questions have been raised about Zelikow's
handling of the 9/11 Commission.

In his 2009 book, The Commission, Philip Shenon, an investigative reporter
for the New York Times, wrote about "how tightly Zelikow was able to
control the flow of information on the commission," and that "everything"
was "run through" him.

While Zelikow's tight control of the commission excluded disturbing
evidence from national security experts like Shaffer and Scheuer, a
dubious scholar like Laurie Mylroie was afforded ample opportunity to
promote the most spurious justification for the Iraq war. Mylroie, whose
major booster in government was Deputy Defense Secretary, Paul Wolfowitz,
argued that Iraq had been involved in every major terrorist attack against
the United States since the early 1990s, including 9/11. During commission
hearings on al-Qaeda, Zelikow, writes Shenon, "made sure that she had a
prominent place at the witness table".

And why wouldn't he? After all, Zelikow had an important role in, as
Shenon puts it, "developing the scholarly underpinnings for the Iraq war".
It was Zelikow who had authored a thirty-one-page "preemptive war"
doctrine which George W. Bush announced to the world in 2002 as "The
National Security Strategy of the United States".

"Why would Iraq attack America or use nuclear weapons against us?" Zelikow
asked an audience at the University of Virginia in September 2002. In a
rare moment of candour, Zelikow proceeded to explain that the real reason
for preemptive war against Iraq was "the threat against Israel".

Judge Napolitano asked Lt. Col. Shaffer if the commissioner in
Philadelphia had said whether anyone on the 9/11 Commission "had an
agenda, or was covering up for somebody, or was protecting somebody". The
commissioner's reply was, according to Shaffer: "Everybody on the
commission was covering for someone".

Given the fatal career implications of broaching such a taboo subject, not
to mention Rupert Murdoch's well-known devotion to the State of Israel,
it's hardly surprising that the Fox presenter didn't probe too deeply into
who Philip Zelikow might have been covering for.

Maidhc Cathail is a freelance writer. His work has been published by Al
Jazeera Magazine, Antiwar.com, Dissident Voice, Khaleej Times, Palestine
Chronicle and many other publications.


--------16 of 17--------

How propaganda is disseminated: WikiLeaks Edition
By Glenn Greenwald
Sunday, Oct 17, 2010 09:18 ET
AP
Common Dreams

This is how the U.S. government and American media jointly disseminate
propaganda: in the immediate wake of some newsworthy War on Terror event,
U.S. Government officials (usually anonymous) make wild and reckless -
though unverifiable - claims. The U.S. media mindlessly trumpets them
around the world without question or challenge. Those claims become
consecrated as widely accepted fact. And then weeks, months or years
later, those claims get quietly exposed as being utter falsehoods, by
which point it does not matter, because the goal is already well-achieved:
the falsehoods are ingrained as accepted truth.

I've documented how this process works in the context of American air
attacks (it's immediately celebrated that we Killed the Evil Targeted
Terrorist Leader [who invariably turns out to be alive and then allegedly
killed again in the next air strike], while the dead are always, by
definition, "militants"); with covered-up American war crimes, with the
Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman frauds - the same process was also evident
with the Israeli attack on the flotilla - and now we find a quite vivid
illustration of this deceitful process in the context of WikiLeaks'
release of Afghanistan war documents:

CNN, July 29, 2010:

Top military official: WikiLeaks founder may have 'blood' on his hands

The top U.S. military officer said Thursday that Julian Assange, founder
of WikiLeaks, was risking lives to make a political point by publishing
thousands of military reports from Afghanistan.

"Mr. Assange can say whatever he likes about the greater good he thinks he
and his source are doing, but the truth is they might already have on
their hands the blood of some young soldier or that of an Afghan family,"
Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at a
news conference at the Pentagon. . . .

In equally stern comments and at the same session, Secretary of Defense
Robert Gates said the massive leak will have significant impact on troops
and allies, giving away techniques and procedures.

