resist

Pictures from the Peace March on Washington

2007-01-28T23:35:00.000-05:00

tags: Iraq, protest, march, demonstration

March on Washington

2007-01-19T17:49:00.000-05:00

I'm sure you have all heard the latest plan to "surge" 20,000 more troops into Iraq and I'm betting most of you aren't happy with this. Well, you have a chance to show your opposition if you can get to Washington DC next weekend. On Saturday, January 27th there will be a march to protest against the war and I hope some of you can get there, if not I'm sure there will be local demonstrations and actions around the country.

I will be traveling to D.C., so if anyone wants to meet up (or wants to give me a place to crash for a night or 2 other than on my friend's dorm room floor), then get a hold of me and we can work something out.

More information about the march is available online:

http://www.unitedforpeace.org/article.php?id=3436

Peace

tags: Iraq protest march rally demonstration Washington

Iraq Study Group says "US policy is not working"

2006-12-07T12:35:00.000-05:00

Basically the report says that Iraq is a mess and will only get worse unless diplomatic measures are pursued aggressively. Overall it calls for a change in strategy, a new course if you will.

Here are some highlights:

Without setting a timetable, the group also asserted that the United States could withdraw most combat troops by early 2008. But to reach that goal, the panel said, the Bush administration must immediately reassign far more US troops to advise Iraqi Army units, aggressively pursue the help of Iraq's influential neighbors, and place new pressure on the Iraqi government to reach a political settlement between warring ethnic groups.

"Current US policy is not working, as the level of violence in Iraq is rising and the government is not advancing national reconciliation," said the report. "Making no changes in policy would simply delay the day of reckoning at a high cost."

We will have to see if Bush's White House listens to the outside advice, it has not been known for doing that in the past however.

tags: Iraq war study

Rumsfeld to resign!

2006-11-08T13:15:00.000-05:00

Wow, the GOP announced that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld will be stepping down from his position today. This follows many calls for his removal including most notably in a recent editorial from the Army Times.

They clearly wanted to wait until after the election for this, but this is good. It will hopefully mean that change will be acceptable and forthcoming regarding the war in Iraq.

It's about time.

tags: Rumsfeld resigns Iraq resignation war

Democrats win major gains in elections

2006-11-08T13:10:00.000-05:00

Not much to say that has not been said elsewhere. The Democrats have taken control of the House of Representatives and by all appearances they are going to win control of the Senate as well. The pendulum has swung back.

tags: election Democrats House Senate

President Bush on Iraq: It's Never Been "Stay The Course"

2006-10-23T23:22:00.000-05:00

I'm calling shenanigans.

tags: Iraq Bush

The end of the the Great Experiment?

2006-10-22T20:02:00.000-05:00

You may not have heard of the Military Commissions Act of 2006 because of a boy hungry congressman, but you should know about it.

Republicans proposed, debated over, and passed the act which gives Bush control over who is an "enemy combatant" and what constitutes torture. At the same time Foley gets thrown under the bus as distraction.

It's all a set up, game over. They drew the line in the sand, now America can torture, imprison people indefinitely as long as Dear Leader says so, and people don't care because a minor sex distraction overruled it in the media.

I really just have a bad case of outrage fatigue right now, I'm waiting for the elections, but I know that those are a flimsy joke to make us all feel like we participate and have a say. Sigh.

I don't know if I can express how major suspending Habeas Corpus really is, it goes back to the Magna Carta. I've always been proud to live in a country that gives a fair and speedy trial even to the worst criminals.

Ok, I realize nobody cares because hey look, the Dow is over 12,000! And gas prices have come down a little! But most people don't own stocks and are still suffering under growing debts. How many of you are going to have outragous debts to pay off after school, how many worry about paying for adequate health care. I have a solution: Gitmo, they'll give you a cage to sleep in and treat any medical problems you have (granted the torture probably caused them)

Habeas Corpus isn't some silly civil liberty like privacy concerns or something, it is the essential right. "The Great Writ."

My America doesn't torture and it does not hold people indefinitely without charge, especially American citizens (like Jose Padilla).

Take your stand on this side of the line or enjoy corporate feudalism. Don't let fear and hatred guide you towards what profits the greedy and buries the rest of us in debt. If we don't, the great American experiment is in its true form over.

