Thursday, August 3, 2006

Alexander Cockburn profiles 'Hezbollah's Top Ally in Israel," an Air Force general "in the LeMay tradition." [Cursor.org] 12:36:08 PM    comment []

This information comes to us from The Institute for Public Accuracy. Claims vs. Facts on Qana Today, the Washington Post ran an op-ed headlined "The Rules of War," by Moshe Yaalon, former chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces and now a distinguished military fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Yaalon was head of Israeli army intelligence when Israel bombed a civilian shelter in Qana in 1996. A civil suit in the United States, charging him with war crimes, is pending. Yesterday, Human Rights Watch issued a report, "Fatal Strikes: Israel's Indiscriminate Attacks Against Civilians in Lebanon," based on their investigations in Lebanon. The following are quotes taken from each: Yaalon: "Hoping to retain its high moral standards in the face of such a cynical enemy, Israel has made every effort to avoid harming civilians.[per thou] HRW: "In some cases, the timing and intensity of the attack, the absence of a military target, as well as return strikes on rescuers, suggest that Israeli forces deliberately targeted civilians." Yaalon: "It is clear to any objective observer that Hezbollah is using Lebanese civilians as human shields. It builds its headquarters in densely populated areas, embeds its fighters in towns and villages, and deliberately places missiles in private homes, even constructing additions to existing structures specifically to house missile launchers." HRW: "Human Rights Watch found no cases in which Hezbollah deliberately used civilians as shields to protect them from retaliatory IDF attack." Yaalon: "But at Qana, Hezbollah responded to Israel's compassion with more cynical brutality. After launching missiles at Israel, the terrorists rushed inside a building. When Israel fired a precision-guided missile to strike at the terrorists, scores of civilians, including children, were killed." HRW: "Human Rights Watch researchers visited Qana on July 31, the day after the attack, and did not find any destroyed military equipment in or near the home. None of the dozens of international journalists, rescue workers, and international observers who visited Qana on July 30 and 31 reported seeing any evidence of Hezbollah military presence in or around the home around the time that it was hit. Rescue workers recovered no bodies of apparent Hezbollah fighters from in or near the building." 12:10:15 PM    comment []

This is the link to the Vanity Fair article, complete with sound clips, from NORAD on 9/11. Listen to them. http://www.vanityfair.com/features/general/060801fege01 11:35:30 AM    comment []

Strong-Arming the Vote The New York Times | Editorial Thursday 03 August 2006 President Bush's Justice Department has been criticized for letting partisanship guide its work on voting and elections. And party politics certainly appears to have been a driving force in a legal maneuver it just pulled off in Alabama, where it persuaded a federal judge to take important election powers away from the Democratic secretary of state and give them to a Republican governor. The Justice Department says it is trying to enforce the election law, but that is unconvincing. There are plenty of ways to enforce the law without creating the impression that it is tilting the electoral landscape in favor of Republicans. Alabama is one of many states that have been late in meeting a federal requirement to create a computerized statewide list of voters. Secretary of State Nancy Worley says the delay is due to factors outside her control. Her critics disagree. But whatever the reason, the Justice Department has every right to try to speed things along. The trouble is, rather than work with Ms. Worley to get the job done, it decided to go to court to take away her authority and hand it to Gov. Bob Riley. Sadly, a federal judge agreed yesterday to do just that, in a one-sided proceeding that felt a lot like a kangaroo court. The Justice Department and the Alabama attorney general, Troy King, both argued that Governor Riley should control the voter database. Mr. King, a Republican, was appointed to his job by Governor Riley after serving as his legal adviser, and when Ms. Worley realized that Mr. King would not represent her interests, she asked him to let her hire a lawyer to argue her side. He refused. The Alabama Democratic Party tried to intervene in the case, so it could argue against giving control of the voter rolls to the governor. The judge, who was recently named to the bench by President Bush, would not let the Democrats in. The Justice Department's request to shift Ms. Worley's powers to Governor Riley is extraordinary. Normally, the government would seek an order telling a state official what to do, or it would ask to have a nonpartisan person appointed as a special master. And the Justice Department's aggressive stance stands in stark contrast to the forgiving approach it has taken to Republican secretaries of state. After Katherine Harris removed eligible voters from the rolls in Florida in 2000, and Kenneth Blackwell tried to block eligible people from registering in Ohio in 2004, the Justice Department made no effort to limit their powers. Controlling the voting rolls can yield important advantages, as Ms. Harris proved in 2000. The Justice Department's actions in Alabama appear to be less about enforcing the law than about wresting control of the voter rolls from the opposition party, and making a Democratic secretary of state who is up for re-election in a few months look bad. It would not be the first time the Bush Justice Department seemed to play party politics with elections. Political appointees approved the pro-Republican Congressional redistricting plan in Texas and a voter ID law in Georgia, despite objections from staff lawyers that the plans violated the Voting Rights Act. The Justice Department has enormous power over state elections. It is important that this power be used in a way that appears - and is - nonpartisan. Undercutting a Democratic secretary of state, and taking the extraordinary step of handing her powers to a Republican governor, meets neither test. The Justice Department is giving the impression that it is less concerned that elections be lawful and fair than that they come out a particular way. ------- 10:43:37 AM    comment []