"The battlefield consequences of the release of these documents are
potentially severe and dangerous for our troops, our allies and Afghan
partners, and may well damage our relationships and reputation in that key
part of the world," Gates said. "Intelligence sources and methods, as well
as military tactics, techniques and procedures will become known to our
adversaries."

The Guardian, July 26, 2010:

The White House today condemned whistleblower WikiLeaks, accusing the
website of putting the lives of US, UK and coalition troops in danger and
threatening America's national security of the US after it posted more
than 90,000 leaked US military documents about the war in Afghanistan.

Sen. Carl Levin, CNN, August 1, 2010:

CANDY CROWLEY: I want to turn you to WikiLeaks, which also comes under
your bailiwick to a certain extent. Some 90,000 documents with secret
information or top secret information. Can you quantify the damage?

LEVIN: Not yet. I think that's being assessed right now as to how many
sources of information that gave us information that was useful to us are
now in jeopardy. That - that determination and damage assessment is being
made right now by the Pentagon. But there quite clearly was damage.

DoD Spokesman Geoff Morrell, August 5, 2010:

WikiLeaks's public disclosure last week of a large number of our documents
has already threatened the safety of our troops, our allies and Afghan
citizens who are working with us to help bring about peace and stability
in that part of the world.

The Heritage Foundation's Conn Carroll, August 24, 2010:

Julian Assanage - you know, molesting charges aside - is a criminal. He
broke the law. He is, you know, a murderer of American and Afghani people.
His carelessness has killed people.

Steven Aftergood, self-proclaimed transparency advocate and leading
WikiLeaks critic, August 16, 2010:

Wikileaks has failed to demonstrate similar discernment in handling
classified records, and it will be up to others to try to repair the
damage it has caused.

Liz Cheney, August 2, 2010:

Dick Cheney's daughter, Liz Cheney wants the government of Iceland to stop
its Wikileaks support. . . . "Our Government should make sure that Mr.
Assange, Wikileaks founder and spokesman, never gets a U.S. Visa - He has
blood on his hands," Liz Cheney said.

She didn't stop there. She went on to say: "What he's done is very clearly
aiding and abetting al Qaeda. And as I said, he may very well be
responsible for the deaths of American soldiers in Afghanistan," she
concluded.

Newt Gingrich, Newsmax interview, July 31, 2010:

Q: What does that do the Afghanistan war effort, and how does that put our
men and women at risk?

GINGRICH: The release of these documents should be regarded as an act of
treason. When you release 70 or 80,000 documents, you don't know how many
people you're going to kill . . . . Frankly, I think we should be very
aggressive about the website that was set up, WikiLeaks, and I think we
should be very, very strong on the condemnation of the newspapers that
published them.

Paul Rieckhoff, August 2, 2010:

At the end of the day I think Admiral Mullen is right. I think Julian
Assange and WikiLeaks already probably have blood on their hands.

CNN, today:

The online leak of thousands of secret military documents from the war in
Afghanistan by the website WikiLeaks did not disclose any sensitive
intelligence sources or methods, the Department of Defense concluded. . .
.

The assessment, revealed in a letter from Secretary of Defense Robert
Gates to the Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Carl
Levin (D-Michigan), comes after a thorough Pentagon review of the more
than 70,000 documents posted to the controversial whistle-blower site in
July. . . .

The defense secretary said that the published documents do contain names
of some cooperating Afghans, who could face reprisal by Taliban.

But a senior NATO official in Kabul told CNN that there has not been a
single case of Afghans needing protection or to be moved because of the
leak.

Let's repeat that. Despite Gates' ongoing assertion that "the initial
assessment in no way discounts the risk to national security" and that
"there is still concern Afghans named in the published documents could be
retaliated against by the Taliban," even the DoD and NATO admit that the
WikiLeaks release "did not disclose any sensitive intelligence sources or
methods" and that "there has not been a single case of Afghans needing
protection or to be moved because of the leak." Nonetheless, the
accusation that WikiLeaks and Assange have "blood on their hands" was -
as intended - trumpeted around the world for weeks without much question
or challenge.