/end rant.

tags: habeas corpus military Bush

It's time for discussion

2006-09-25T00:43:00.000-05:00

We as a country are at a point where we need to have a serious discussion with our neighbors and assess the direction we are heading in the War on Terror. No real discussion has occurred because anybody who raises a challenge is labeled as unpatriotic and a terrorist appeaser.

The fact is there are other options, and if this democracy is to work we have to discuss them seriously. Opinions should be respected on their merits and not just attacked if they do not agree with your view.

Bush has admitted to having secret prisons, spying is going on unchecked by the system of "checks and balances" (read: get a warrant), the Administration wants to make sure they can torture people and then not show them the evidence gathered against them (if they ever see a trial), intelligence agencies now say that the war in Iraq has actually made the terror threat worse.

What are we doing? Is this the America we want? Is this the shining example of hope and liberty we love?

It's time for everyone to ask themselves these questions and discuss the answer with their neighbors.

I have asked myself and here are my answers: The US shouldn't torture, the US shouldn't have secret prisons, the US shouldn't have secret trials, the US shouldn't spy here at home without warrants, the US should either give our troops everything they need to secure Iraq (like we should have done originally), or we should leave. I want a better way.

What is your answer?

tags: politics questions terror

How to steal an election

2006-09-22T16:13:00.000-05:00

This is about 10 minutes long but an absolutely necessary video to watch. Princeton researchers demonstrate how easy it is to rig an election with a Diebold electronic voting machine.

Our democracy is being hijacked, we need paper trails to ensure clean elections.

tags: Diebold election voting rig

How Bush Uses 9/11

2006-09-11T21:20:00.000-05:00

Sometimes pictures can say so much more than words.

tags: 9-11 flag Bush

It's Privacy Stupid

2006-09-08T00:27:00.001-05:00

People may not agree in many issues, but there is one thing that many Americans are passionate about, and that is their privacy.

This is what should be focused on to unite people this election.

1. Change vs. more of the same
2. It's privacy, stupid
3. Don't forget health care

tags: privacy

A Voice in the Streets is a Vote for Change

2006-09-07T07:46:00.000-05:00

“And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there?”

It has been five years since the 9/11 attacks and the current government has done more to hurt what this country stands for than even terrorists could. Here are a few of the concerns:

1) A general lack of interest in American social and economic inadequacies in favor of an aggressive and distracting foreign policy. Schools, infrastructure, and wallets suffer.

2) Subversion by the current Administration of basic rights granted in the Constitution. The loss of certain individual privacy following the passage of the Patriot Act, and through a broad interpretation of powers granted by Congress, is unnecessary to the greater war on terror and the loss of such rights is a greater threat to the American way of life than a possible event of random terror. Checks on power have been removed.

3) A complete disregard by the Administration for accountability. When things go wrong token assurances are given but no real change is pursued. "Leakers" are outed while their directing bosses remain. Poor choices for government appointments are let go when the appointer is left unaccountable.

4) The Administration’s claim that it can declare an individual as an enemy combatant who cannot challenge their own detention in a traditional court of law has taken the Executive's actions out of the realm of judicial oversight, a fundamental piece of the checks and balance system. According to the claim any individual, foreign or US citizen, can fall into the legal black hole of permanent unchallengeable detention.

5) It is apparent that the wars abroad have no benefit to the American people. Lives are lost as new terrorists are created in retaliation to the invasions. Soldiers die while Administration linked corporations profit in direct correlation.

6) The citizens want their voices heard but the system functions to mute any challenge. The filter of the bureaucratic republic allows Bush to be "the decider," but only for himself and the small circle he hears around him rather than the broader population he is supposed to lead. Votes are meaningless nuisances to their exploitative security.

7) Americans starve and freeze in our own streets, but countless millions of dollars are spent on placing our soldiers in harm's way to fight abroad or to imprison nonviolent offenders in record numbers.

9) Fiscal and economic policies have damaged the people in lost incomes, jobs, and retirements. Corporations get away with economic murder and the perpetrators receive what is essentially a slap on the wrist compared to the suffering their victims must face. The policies in place allow the people to be plundered by corporations and the government that allows it alike.

10) The government is owned by those who have the most money. Lobbying and campaign contributions dictate who benefits directly from any politicians post. The will of the people is not funneled through money; it is spoken by the masses who grumble with no voice or power individually to change their situation.

Enough is enough.

In the current situation the people do not own the government, the government owns the people. Their strength is in our sitting idly by as they do as they please with our money and our lives. They do not fear us as we are not a united challenge to them. We allow it.

