Military hides womans' death - Bill Nelosn (D-Fl) and his Alito Vote

t r u t h o u t - Marjorie Cohn | Military Hides Cause of Women Soldiers' Deaths

Military Hides Cause of Women Soldiers' Deaths
    By Marjorie Cohn
    Monday 30 January 2006

    In a startling revelation, the former commander of Abu Ghraib prison testified that Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, former senior US military commander in Iraq, gave orders to cover up the cause of death for some female American soldiers serving in Iraq.

    Last week, Col. Janis Karpinski told a panel of judges at the Commission of Inquiry for Crimes against Humanity Committed by the Bush Administration in New York that several women had died of dehydration because they refused to drink liquids late in the day. They were afraid of being assaulted or even raped by male soldiers if they had to use the women's latrine after dark.

    The latrine for female soldiers at Camp Victory wasn't located near their barracks, so they had to go outside if they needed to use the bathroom. "There were no lights near any of their facilities, so women were doubly easy targets in the dark of the night," Karpinski told retired US Army Col. David Hackworth in a September 2004 interview. It was there that male soldiers assaulted and raped women soldiers. So the women took matters into their own hands. They didn't drink in the late afternoon so they wouldn't have to urinate at night. They didn't get raped. But some died of dehydration in the desert heat, Karpinski said.

    Karpinski testified that a surgeon for the coalition's joint task force said in a briefing that "women in fear of getting up in the hours of darkness to go out to the port-a-lets or the latrines were not drinking liquids after 3 or 4 in the afternoon, and in 120 degree heat or warmer, because there was no air-conditioning at most of the facilities, they were dying from dehydration in their sleep."

    "And rather than make everybody aware of that - because that's shocking, and as a leader if that's not shocking to you then you're not much of a leader - what they told the surgeon to do is don't brief those details anymore. And don't say specifically that they're women. You can provide that in a written report but don't brief it in the open anymore."

    For example, Maj. Gen. Walter Wojdakowski, Sanchez's top deputy in Iraq, saw "dehydration" listed as the cause of death on the death certificate of a female master sergeant in September 2003. Under orders from Sanchez, he directed that the cause of death no longer be listed, Karpinski stated. The official explanation for this was to protect the women's privacy rights.

    Sanchez's attitude was: "The women asked to be here, so now let them take what comes with the territory," Karpinski quoted him as saying. Karpinski told me that Sanchez, who was her boss, was very sensitive to the political ramifications of everything he did. She thinks it likely that when the information about the cause of these women's deaths was passed to the Pentagon, Donald Rumsfeld ordered that the details not be released. "That's how Rumsfeld works," she said.

    "It was out of control," Karpinski told a group of students at Thomas Jefferson School of Law last October. There was an 800 number women could use to report sexual assaults. But no one had a phone, she added. And no one answered that number, which was based in the United States. Any woman who successfully connected to it would get a recording. Even after more than 83 incidents were reported during a six-month period in Iraq and Kuwait, the 24-hour rape hot line was still answered by a machine that told callers to leave a message.

    "There were countless such situations all over the theater of operations - Iraq and Kuwait - because female soldiers didn't have a voice, individually or collectively," Karpinski told Hackworth. "Even as a general I didn't have a voice with Sanchez, so I know what the soldiers were facing. Sanchez did not want to hear about female soldier requirements and/or issues."

    Karpinski was the highest officer reprimanded for the Abu Ghraib torture scandal, although the details of interrogations were carefully hidden from her. Demoted from Brigadier General to Colonel, Karpinski feels she was chosen as a scapegoat because she was a female.

    Sexual assault in the US military has become a hot topic in the last few years, "not just because of the high number of rapes and other assaults, but also because of the tendency to cover up assaults and to harass or retaliate against women who report assaults," according to Kathy Gilberd, co-chair of the National Lawyers Guild's Military Law Task Force.

    This problem has become so acute that the Army has set up its own sexual assault web site.

    In February 2004, Rumsfeld directed the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to undertake a 90-day review of sexual assault policies. "Sexual assault will not be tolerated in the Department of Defense," Rumsfeld declared.

    The 99-page report was issued in April 2004. It affirmed, "The chain of command is responsible for ensuring that policies and practices regarding crime prevention and security are in place for the safety of service members." The rates of reported alleged sexual assault were 69.1 and 70.0 per 100,000 uniformed service members in 2002 and 2003. Yet those rates were not directly comparable to rates reported by the Department of Justice, due to substantial differences in the definition of sexual assault.