9/11 panel mulled criminal referrals (95). 9/11 panel mulled criminal referrals (95) [The Raw Story | A rational voice - Alternative news] 10:42:02 AM    comment []

Eric Boehlert: Fox News Continues to Suggest Israel Did Not Bomb Qana. This really is remarkable, even by Fox News standards. Four days after the Israeli government admitted to, and apologized for, mistakenly bombing a civilian apartment building in the Lebanese town of Qana and killing 60 innocents in the process, American right-wingers continue to scramble, trying to create a parallel universe explanation where fungible facts show it wasn't Israel's fault at all. In fact, Israel's the victim of a massive Qana hoax. Naturally, Fox News' high-profile hosts and guests are leading the delusional charge. Earlier this week FNC host Oliver North, discussing the bombing in Qana, lamented the fact that "whether the Israelis did it or not, the Israelis are going to get blamed for it." [Emphasis added.] North also clearly suggested the civilians in Qana may have been "killed by Hezbollah." (Killed for public relations reasons, according to the wing nut logic.) More recently, Fox News contributing analyst, the willfully fact-free Michelle Malkin (she's the one who during the Terri Schiavo controversy was certain--certain!--the GOP talking points memo was a fake; she's the one who suggested Sen. John Kerry shot himself on purpose while serving in Vietnam), announced the grief broadcast from Qana was "manufactured," that the photos of the rubble there looked "staged," and that Hezbelloh was likely responsible for the carnage. Fox News host Bill O'Reilly quickly agreed, insisting, "It doesn't matter if there is an investigation that shows Hezbelloh killed their own people" in Qana. For those keeping track of the Middle East spin game, that means Fox News has now outflanked the Israeli government. [The Huffington Post | Full Blog Feed] 10:37:51 AM    comment []

James Boyce: Blood In The Water? Yes. Ours? Nope.. Something very important for the Democrats and Progressives happened this morning in the town of Johnstown, Pennsylvania. We fought back. As I noted in my post yesterday, this week has been full of activity in Pennslyvannia, for and against Representative John Murtha - a decorated veteran and a man who has done as much for the troops and veterans of this country than anybody. But unlike 2000, when John McCain was swift-boated. Unlike 2002, when Max Cleland suffered the same fate and unlike 2004, when the Kerry Campaign was slow to react to the lies and distortions of his record by the not-so-Swifties, this time, not only did we fire the first shot, but we also we fired louder and stronger. Led by Max Cleland, a press conference was held at 10:30 this morning when Max, Fighting Democrat Eric Massa and Mike Lyon, Executive Director of The Patriot Project, denounced the so-called "Vietnam Veterans For Truth" for what they truly are, Swift Boating Wannabees, who are trying to use John Murtha's thoughtful and correct I might add, criticism of the administration's conduct in Iraq against him - not in a discussion of policy but in an out and out strategy of personal destruction. Then it was the turn of the other folks to hold their press conference on the same street and a funny thing happened on the way to John Murtha's crucifixion by the neo-nuts. Our press conference outdrew their's by 10 - 1. People came from all around the state and the region to stand up and say, "we've had enough." People are finally starting to see that this is nothing more than "same people, same tactics, same strategy, different candidate." It's about time. But today's victory is not the end of the story, it is the beginning of what will be an increasingly bitter battle that will be fought over the coming months, through this election and right into 2008. But we will be ready. We will be ready for them in November when John O'Neill leds the rally against John Murtha (providing, of course, the leadership group for the VVFT can come up with Mr. O'Neill's "expenses.") We will be ready for them when Curt Weldon criticizes Admiral Joe Sestak again. We get ready for them all across the country and we will fight. But here's a final sobering thought. Where is hell was the Democratic Party today? To paraphrase a young John Kerry, where are our leaders? Did Howard Dean and the DNC step up and defend Jack Murtha? No. Did Nancy Pelosi utter a peep? Not one. Where are John Murtha's colleagues in the House on this? They love when he comes to their town and raises money for them. But stand by his side, perish the thought. After all, isn't John Murtha actually standing up and advocating the withdrawal that all Democrats united behind in the letter to the President they trumped? It's easy to do a press conference in Washington but John Murtha is taking the flak - the others are taking the credit. And speaking of that, remember when John Kerry stood up and spoke for a withdrawal from Iraq? Demanded a timetable? Who criticized him? The same inside-the-beltway geniuses who sent the letter demanding the withdrawal. No wonder our party is such as mess. But today, there was a glimmer of light. And like virtually all of the positive developments on the Democratic side, it didn't happen on street corner in DC but on a street in Pennslyvannia where real Democrats stood up for a real war hero, and the country will be a better place for it. [The Huffington Post | Full Blog Feed] 10:00:23 AM    comment []