It's been clear from the start that - despite the valid concern that
WikiLeaks should have been more vigilant in redacting the names of
innocent Afghan civilians - the Pentagon (and its media and pundit
servants) were drastically exaggerating the harms, as The Associated Press
noted on August 17:

The WikiLeaks leak is unrivaled in its scope, but so far there is no
evidence that any Afghans named in the leaked documents as defectors or
informants from the Taliban insurgency have been harmed in retaliation.

Some private analysts, in fact, think the danger has been overstated. "I
am underwhelmed by this argument. The Pentagon is hyping," says John
Prados, a military and intelligence historian who works for the
anti-secrecy National Security Archive. He said in an interview that
relatively few names have surfaced and it's not clear whether their
present circumstances leave them in jeopardy.

And on August 11, even the DOD was forced to admit to The Washington Post
the complete absence of any evidence to support its wild accusations: "'We
have yet to see any harm come to anyone in Afghanistan that we can
directly tie to exposure in the WikiLeaks documents,' [Pentagon spokesman
Geoff] Morrell said." Nonetheless, the initial spate of hysterically
accusatory rhetoric, combined with the uncritical media dissemination,
poisoned public opinion about WikiLeaks, and the fact that those
accusations have been subsequently revealed as baseless will receive
little attention and undo none of that deceit-based damage.

The benefits to the Government from spewing baseless accusations against
WikiLeaks are obvious: they inure the public to the thuggish steps being
taken to cripple and otherwise intimidate the whistleblowing site from
exposing more government secrets about the truth of our wars. WikiLeaks'
American spokesman, Jacob Appelbaum, was detained for hours at the airport
when entering the U.S. in August, had his property seized (his laptop and
cellphones), and was threatened with similar treatment each time he
re-enters the U.S., and the following day was interrogated by FBI agents
at a conference at which he spoke in New York. This week, WikiLeaks was
notified that the service it uses to collect online donations "had closed
down its account because it had been put on an official US watchlist and
on an Australian government blacklist." And, of course, both the
organization itself and Julian Assange have been repeatedly and publicly
threatened with prosecution.

The effort to smear WikiLeaks is a by-product not only of anger over past
disclosures, but fear of future ones as well. As CBS News reported
yesterday: "The Pentagon is bracing for the possible release of as many as
400,000 potentially explosive secret military documents on the U.S.-Iraq
war by WikiLeaks. The self-described whistleblower website could release
the files as early as Sunday. . . . part of the fear about the potential
release is the unknown: Defense officials are not sure exactly what
documents WikiLeaks has."

Whatever else is true about this latest release (and future leaks by
WikiLeaks as well), substantially greater caution is obviously warranted
when assessing and repeating Pentagon accusations about the damage caused
by these new documents and the supposed recklessness of WikiLeaks in
releasing them. But that is unlikely to happen. If our established media
is governed by any overarching principle, it's this: when the U.S.
military speaks, its pronouncements - especially in the beginning - are
to be respected, believed and repeated without question or challenge no
matter how many times that deference proves to be unwarranted.



--------17 of 17--------


                            ----------------
                             Frack the rich
                            ----------------

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

   - David Shove             shove001 [at] tc.umn.edu
   rhymes with clove         Progressive Calendar
                     over 2225 subscribers as of 12.19.02
              please send all messages in plain text no attachments

                          vote third party
                           for president
                           for congress
                           for governor
                          now and forever


                           Socialism YES
                           Capitalism NO


 To GO DIRECTLY to an item, eg
 --------8 of x--------
 do a find on
 --8

 Research almost any topic raised here at:
  CounterPunch    http://counterpunch.org
  Dissident Voice http://dissidentvoice.org
  Common Dreams   http://commondreams.org
 Once you're there, do a search on your topic, eg obama drones