    Notably, the report found that low sociocultural power (i.e., age, education, race/ethnicity, marital status) and low organizational power (i.e., pay grade and years of active duty service) were associated with an increased likelihood of both sexual assault and sexual harassment.

    The Department of Defense announced a new policy on sexual assault prevention and response on January 3, 2005. It was a reaction to media reports and public outrage about sexual assaults against women in the US military in Iraq and Afghanistan, and ongoing sexual assaults and cover-ups at the Air Force Academy in Colorado, Gilberd said. As a result, Congress demanded that the military review the problem, and the Defense Authorization Act of 2005 required a new policy be put in place by January 1.

    The policy is a series of very brief "directive-type memoranda" for the Secretaries of the military services from the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness. "Overall, the policy emphasizes that sexual assault harms military readiness, that education about sexual assault policy needs to be increased and repeated, and that improvements in response to sexual assaults are necessary to make victims more willing to report assaults," Gilberd notes. "Unfortunately," she added "analysis of the issues is shallow, and the plans for addressing them are limited."

    Commands can reject the complaints if they decide they aren't credible, and there is limited protection against retaliation against the women who come forward, according to Gilberd. "People who report assaults still face command disbelief, illegal efforts to protect the assaulters, informal harassment from assaulters, their friends or the command itself," she said.

    But most shameful is Sanchez's cover-up of the dehydration deaths of women that occurred in Iraq. Sanchez is no stranger to outrageous military orders. He was heavily involved in the torture scandal that surfaced at Abu Ghraib. Sanchez approved the use of unmuzzled dogs and the insertion of prisoners head-first into sleeping bags after which they are tied with an electrical cord and their are mouths covered. At least one person died as the result of the sleeping bag technique. Karpinski charges that Sanchez attempted to hide the torture after the hideous photographs became public.

    Sanchez reportedly plans to retire soon, according to an article in the International Herald Tribune earlier this month. But Rumsfeld recently considered elevating the 3-star general to a 4-star. The Tribune also reported that Brig. Gen. Vincent Brooks, the Army's chief spokesman, said in an email message, "The Army leaders do have confidence in LTG Sanchez."

*****************************************************************

I WISH I HAD SOMEONE BETTER TO VOTE FOR BESIDES MR. BILL - NELSON HAS NO BACKBONE! HE NEVER STANDS TOGETHER WITH THE PARTY. HE NEVER DOES WHAT WE WANT HIM TO DO. WILL SOMEONE PLEASE RUN ON THE DEMOCRAT TICKET AGAINST BILL NELSON!  PLEASE!  ALL I WANT IS SOMEONE TO STAND UP FOR US, FOR OUR FREEDOM, FOR MY CHILDREN'S FUTURE.   HE WILL VOTE NO FOR ALITO AND NO FILIBUSTER.

HE CAN'T GIVE US A FIGHT   

HE'S LOST IN SPACE

Senator Nelson sent this letter to the President on Wednesday, Jan. 25, having posted a press statement on his web site the day before. 
http://billnelson.senate.gov/news/details.cfm?id=250706& 
 
Although the Senator's forthcoming vote against the Alito confirmation has been reported, this letter to the President, which explains the depth of his concerns, has not been publicized. This was sent to me by Ruth Roman Lynch, who obtained it through the local NAACP and it is available on the Senator's web site: 
http://billnelson.senate.gov/news/details.cfm?id=250761& 
 
There are rumors that Senator Nelson will support the filibuster, but please continue to give him your support and thank him for standing firm. 
 
Phil 
_________________________ 
 
Mr. President: 
 
The gospel promises all of us impartiality at judgment. And, I would suggest impartiality -- or, justice for all - is a principle embedded deep in our constitutional democracy. 
 
I believe in an America where courts address injustice, and correct it. I believe in an America where our judges serve the people by interpreting the Constitution - without agenda. 
 
I may have no greater responsibility in the Senate than to be charged by our Constitution with advising the president on his picks for the United States Supreme Court. 
 
And in assuming this awesome responsibility, I rise today to oppose Judge Alito's confirmation to the Supreme Court. 
 
Soon, the Supreme Court likely will hear cases about protecting our personal privacy from government and corporate intrusion; and about the sharing of power between Congress and the president. 
 
These decisions will have an important affect on each of our lives, and on the future of our nation. 
 
Over the past few weeks, Iheld numerous town hall meetings at which residents shared their thoughts and opinions on Judge Alito. 
 