THE SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE REPORTS THAT CATHOLIC CHARITIES WILL NO LONGER PROVIDE ADOPTION SERVICES. THE OPENING PARAGRAPH READS: QUOTE -AFTER SPENDING NEARL 100 YEASR FINDING HOMES FOR CHILDREN AWAITING ADOPTION, CATHOLIC CHARITIES ANNOUNCED THAT IT WILL NO LONGER PROVIDE FULL ADOPTION SERVICES. ... CLOSE QUOTE IT CONTINUED ... QUOTE -THE DECISION TO END ADOPTIONS COMES FINE MONTHS AFTER THE ARCHDIOCESE SAID IT NO LONGER WOULD ALLOW SAME-SEX COUPLES TO ADOPT CHILDREN THROUGH ITS CATHOLIC CHARITIES AGENCY. EARLIER THIS YEAR, CATHOLIC CHARITIES SAID IT HAD PLACED FIVE OF 136 CHILDREN WITH SAME SEX COUPLES SINCE 2000. A 2003 VATICAN EDICT SAID PLACING CHILDREN INTO SAME SEX HOUSEHOLDS WAS "GRAVELY IMMORAL" AND "WOULD ACTUALLY MEAN DOING VIOLENCE TO THESE CHILDREN" - CLOSE QUOTE OH MY GOD. NOW, I AM A CATHOLIC. BAPTIZED, RECONCILED, FIRST HOLY COMMUNION, CONFIRMED, MARRIED ... ALL IN THE CHURCH. WELL, THEN I WAS DIVORCED AND MARRIED AGAIN. THAT WAS A CIVIL MARRIAGE. BUT STILL, YOU CAN SEE THAT I HAVE HAD MY OWN SORT OF DEVOTION TO THE CHURCH. THAT WAS SHATTERED WITH THE REVELATIONS WHICH I HAD FIRST DENIED AND LATER HAD TO ACCEPT THAT THERE WAS A SYSTEMIC PROBLEM WITHIN IN THE CHURCH THAT ALLOWED CHILD MOLESTERS TO BECOME PRIESTS, TO PERPETRATE THEIR HEINOUS ACTS, AND THEN TO FIND ALL MANNER OF WAYS TO COVER UP FOR THEM. PEDOPHILE PRIESTS. IT[base ']S ENOUGH TO DRIVE ONE TO THE EPISCOPALIANS. BUT IT DIDN[base ']T. WHLIE SOME OF MY FORMERLY DEVOUT FAMILY MEMBERS DID LEAVE THE CHURCH, I HAVE NOT. NOT FORMALLY, ANYWAY. AND NOW TO HEAR THIS MAKES MY BLOOD RUN COLD. WHAT WOULD JESUS DO INDEED? RATHER THAN PLACING CHILDREN WHO ARE PARENTLESS, FAMILY-LESS, INTO A LOVING ENVIRONMENT WITH A COUPLE WHO WANTS TO PARENT THEM... SAME SEX OR OPPOSITE SEX ... THE CHURCH ABANDONS THE CHILDREN ALL TOGETHER. HAD THEY EVEN MAINTAINED THAT THEY CAN[base ']T PLACE CHILDREN WITH SAME SEX COUPLES DUE TO THE CHURCH[base ']S MORAL TEACHINGS, I WOULD HAVE ACCEPTED THAT - GRUDGINGLY, AND NOT WITHOUT COMMENT! -- BUT I WOULD HAVE ACCEPTED THAT AS THEIR RELIGIOUS RIGHT TO BIGOTRY. BUT TO ABANDON ALL CHILDREN. AND TO STATE THAT PLACEMENT WITH SAME SEX COUPLES AMOUNTS TO VIOLENCE PERPETRATED AGAINST THE CHILD ... AND THAT COMMENT COMING FROM THE SAME CHURCH WHO FOR DECADES - PERHAPS CENTURIES - COVERED UP CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN PERPETRATED BY THEIR OWN CLERGY - IS THE HEIGHT OF HYPOCRISY AND A VICIOUS ASSAULT ON THE CHURCH CATHOLICS BELIEVE WAS FOUNDED BY JESUS CHRIST. /////////////// AND WHAT OF THE REALITY OF CONCERN OVER PLACEMENT IN SAME SEX COUPLE HOUSEHOLDS??? MEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICA, FOUNDED BY DAVID BROCK - A ONE TIME HIT MAN FOR THE CONSERVATIVE RIGHT - POINTED OUT THAT MANY RIGHT WING NUTCAKES ASSAIL SAME SEX COUPLE ADOPTION AS BEING BAD FOR KIDS BY CITING A STATISTIC THAT ORIGINATED WITH THE KING OF THE NUTCAKES JAMES DOBSON. LET ME SHARE THE SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THEIR LATEST REPORT, IN WHICH THEY ARE DISCUSSING