Change comes through strength, and strength comes in numbers.

Regardless of philosophical differences concerning specific divisive issues, we must come together in opposition to a system that currently ignores the America that is by the people and for the people. The issues will remain, but the forum to discuss them can change.

Politics is about community and how we interact, it is about our schools, our roads, and how we take care of each other.

Politics is about consensus, and open dialogue. Not hate and covered ears.

Interaction is difficult, yes, but America is built upon communities coming together as a single, more powerful whole. The system in place denies this through division and the current forum of politics ignores the grievances of the common people in favor of the powerful few.

In this movement everybody can have play a role, spreading the word of change is what is important. Let's get started.

Remember, the buildings may be theirs, but the streets belong to us. Use them, go out and greet your neighbors and tell them that you want change.

Resist October 26.

we-resist.net

Perpetual wars destroy Americans

2006-09-03T02:10:00.000-05:00

A follow-up to my last post about the connections between the War on Drugs and the War on Terror.

The War on Drugs has coincided with a consistent increase in drug supply.

Along with the increase supply has been an dramatic rise in arrests and convictions.

When supply stabilized in the late 90s, so did the number of arrests.

As the supply skyrockets due to opium poppy growth since the US invasion of Afghanistan after 9/11, the number of arrests have shot up in turn. (Although statistics get hazy after 2002 for incarceration, arrests still rose dramatically)

You have heard of the military-industrial complex. The current nature of law enforcement in the War on Drugs works the same way. This narco-industrial complex provides jobs to all those who deal with the users on the streets.

In this war the police get funding to arrest, the prison cells get packed tight, and people are hired, normally through taxes, every step of the way. Why would anyone want to end a war like that?

Jobs are created, but is it worth it? Communities are destroyed as more of the population is put in prison (a percentage which we are already world leaders in).

The War on Terror is a very similar war, creating opportunities for the military-industrial complex. Is it worth it?

Troops are being killed and America is making more enemies throughout the world, all the while the government is eroding away our basic rights and liberties here at home in order to fight this war.

The priorities are clear, and it is obvious that these wars are not designed to be won. They have to exist perpetually in order to maintain funding. We must always have enemies to fight, even if it means creating new ones, just like drugs always need to be in supply to justify the war against them.

note: edited for clarity 4:35 am 9/3/06

tags: war drugs terror

The War on Drugs is not a war against drugs

2006-09-02T19:44:00.000-05:00

The War on Drugs is intertwined with the War on Terror, but not just in the area of funding that comes to most minds. The War on Terror has allowed more drugs to flow into the streets, destroying American lives at the hands of a government that punishes common users for nonviolent offenses.

America's invasion of Afghanistan following the 9/11 attacks has resulted in an unfortunate side effect that the current occupation forces are doing little to combat. Poppy cultivation has exploded in the country, especially in the southern provinces. The poppy is the plant that the drugs opium and heroin are created from.

Afghanistan, already the world's leading producer, has seen its cultivation shoot up 60% in the past year. The Afghan crops now account for 92% of the world supply, adding such a large quantity of drugs to the world market that the supply outstrips the demand.

The ultra-conservative Taliban government had nearly eradicated opium production preceding the US invasion in 2001, in fact production world-wide had stabilized and even showed signs of decreasing. Their removal has taken away any obstacles preventing farmers from growing poppies in order to make money to feed their families. In a country where good jobs can be hard to come by, growing poppies to sell into the global drug market probably seems like an easy source of income.

Unfortunately, right now curbing the expansion of opium production is not a priority for the troops sent there in order to fight a resurgent Taliban resistance and establish an orderly, democratic government. In the meantime the drug trade goes unchecked, fueling a supply of cheap drugs into the world.

The policy now is to wait until the drugs hit America and people get addicted to the cheap supply. There will be more non-violent offenders to fill the jails and necessitate money to fuel the War on Drugs. If the War on Drugs really wants to make a difference, then it should limit the supply and focus on helping addicts rather than incarcerating them. Prisons make criminals, and nonviolent offenders charged with many drug related offenses should not be there, it is a waste of taxpayer money and increases the chance that they will commit further crime, not to mention the destructive effect pulling people out of their communities has.

I suppose this news from Afghanistan would not be as big of a problem if the effects in the US were not so resoundingly negative, compounded by the destructive nature of the laws set up under the War on Drugs. If we treated our addicts, attempting to make them productive members of society, then some of the negativity could be avoided.