That's one reason why I carefully studied his record over the past fifteen years on the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals. During his time on the bench, Judge Alito ruled on cases ranging from the rights of individuals to the stewardship of the environment. 
 
After his testimony before the Judiciary Committee, I was concerned that he more often than not ruled in favor of big government and big corporations over the ordinary American. 
 
Following the hearings, I personally met with Judge Alito to discuss my concerns. 
 
I explained how much a recent Supreme Court decision has frightened many of my constituents. They fear their homes can now be seized by the government to make way for a private developer's project. 
 
While he expressed sympathy for the parties whose homes had been seized, he offered no misgivings whatsoever about the legal reasoning that led to that outcome. 
 
I am concerned about his rulings in other cases pitting the government against individuals -- over issues ranging from the environment to workers' rights to racial discrimination. 
 
In Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey v. Magnesium Elektron, he established high barriers to prevent individuals from being able to sue polluters for violations of the Clean Water Act. The Supreme Court later rejected his reasoning by a vote of 7-2. 
 
In Chittister v. Department of Community and Economic Development, he ruled that state employees could not sue for damages to enforce their rights under the federal Family and Medial Leave Act. Again, the Supreme Court later reversed this ruling by a vote of 6-3. 
 
In Riley v. Taylor, he ruled that there was no basis for appeal in a death penalty case in which prosecutors had used their peremptory challenges to exclude black jurors from the jury pool. The full Third Circuit later heard this case and overturned Judge Alito's ruling. 
 
These and other cases highlight the broader concerns I have with Judge Alito's record. 
 
Mr. President, during my years in the Senate, I have voted for almost all of President Bush's judicial nominees. All told, I have voted for 216, or 96 percent of the president's 226 judicial picks, including Chief Justice John Roberts. 
 
And I greeted Judge Alito's nomination with an open mind. 
 
But his many legal writings, judicial opinions and evasive answers both at his hearing and in my private meeting with him, convinced me he would tilt the scales of justice against the average Joe. 
 
Because he is not the centrist voice I believe this nation needs to replace the retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who fiercely defended the rights and liberties of all Americans, I'm going to vote no on this confirmation. 

Direct Talks - U.S. Officals and Iraqi Insurgents

Exclusive: Direct Talks—U.S. Officials and Iraqi Insurgents

Newsweek

Feb. 6, 2006 issue - American officials in Iraq are in face-to-face talks with high-level Iraqi Sunni insurgents, NEWSWEEK has learned. Americans are sitting down with "senior members of the leadership" of the Iraqi insurgency, according to Americans and Iraqis with knowledge of the talks (who did not want to be identified when discussing a sensitive and ongoing matter). The talks are taking place at U.S. military bases in Anbar province, as well as in Jordan and Syria. "Now we have won over the Sunni political leadership," says U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad. "The next step is to win over the insurgents." The groups include Baathist cells and religious Islamic factions, as well as former Special Republican Guards and intelligence agents, according to a U.S. official with knowledge of the talks. Iraq's insurgent groups are reaching back. "We want things from the U.S. side, stopping misconduct by U.S. forces, preventing Iranian intervention," said one prominent insurgent leader from a group called the Army of the Mujahedin, who refused to be named because of the delicacy of the discussions. "We can't achieve that without actual meetings."

U.S. intelligence officials have had back-door channels to insurgent groups for many months. The Dec. 15 elections brought many Sunnis to the polls and widened the split between Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi's foreign jihadists and indigenous Sunni insurgents. This marks the first time either Americans or insurgents have admitted that "senior leaders" have met at the negotiating table for planning purposes. "Those who are coming to work with [the U.S.] or come to an understanding with [the U.S.], even if they worked with Al Qaeda in a tactical sense in the past—and I don't know that—they are willing to fight Al Qaeda now," says a Western diplomat in Baghdad who has close knowledge of the discussions. An assortment of some of Iraq's most prominent insurgent groups also recently formed a "council" whose purpose, in addition to publishing religious edicts and coordinating military actions, is to serve as a point of contact for the United States in the future. "The reason they want to unite is to have a public contact with the U.S. if they disagree," says the senior insurgent figure. "If negotiations between armed groups and Americans are not done, then no solutions will be found," says Issa al-Addai al-Mehamdi, a sheik from the prominent Duleimi tribe in Fallujah. "All I can say is that we support the idea of Americans talking with resistance groups."