ARKANSAS STATE SENATOR JIM HOLT[base ']S CLAIM, ON NPR[base ']S MORNING EDITION, THAT THERE ARE -THOUSANDS OF STUDIES, ACTUALLY ... OVER 10,000 THAT SHOW THE HOMOSEXUAL FAMILY OR THE ENVIRONMENT IS PROBLEMATIC FOR THE CHILD - THE DISCUSSION CENTERED AROUND A RECENT ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT DECISION THAT BANNING GAYS FROM BECOMING FOSTER PARENTS IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL. On the July 31 edition of National Public Radio's Morning Edition, reporter Jacqueline Froelich aired -- without challenge -- Arkansas Republican state Sen. Jim Holt's assertion that "there are thousands of studies, actually ... over 10,000" that show "the homosexual family or the environment is problematic for the child." Froelich aired Holt's remark during a report on the Arkansas Supreme Court's recent ruling that the state's regulation banning gays from becoming foster parents is unconstitutional. Froelich did not address Holt's dubious figure of 10,000 studies, which would be possible only if a new study reaching that conclusion had been released every day for the past 27 years. Froelich also failed to mention that numerous scientific studies, including research from the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the American Psychological Association (APA), support the Arkansas Supreme Court's ruling. The court held that the Arkansas Child Welfare Agency Review Board had violated the constitutional separation of powers doctrine by exceeding the scope of its authority -- which is to protect the health, safety, and welfare of foster children -- when it banned gays and lesbians from becoming foster parents in 1997. Froelich's report included comments from Arkansas ACLU Executive Director Rita Sklar, agreeing with the court's decision, and then aired a response to the decision from Holt: HOLT: The [lower-court] judge had said that there are no studies that show that the homosexual family or the environment is problematic for the child. And there are thousands of studies; actually, I've got over 10,000 here that show just the opposite. Froelich noted that HOLT'S "10,000 STUDIES" FIGURE IS OFTEN CITED BY FOCUS ON THE FAMILY FOUNDER JAMES DOBSON AND THAT HOLT "RELIED ON THAT STATISTIC AND OTHER DATA WHEN HE CO-SPONSORED A FAILED BILL SEEKING A BAN ON GAY FOSTER PARENTS." INDEED, DOBSON HAS CITED THE 10,000-STUDY FIGURE WITHOUT EXPLAINING THE SOURCE OF HIS DATA. HE MADE THIS CLAIM IN HIS BOOK MARRIAGE UNDER FIRE: WHY WE MUST WIN THIS BATTLE (MULTNOMAH, JUNE 2004), IN WHICH HE ASSERTED THAT "[M]ORE THAN TEN THOUSAND STUDIES HAVE CONCLUDED THAT KIDS DO BEST WHEN THEY ARE RAISED BY LOVING AND COMMITTED MOTHERS AND FATHERS" (PAGE 54). ACCORDING TO A MEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICA REVIEW OF MARRIAGE UNDER FIRE, THE FOOTNOTE FOR THIS PARTICULAR CLAIM STATES THAT "[M]ANY OF THESE STUDIES ARE EITHER PRESENTED OR REPRESENTED IN THE FOLLOWING," SUBSEQUENTLY LISTING A NUMBER OF BOOKS AND ARTICLES. DOBSON DID NOT PROVIDE ANY EVIDENCE DOCUMENTING ALL 10,000 STUDIES, BUT