The War on Drugs has other problems as well, but the unchecked availability of drugs shown in Afghanistan combined with harsh sentences for users is filling our prisons with record numbers of inmates. The US already has the highest incarceration rate in the world, do we need to lock up more? This is a tough system to change as it as a huge bureaucracy behind it. People are paid in all aspects of the War on Drugs, such as the police, prison guards, or companies that supply law enforcement.

The solution is not to escalate the current version of the War on Drugs and merge it with the war on terror. The whole idea behind the War on Drugs must be examined.

The War on Drugs is not a war against drugs, otherwise we would be eradicating the production sources in Afghanistan, it is a war against people here in America and the War on Terror has actually helped to escalate that war.

tags: opium Afghanistan heroin Taliban poppies drugs

Is America prepared for Snakes on a Plane?

2006-08-23T23:51:00.000-05:00

OK, I saw Snakes on a Plane, and believe it or not...I really enjoyed it. It is over the top, but that is the aim and they just do it so well.

We have these reports of terrorists attempting to use extremely unlikely means to bring down a plane in the world, but remember...it could be worse. We could have motherfucking snakes used to take down planes!

Quick overview of the movie, I do not think I will be giving away any real plot spoiler shockers here, but skip it if you think necessary:

-Guy witnesses murder.
-Must travel by plane to testify against murderer.
-Snakes placed on plane to prevent him from testifying (either by biting him directly or by taking down the plane)
-People fight back before snakes succeed in their mission.

Yes, there are probably easier ways to take down the plane, but they are just not as grabbing. The likelihood of the plot working are remote, despite the efforts necessary to simply smuggle the illicit cargo. The plan is attempted only apparently after all other options were exhausted.

If terrorists have gotten to the point of having to concoct a difficult to mix liquid explosive without the assistance of a lab, I think our security has already forced them to reach for plots. Their options of attack have been limited since 9/11 and the most drastic security upgrade was made.

Clearly things can still be smuggled on planes if someone has the determination, but now any potential terrorists must now deal with the prospect of fighting against an angry cabin of passengers unrestrainedly trying to stop them. The would-be "shoebomber" was beaten into submission before he was able to complete his attempt.

My problem with the latest threat is the implausibility of it. Is it really necessary to scare everyone over something which is unlikely to succeed and that people on planes are already prepared to stop? Here is the process from The Register (emphasis added):

Once the plane is over the ocean, very discreetly bring all of your gear into the toilet. You might need to make several trips to avoid drawing attention. Once your kit is in place, put a beaker containing the peroxide / acetone mixture into the ice water bath (Champagne bucket), and start adding the acid, drop by drop, while stirring constantly. Watch the reaction temperature carefully. The mixture will heat, and if it gets too hot, you'll end up with a weak explosive. In fact, if it gets really hot, you'll get a premature explosion possibly sufficient to kill you, but probably no one else.

After a few hours - assuming, by some miracle, that the fumes haven't overcome you or alerted passengers or the flight crew to your activities - you'll have a quantity of TATP with which to carry out your mission. Now all you need to do is dry it for an hour or two.

The genius of this scheme is that TATP is relatively easy to detonate. But you must make enough of it to crash the plane, and you must make it with care to assure potency. One needs quality stuff to commit "mass murder on an unimaginable scale," as Deputy Police Commissioner Paul Stephenson put it. While it's true that a slapdash concoction will explode, it's unlikely to do more than blow out a few windows. At best, an infidel or two might be killed by the blast, and one or two others by flying debris as the cabin suddenly depressurizes, but that's about all you're likely to manage under the most favorable conditions possible.

It takes a long time and requires constant monitoring but at best the whole scheme will blow out a few windows. Aloha Airlines Flight 243 managed to land after it lost a section of the roof at 24,000 feet. One person was killed, they were a member of the crew who was not wearing a seatbelt at the time.

If we let ourselves become scared of every unlikely source of death, we might as well start carrying snake anti-venom on every flight...oh wait, no liquids allowed.

tags: SoaP terrorism planes airlines

Save the Hopeline

2006-08-01T11:03:00.000-05:00

Here is the deal. 1-800-SUICIDE, the national hotline that has been a lifeline for countless people for the past eight years, is facing a crisis of its own.