They have much to discuss. For one, Americans and Iraqi insurgent groups share a common fear of undue Iranian influence in Iraq. "There is more concern about the domination by Iran of Iraq," says a senior Western diplomat, "and that combination of us being open to them and the dynamics of struggle for domination of violence has come together to get them to want to reach an understanding with us." Contacts between U.S. officials and insurgents have been criticized by Iraq's ruling Shiite leaders, many of whom have longstanding ties to Iran and are deeply resented by Sunnis. "We haven't given the green light to [talks] between the U.S. and insurgents," says Vice President Adel Abdel Mehdi, of the Shiite party, called the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq.

Negotiations are risky for everyone—not least because tensions between Al Qaeda and Iraq's so-called patriotic resistance is higher than ever. Two weeks ago, assassins killed Sheik Nassir Qarim al-Fahdawi, a prominent Anbar sheik described by other Sunnis as a chief negotiator for the insurgency. "He was killed for talking to the Americans," says Zedan al-Awad, another leading Anbar sheik. Al Qaeda, meanwhile, continues to gain territory in the Sunni heartland, according to al-Awad: "Let me tell you: Zarqawi is in total control of Anbar. The Americans control nothing." Many, on both sides, are hoping that talks could change that.

—Scott Johnson, Rod Nordland and and Ranya Kadri

A boy weeps during the funeral of Abdul Razak al-Na'as in Baghdad January 29, 2006. Gunmen shot dead Na'as, a prominent Iraqi academic and political analyst in his car in a Baghdad street on Saturday, police said. Gunmen blocked his car with their own and then opened fire, killing him instantly. REUTERS/Ali Jasim

Our Actions have Reactions

An Iraqi woman sits with her children as a U.S. Marine from the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit searches her home near the western Iraq town of Hit January 28, 2006. The Marines were patrolling the area in and around Hit in search of hidden weapons caches, improvised explosive devices (IED's) and insurgent activity. REUTERS/Bob Strong  

Documents show US military in Iraq detain wives

By Will Dunham

U.S. forces in Iraq, in two instances described in military documents, took custody of the wives of men believed to be insurgents in an apparent attempt to pressure the suspects into giving themselves up.

Both incidents occurred in 2004. In one, members of a shadowy military task force seized a mother who had three young children, still nursing the youngest, "in order to leverage" her husband's surrender, according to an account by a civilian Defense Intelligence Agency intelligence officer.

In the other, an e-mail exchange includes a U.S. military officer asking "have you tacked a note on the door and challenged him to come get his wife?"

The documents were among thousands obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union from the government under court order through the Freedom of Information Act.

"This is not an acceptable tactic," ACLU lawyer Amrit Singh said on Friday, referring to seizing a wife to try to catch a husband, "nor are any of the other abusive techniques acceptable. We know that abusive techniques were employed in a systemic manner across Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay."

Paul Boyce, an Army spokesman at the Pentagon, said: "It's very hard, obviously, from some of these documents to determine what, if anything, actually happened. ... When you see an individual e-mail note, it's oftentimes very confusing to figure out how that particular case fits into an overall, larger puzzle."

Boyce also said the military has thoroughly looked at "any allegation against soldiers of misconduct or abuse of detainees."

A June 10, 2004, memo written by the DIA employee, labeled as "secret," referred to "violations of the Geneva Convention" relating to detainee abuse and illegal detention of noncombatants.

'THREE YOUNG CHILDREN'

It described the actions of Task Force 6-26, which has been mentioned in other documents in connection with allegations of detainee abuse, and stated that on May 9, 2004, task force personnel detained the wife of "a suspected terrorist" in Tarmiya, Iraq.

"The 28-year-old woman had three young children at the house, one being as young as six months and still nursing. Her husband was the primary target of the raid, with other suspect personnel subject to detainment as well," the memo stated.

"During the pre-operational brief, it was recommended by TF (task force) personnel that if the wife were present, she be detained and held in order to leverage the primary target's surrender," the memo stated. Its author said that "I objected to the detainment of the young mother to the raid team leader" and "I believed it was a dead issue."

The memo stated that "I determined that the wife could provide no actionable intelligence leading to the arrest of her husband."

"Despite my protest, (the) raid team leader detained her anyway," stated the memo, whose author officially reported the incident within the chain of command. The memo said the wife was released two days later to the custody of a tribal sheik.

In the other case, a U.S. lieutenant colonel e-mailed, "What are you guys doing to try to get the husband -- have you tacked a note on the door and challenged him to come get his wife? ... or something more sophisticated, I suspect, from the 'not necessarily the cool guys, but the guys with the cool stuff?"'