TITLES HE DID CITE INCLUDE: GROWING UP WITH A SINGLE PARENT: WHAT HURTS, WHAT HELPS (HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS, OCTOBER 1994), SINGLE MOTHERS AND THEIR CHILDREN: A NEW AMERICAN DILEMMA (UNIVERSITY PRESS OF AMERICA, MARCH 1988), "LONG-TERM EFFECTS OF PARENTAL DIVORCE AND PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIPS, ADJUSTMENT, AND ACHIEVEMENT IN YOUNG ADULTHOOD," AND "CHILDREN WHO DON'T LIVE WITH BOTH PARENTS FACE BEHAVIORAL PROBLEMS." THESE EXAMPLES SUGGEST THAT MANY OF DOBSON'S PURPORTED "TEN THOUSAND STUDIES" DID NOT EXAMINE PARENTING BY GAY INDIVIDUALS OR COUPLES AT ALL BUT, RATHER, ADDRESSED CHILD DEVELOPMENT IN A SINGLE-PARENT HOME VERSUS A TWO-PARENT HOME. IN FACT, NUMEROUS STUDIES SUPPORT THE OPPOSITE CONCLUSION. FOR EXAMPLE, A 2002 AAP TECHNICAL REPORT FOUND THAT: A GROWING BODY OF SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE DEMONSTRATES THAT CHILDREN WHO GROW UP WITH 1 OR 2 GAY AND/OR LESBIAN PARENTS FARE AS WELL IN EMOTIONAL, COGNITIVE, SOCIAL, AND SEXUAL FUNCTIONING AS DO CHILDREN WHOSE PARENTS ARE HETEROSEXUAL. CHILDREN'S OPTIMAL DEVELOPMENT SEEMS TO BE INFLUENCED MORE BY THE NATURE OF THE RELATIONSHIPS AND INTERACTIONS WITHIN THE FAMILY UNIT THAN BY THE PARTICULAR STRUCTURAL FORM IT TAKES. IN A JULY 2004 POLICY STATEMENT "OPPOS[ING] ANY DISCRIMINATION BASED ON SEXUAL ORIENTATION IN MATTERS OF ADOPTION, CHILD CUSTODY AND VISITATION, FOSTER CARE, AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES," THE APA ASSERTED THAT "RESULTS OF RESEARCH SUGGEST THAT LESBIAN AND GAY PARENTS ARE AS LIKELY AS HETEROSEXUAL PARENTS TO PROVIDE SUPPORTIVE AND HEALTHY ENVIRONMENTS FOR THEIR CHILDREN." SIMILARLY, AN OCTOBER 2005 WEB MD ARTICLE REPORTED THAT ACCORDING TO FINDINGS PRESENTED AT THE OCTOBER 2005 AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS CONFERENCE AND EXHIBITION, "[C]HILDREN GROWING UP IN SAME-SEX PARENTAL HOUSEHOLDS DO NOT NECESSARILY HAVE DIFFERENCES IN SELF-ESTEEM, GENDER IDENTITY, OR EMOTIONAL PROBLEMS FROM CHILDREN GROWING UP IN HETEROSEXUAL PARENT HOMES." IN ADDITION, A JANUARY 2005 NEW YORK TIMES ARTICLE (SUBSCRIPTION REQUIRED) NOTED THE ASSESSMENT OF DR. JUDITH STACEY, A SOCIOLOGY PROFESSOR AT NEW YORK UNIVERSITY, THAT "THERE IS NOT A SINGLE LEGITIMATE SCHOLAR OUT THERE WHO ARGUES THAT GROWING UP WITH GAY PARENTS IS SOMEHOW BAD FOR CHILDREN." AND MIGHT I JUST ADD THAT EVEN DR. LAURA SCHLESSINGER, THAT HOUND, HAS SAID THAT GAY COUPLES RESCUE CHILDREN FROM A PARENTLESS LIFE WHEN THEY ADOPT THEM. SHE DOES NOT ADVOCATE FOR THEM ADOPTING BABIES, BECAUSE SHE SAID HETERO COUPLES ARE AVAILABLE FOR THAT. BUT WHEN THE STRAIGHT FOLKS FAIL TO STEP UP, THEN IT'S OKAY FOR THE HOMOS TO TAKE IN CHILDREN IN NEED. GOD I SOMETIMES HATE THOSE PEOPLE WHO CALL THEMSELVES FAMILY FRIENDLY WITH THEIR HYPOCRISY AND TWISTED LOGIC. I MIGHT JUST POINT OUT THAT I AM A 50 YEAR OLD WOMAN WHO IS THE PROUD MOTHER OF THREE YEAR OLD TRIPLETS, SIRED BY MY HUSBAND, BIRTHED BY ME TO OUR HETEROSEXUAL COMMITTED FAMILY. 9:52:14 AM    comment []

© Copyright 2006 Patricia Thurston.