The Substance Abuse & Mental Health Service Administration (SAMHSA), a division of Health & Human Services, has decided to create their own government run system where they would have direct access to confidential data on individuals in crisis. The federal government has since cut off all funding to 1-800-SUICIDE and left $266,000 in bills to be paid from already allocated funding.

Donate, talk to friends, representatives, do what it takes to save this vital source of help for the most desperate members of society.

tags: 1-800-SUICIDE

Bush wants power to jail anyone indefinitely

2006-07-29T12:56:00.000-05:00

I guess it is inevitable that legislation will be proposed giving Bush the power to declare anyone a terrorist and have them locked up indefinitely. The people in charge have to figure out a way to keep people locked up now that the Supreme Court said they could not use the easily rigged tribunal system.

This is America, everyone deserves a fair trial to challenge their detention. A fair trial requires an open process with oversight to make sure the system is not abused.

"Legal experts said Friday that such language is dangerously broad and could authorize the military to detain indefinitely U.S. citizens who had only tenuous ties to terror networks like al Qaeda."

If this sort of legislation does pass then eventually someone will abuse it to secure their own power. It may not be Bush or his cronies, but it will happen.

tags: terrorism detainee constitution legislation war terror

Massachusetts ConCon 2006

2006-07-19T00:11:00.000-05:00

Last Wednesday I attended the 2006 Massachusetts Constitutional Convention and just want to share what I saw their basically.

I got there at 7am to hop in line so I could get 1 of 125 tickets to get into the viewing gallery so I could actually see our politicians in action (trust me, action is used loosely). I waited outside for an hour or so and was eventually led inside where I waited another few hours to actually get my ticket. Not as exciting as waiting for Red Sox tickets I suppose, but I guess it beats real work.

The security officers in charge instructed everybody who received tickets on the rules on how the day would go. First of all we were to remain quiet in the gallery, meaning no cheering or booing. All stickers needed to be removed and any t-shirts with messages printed on them needed to be turned inside out. After the rules were explained we were told to be back by 12:30, at which time we would be let into the gallery.

On to the ConCon.

It really amazes me sometimes that we pay these people to work. They are more like easily distracted children than professional representatives. I got to see both the Senate and the House of Representatives there in action and I do not think either could really be said to have been impressive to watch. They talk amongst themselves and pay no attention to the speakers, they are never really in the room anyway. Instead, they are generally just outside talking and negotiating out of view with their colleagues.

One main proposed amendment debated would make health care a fundamental right to all residents of Massachusetts. The idea of this amendment is that it would support and further the efforts to reform health care in the state. Many have the goal of a single payer system run by the government, putting a powerful private insurance lobby out of business, and this amendment is one tactic being used to try to achieve that goal. If the amendment were to pass then later lawsuits could be filed so the courts could find that under the new words of the Constitution that the current health care system is inadequate, forcing the issue to be tackled within the state legislature.

Anyway, it got sent to a study, essentially killing it since it is possible that results may not even be reported until after this legislative session. Senator Jehlen said, "if this is not going on in this Constitutional Convention or before the November election, when if ever it would go to the ballot? Would it be dead forever" to which the Chair replied "thatÂs correct" because "a vote for this study is a vote against the ballot question." Glad they are working efficiently though. They can vote for a study without explicitly voting against the amendment, all knowing that by doing so they are effectively killing its chances of being adopted.

Another topic tackled was election reform. Lets just say nothing passed, and with the Dems firmly in control there was no real debate (not just over this, over anything).

The big topic of the day however was the proposed amendment to ban gay marriage by defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. There were hundreds of people demonstrating in front of the State House representing both sides of the issue, with gay rights supporters on the State House side of the road facing off with anti gay marriage protesters on the other.

The two sides have attempted to portray this issue very differently, but I slightly new tactic was used by the ban promoters this time. The supporters of gay marriage continued to show this as a civil rights issue and there was the usual morals and family values argument from their opposition, but this time the opposition's main argument was to put this vote to the people and see what they have to say.

My view is this. If gay people want the rights, benefits, and responsibilities of being married to the person they love then good for them, they should. I do not believe that the constitution should be used to limit a group of people's rights as this amendment would do, it should instead protect rights from threats. Some people argue that it is bad for society because a gay marriage does not produce children and therefore should not be tolerated, but if gay marriage is banned its not as if they will suddenly create heterosexual families. Some people are gay and wording is not going to change that, might as well accept it and realize that their gayness does not affect your straightness.