A later e-mail stated, "These ladies fought back extremely hard during the original detention. They have shown indications of deceipt (sic) and misinformation."

Cindy Sheehan meets Chavez - using words to spread peace

 

U.S. anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan hugs a supporter before speaking about the U.S. war in Iraq at the 6th World Social Forum in Caracas, Venezuela, Saturday, Jan. 28, 2006. Sheehan, whose son was killed in Iraq, said she was considering running for office against Sen. Diane Feinstein while she waited for the California lawmaker to back a filibuster of Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito. (AP Photo/Leslie Mazoch)

   

 In this photo released by Venezuela's Miraflores Press, Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez greets U.S. peace activist Cindy Sheehan, whose son was killed in Iraq, at Miraflores presidential palace in Caracas, Venezuela, Saturday, Jan. 28, 2006. Sheehan, who is in Caracas attending the 6th World Social Forum, said Saturday she is strongly considering running for office against U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein because the California lawmaker will not support calls to immediately bring the troops home. (AP Photo/Miraflores, Francisco Batista, HO)  

 

In this photo released by Venezuela's Miraflores Press, Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez greets U.S. peace activist Cindy Sheehan, whose son was killed in Iraq, at Miraflores presidential palace in Caracas, Venezuela, Saturday, Jan. 28, 2006. Sheehan, who in Caracas attending the 6th World Social Forum, said Saturday she is strongly considering running for office against U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein because the California lawmaker will not support calls to immediately bring the troops home. (AP Photo/Miraflores,Francisco Batista)        

CANOE -- CNEWS - World: U.S. peace activist Cindy Sheehan meets Venezuela leader, ponders Senate run   U.S. peace activist Cindy Sheehan meets Venezuela leader, ponders Senate run

 

CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) - U.S. peace activist Cindy Sheehan, whose son was killed in Iraq, said Saturday she is strongly considering running for office against U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein because the California Democrat will not support calls to immediately bring troops home.

Sheehan, who was visiting Venezuela for the World Social Forum, along with other anti-war and anti-globalization activists, said she has been thinking of challenging Feinstein for some time.

"I think this is so urgent and necessary that this is what I haveto do," Sheehan said, adding she will make a final decision on whether to run after talking with her three adult children in California in the coming days.

Sheehan accused Feinstein of being out of touch with Californians on Iraq.

"She voted for the war. She continues to vote for the funding."

"She won't call for an immediate withdrawal of the troops," said Sheehan, who gained fame when she set up a protest camp near President George W. Bush's Texas ranch last year.

"I think our senator needs to be held accountable for her support of George Bush and his war policies," she added.

Feinstein's campaign manager, Kam Kuwata, denied that.

"She doesn't support George Bush and his war policies," Kuwata said by phone from California.

"She has stated publicly on numerous occasions that she felt she was misled by the administration at the time of the vote."

But with troops committed, Feinstein believes immediate withdrawal is not a responsible option, Kuwata said.

"Senator Feinstein's position is: 'Let's work toward quickly turning over the defence of Iraq to Iraqis, so that we can bring the troops home as soon as possible."'

Kuwata said Feinstein and Sheehan appear to have a fundamental disagreement over whether troops should be pulled out right now.

"That's why they have elections and if she decides to file (paperwork to run), so be it," he said.

Sheehan, whose son Casey was killed in Iraq in 2004, said running in the Democratic primary in June would help make a broader point.

"It would bring attention to all the peace candidates in the country," she said.

Sheehan, 48, earlier criticized the veteran senator for not immediately backing a filibuster of U.S. Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito.

Feinstein announced Friday she would support that filibuster, the same day Sheehan issued a statement saying she would run against the senator if she didn't take a harder line. Democrats fear Alito would shift the court rightward on issues including abortion and the death penalty.

Sheehan, who lives in Berkeley, Calif., said she would head to Washington on Sunday for protests against Bush's state of the union address and then return to California to discuss her idea of running against Feinstein with her son and two daughters.

"I can't see - if they think it's going to help peace - that they would be opposed to me doing it," she said.

Sheehan and other peace activists met for two hours Saturday with Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who is a fierce critic of Bush and the Iraq war. Sheehan said she was impressed by Chavez's sincerity.

"Our president won't even take five minutes to meet with me," she said, adding Chavez was "really excited" to hear she was considering running for the Senate.

"He said, why don't I run for president?...I just laughed."

******************************************************************

UPDATE: SUNDAY JAN. 29

Cindy Sheehan May Challenge Calif. Senator

By IAN JAMES
Associated Press Writer

January 29, 2006, 1:05 AM EST

CARACAS, Venezuela -- Cindy Sheehan, the peace activist who set up camp near President Bush's Texas ranch last summer, said Saturday she is considering running against Sen. Dianne Feinstein to protest what she called the California lawmaker's support for the war in Iraq.

"She voted for the war. She continues to vote for the funding. She won't call for an immediate withdrawal of the troops," Sheehan told The Associated Press in an interview while attending the World Social Forum in Venezuela along with thousands of other anti-war and anti-globalization activists.

"I think our senator needs to be held accountable for her support of George Bush and his war policies," said Sheehan, whose 24-year-old soldier son Casey was killed in Iraq in 2004.

Feinstein's campaign manager, Kam Kuwata, said the senator "doesn't support George Bush and his war policies."

"She has stated publicly on numerous occasions that she felt she was misled by the administration at the time of the vote," Kuwata said by phone from California.

But with troops committed, Feinstein believes immediate withdrawal is not a responsible option, Kuwata said.

"Senator Feinstein's position is, let's work toward quickly turning over the defense of Iraq to Iraqis so that we can bring the troops home as soon as possible," he said.

Sheehan accused Feinstein of being out of touch with Californians on the issue.

She said she would decide whether torun after talking with her three other adult children. The Democratic primary will be held in June, and candidates must submit their statements for the voter guide by Feb. 14.

Kuwata said Feinstein and Sheehan appear to have a fundamental disagreement over whether troops should be pulled out right now. "That's why they have elections, and if she decides to file (paperwork to run), so be it," he said.

Sheehan said running in the Democratic primary would help make a broader point.

"If I decided to run, I would have no illusions of winning, but it would bring attention to all the peace candidates in the country," she said.

Sheehan, 48, who lives in Berkeley, Calif., said she would head to Washington on Sunday for protests against Bush's State of the Union address on Tuesday, and then return to California to discuss her idea of running against Feinstein with her son and two daughters.

"I can't see -- if they think it's going to help peace -- that they would be opposed to me doing it," she said.

WE CAN STOP ALITO THIS WEEKEND

U.S. Senator John Kerry (D-MA) (L) responds to reporter's questions as he leaves Capitol Hill in Washington January 27, 2006. Kerry publicly pushed for a filibuster to stop the confirmation of Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito but Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid said on Friday that he and fellow Democrats lack the votes. REUTERS/Jim Young

 

 

WE CAN STOP ALITO THIS WEEKEND

http://www.democrats.com/we-can-stop-alito

The last two days have been amazing.

Early Thursday afternoon, we broke the news that Senator John Kerry would lead a filibuster against Judge Sam Alito if he could get 41 Senators to sustain the filibuster. Three hours later, CNN confirmed our story.

Naturally, the White House freaked out and told Senator Bill Frist to schedule a cloture vote as quickly as possible - Monday at 4:30 p.m. - to prevent Democrats from uniting behind Kerry.

Then the White House called its media whores at the NY Times (David Kirkpatrick), AP (Jesse Holland), Pentagon Post (Charles Babington), CNN (Miles O'Brien), and MSNBC (Chris Matthews) and told them to trash John Kerry for daring to challenge the will of Emperor Bush, and to repeat over and over that Democrats did not have enough votes to stop Alito.

But even as Karl Rove was doing his dirty work, progressive activists like you were calling your Senators urging them to support John Kerry's filibuster.

And one by one, Democratic Senators began to turn around.

http://democrats.com/alito-48

At the start of the day, only Dick Durbin and Debbie Stabenow supported Kerry and Kennedy. Just before noon, Hillary Clinton's office called to say she supported us. Then Harry Reid came on board, along with Barbara Boxer, Russ Feingold, Ron Wyden, Chris Dodd, and (I think) Chuck Schumer.

Most importantly, we even picked up Dianne Feinstein, who just yesterday said she opposed a filibuster.

That's 12 votes for a filibuster - and exactly 12 more votes than we had two days ago!

I believe we really can stop Alito by Monday at 4:30 p.m. - but here's what we must do.

1. Ignore the media whores. Karl Rove is feeding them lies as he always does, and they are swallowing those lies as they always do. The only media that matters is the media we are creating right here by calling each Senator and getting a YES or NO statement from them.