The contentious vote however never happened. The Convention was adjourned until two days after the general elections in November, sparing many legislators from having to publicly make a vote that may look bad within their districts. Democrats from conservative district and Republicans from more liberal districts both feared having their vote used against them in the upcoming elections. There was apparently an agreement beforehand that everybody would vote for the recess, but this presumedly fell apart on the floor once it was clear that the motion would definitely pass. By the time everybody had actually voted how they wanted the vote was actually fairly close, 100-91 to postpone until November 9th.

The people from MassEquality, who want to protect gay marriage, feel that they do not have enough votes right now to block the amendment from getting to the ballot in 2008 and want more time to work on the case. The proposed amendment needs 50 votes both this year and next in order to get on the ballot in the 2008 elections where the people of the state can vote on it. I feel however that it should have been debated and voted on before the election, postponing it was an easy way out for many on both sides of the issue and does a disservice to the people.

Well, that was my day at the State House.

tags: ConCon constitutional convention Massachusetts amendment gay marriage health rights

Supreme Court Implies Bush War Crimes?

2006-07-19T00:02:00.000-05:00

The Supreme Court recently struck down the military tribunals being used at Guantanamo. The American Bar Assoociation applauded the Supreme Court’s decision as "a reaffirmation that the Rule of Law must be observed in our country as well as abroad."

The decision affirms that checks and balances within government are important and that the government has the responsibility to adhere to its obligations, such as following the requirements set forth in the Geneva Convention.

My view though is that this decision essentially declares that Bush has indeed violated the Geneva Conventions, a war crime a believe. I know the US does not allow it people to go before the war crime courts, but still, quite an important decision in setting the agenda in the war on terror.

tags: Guantanamo Hamdan Bush Rumsfeld Geneva

The Middle East is Hell

2006-06-29T01:15:00.000-05:00

A group linked to Hamas kidnapped an Israeli soldier and is threatening to execute him.

Israel has started bombing bridges and attacking power plants, apparently preparing for a full escalation of violence. Their jets have even ominously buzzed Syrian airspace in a warning to Damascus based Hamas who they feel was behind the kidnapping.

Militants in the Fatah movement have just executed an Israeli settler.

al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades claimied to have launched a missile with a chemical warhead on it...Israel probably will not be restrained if that is true.

tags: Israel

Flag Burning Amendment Fails

2006-06-29T01:08:00.000-05:00

The measure was rejected by one vote in the Senate. One vote. The flag-burning epidemic in this country will surely grow uncontrollably now.

Of course, the proper way to dispose of a flag is by burning it. Apparently the patriotic members of the Senate who voted for this do not know that.

A flag is a symbol and symbols can be powerful. Taking away an effective means to represent anger towards the government is an insult to the rights that this country are supposed to believe in. I may not agree with a flagburner, but the fact that they can make that bold statement truly does say that something is special about the United States and its relationship with its citizens.

tags: flag burning

North Korea to Tempt U.S. War Planners

2006-06-19T22:18:00.000-05:00

North Korea is expected to launch a new missile. You know, North Korea, that other part of the Axis of Evil.

if there is a launch without any advance notice from the government in Pyongyang, there will be no basis on which to assume it is only a test.

So, is the US planning to retatliate?

tags: Korea

Bush Teases the Blind

2006-06-15T00:10:00.000-05:00

Bush was in a particularly playful mood during his press conference today, discussing mainly his surprise trip to Iraq. The trip was really a 5 hour stopover in the greenzone that because the situation is so stable there had to be unannounced and required him escaping quickly.

Anyway, back to the press conference. This quote pretty much sums it up:

Then he was told a reporter he playfully teased about wearing sunglasses during the press conference has a serious vision problem and is legally blind.

tags: Bush shades blind

Where Real News Comes From

2006-06-08T10:09:00.000-05:00

tags: daily show Jon Stewart comic

Zarqawi is Dead

2006-06-08T09:32:00.000-05:00

The military has said that the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq has been killed. Great news actually since this guy as a foreigner had stated goals that were well beyond a homegrown insurgency.

My question though is will this make any difference?

Its a great success for moral now doubt and shows that military intelligence is not completely some sort of oxymoron. Unfortunately I fear its only symbolic and want affect the dangers faced daily by the troops on the ground.

I guess we will see how much control he actually had, and how his death will affect the insurgency.

tags: Zarqawi Iraq al-Qaeda insurgency