2. Keep calling the Senators who are undecided or opposed to a filibuster. You can call their DC office all weekend and leave polite but firm voicemails urging the Senators to support Kerry's filibuster. When offices open on Monday 9 a.m. ET, make another round of calls. Let's shut down the Capitol switchboard on Monday!

http://democrats.com/alito-48

3. Call the DNC (202-863-8000) and the DSCC (202-224-2447) and tell them your 2006 contributions will depend on the success of the Alito filibuster. Tell them they need to get every Democratic Senator on board.

4. Wake up the sleeping bloggers. Where are the biggest blogs, including DailyKos.com, TalkingPointsMemo.com, CrooksandLiars.com, and AmericaBlog.com? (Complaining about how Democrats played last week won't cut it -we're in the Super Bowl and we can win this damn game if we get Democrats to play their best game on Monday - and hopefully the rest of this coming week.) Thanks to Agonist, BobGeiger, BradBlog, BuzzFlash, CultureKitchen, The Democratic Daily, DemocraticUnderground, Eschaton, Firedoglake, Mahablog, MakeThemAccountable, Mark Crispin Miller, NewsDissector, PoliticalWire, RudePundit, Vichy Democrats and everyone else who's plugging this.

5. Lend a hand to real-world groups like NOW, People for the American Way, Feminist Majority, Backbone Campaign, Moveon, Planned Parenthood, Progressive Democrats of America, and Working Assets Long Distance, which have worked tirelessly for two months to Stop Alito.

6. Call talk shows like Air America, C-SPAN, etc. and talk about what we're doing on this blog and how we're killing ourselves to stop Alito - and how we can win if everyone who cares about the future of our Democracy joins us.

7. Keep hope alive - because American Democracy is worth it!!!

http://democrats.com/alito-48

Bob Fertik

____________________

UPCOMING EVENTS TO END THE WAR AND HOLD WARMAKERS ACCOUNTABLE

The following events can also be found in the After Downing Street events system at http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/event

Panel Discussion of Immediate Withdrawal from Iraq
Featuring: Scott Ritter, Stephen Zunes, Ann Wright, Michael Schwartz, David Swanson, Harlan Hopgood, Steve Young, and Lisa Lubow.
Saturday, January 28, 7:30 p.m.
Grand Ballroom - Manhattan Beach Marriott, 1400 Parkview Avenue, Manhattan Beach, Calif.
Progressive Caucus of the California Democratic Party and US Tour of Duty
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/6939

"Out of Iraq" Forum
Featuring: David Swanson, Ann Wright, Jane Bright, Sean Huze, Marcy Winograd
Sunday, January 29, 2 p.m. – 5 p.m.
The Paul Kopeikin Gallery, 6150 Wilshire Blvd., Los Angeles, Calif.
Progressive Democrats of America, After Downing Street, & Clothing of the American Mind
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/6947

Bush-Cheney Impeachment Forum
Featuring: Kevin Zeese, Cindy Sheehan, Ann Wright, David Swanson, Ramsey Clark, Marcus Raskin, and Ralph Nader.
Monday, January 30, noon to 2 p.m.
Bus Boys and Poets, 14th and V Streets, NW, Washington, DC
Democracy Rising, After Downing Street/Censure Bush, Backbone Campaign, Democrats.com, ImpeachPAC, Montgomery County Progressive Alliance, and Progressive Democrats of America.
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/6900

Cindy Sheehan to Read from Her New Book
Monday, January 30, 7 p.m.
All Souls Unitarian Church, 1500 Harvard St. NW, Washington, DC
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/6904

Dick Cheney Birthday Bash
Monday, January 30, 5:30 - 7:30 p.m.
Duggan's Pub, 440 S. 11th Street, Lincoln, Neb.
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/6678

Alternative State of the Union
Featuring: Members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, Katrina vanden Heuvel, John Cavanagh
Tuesday, January 31, 9:00 – 9:40 a.m. news conference followed by two panel discussions of 45-50 min.
Democratic National Headquarters, The Wasserman Conference Room, 430 South Capitol Street, SE, Washington, DC
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/6916

Related Nation Editorial:
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060206/editors

"Out of Iraq" by Lynn Woolsey and Barbara Lee
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060206/woolsey

"A Unified Security Budget" by John Conyers
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060206/conyers

The People's State of the Union Press Event
January 31, 3-5 p.m.
Mott House, 122 Maryland Ave NE, Washington, DC
John Conyers, Lynn Woolsey, Maxine Waters, Cindy Sheehan, Ann Wright, Malik Rahim, Ann Wright, John Cavanagh
www.codepinkalert.org

Bring the Noise and Drown Out Bush’s Lies
Tuesday, January 31, 8 p.m.
In large cities and town squares across the country — we will rally one hour before Bush’s address. At 9:00 PM let the world hear us as we symbolically drown out Bush’s lies—bring your own noise—drums, pots and pans, musical instruments — your voice. Let taxi horns blare and church bells ring, as we bring our own state of the union message: BUSH STEP DOWN!
In DC? Join us at the Capitol Reflecting Pool!
www.worldcantwait.org

The People's State of the Union
Instead of sitting at home alone shouting at your TV in anger and frustration, take the People's State of the Union to the public. Gather with other CODEPINK women at a friendly bar or restaurant to watch the President's speech and make a night of it.
In DC? Join us at Bus Boys and Poets restaurant at V and 14th Streets, NW, for a Sorry State of the Union. Play "Liars Bingo", drink "pink elephants" Live simulcast with Verna Avery Brown, Pacifica radio DC Bureau Chief.
http://www.codepinkalert.org/article.php?list=type&type=106

Iraq's Oil and Port Workers and their Unions: Photographs by David Bacon
January 31 - February 28
Opening Reception: January 31, 7:30 p.m.
United Steel Workers Local 675, 1200 E. 220th St., Carson, Calif.
March 1 - March 31
International Longshore and Warehouse Union Local 63, 350 W. 5th Street, San Pedro, Calif.
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/6948

Bush Crimes Commission to Present Findings
Feb. 2, 12 Noon
National Press Club, Washington, DC
CONTACT: 212-941-8086
EMAIL: commission@nion.us
www.bushcommission.org

Take Our Demand to the White House
This regime is immoral, dangerous, and criminally indictable.
Bush Lied. Bush Spied. Bush Step Down.
2006. 2008. Too late. Turn your outrage into mass political action.
Saturday, February 4, 11 a.m.
17th & Constitution, Washington, DC
http://www.worldcantwait.org 

SIGNS FOR ANY OCCASION:
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/6792

Run Cindy Run

   

 Crosswalk.com - Sheehan to Feinstein: Filibuster Alito, Or I'll Run Against You

Sheehan to Feinstein: Filibuster Alito, Or I'll Run Against You
Melanie Hunter
Senior Editor

(CNSNews.com) - Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan has threatened to run for Sen. Dianne Feinstein's (D-Calif.) seat unless Feinstein filibusters Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito.

Sheehan, who was in Caracas, Venezuela Friday attending the World Social Forum, heard that several Democrats planned to filibuster Alito but that Feinstein, who is up for re-election in November, announced that she will vote against Alito but would not filibuster the nomination.

"I'm appalled that Diane Feinstein wouldn't recognize how dangerous Alito's nomination is to upholding the values of our constitution and restricting the usurpation of presidential powers, for which I've already paid the ultimate price," Sheehan said in a statement.


Sheehan became a national figure representing the anti-war movement after her son Casey was killed in Iraq and she stood vigil outside President Bush's Crawford, Texas ranch last summer demanding to speak face-to-face with Bush about her son's death.

Sheehan claimed Alito has "an extensive paper trail documenting the right-wing political agenda that he has actively advanced, not only as a high-ranking official in the Reagan Administration, but also as a judge."

She accused Alito of trying to restrict Congress' power and supporting "efforts to curtail privacy rights, including not only privacy from government surveillance and arbitrary arrest, but also other constitutional rights based on privacy, such as reproductive liberty for women."

Sheehan is scheduled to return from Venezuela on Monday and will travel to the nation's capital to take part in an alternative State of the Union event.

 

NBC11.com - News - Cindy Sheehan Threatens To Run Against Feinstein  

Cindy Sheehan Threatens To Run Against Feinstein Sheehan Says She'll Run Unless Feinstein Filibusters Alito Nomination

CARACAS, Venezuela -- According to a press release issued Friday, Cindy Sheehan has decided to run against California Senator Diane Feinstein if Feinstein does not filibuster the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Samuel Alito.

Sheehan made that announcement from Venezuela where she is attending the World Social Forum.

Sheehan's son Casey died in Iraq in 2004 and she has since become an outspoken protester of the war.

Sheehan is quoted to have said, "I'm appalled that Diane Feinstein wouldn't recognize how dangerous Alito's nomination is to upholding the values of our constitution. and restricting the usurpation of presidential powers, for which I've already paid the ultimate price."

Sheehan became well known across the United States when she stood vigil outside President Bush's ranch in Crawford last summer. She demanded to speak with the president about the cost of the war in Iraq.

Sheehan returns to the United States on Monday. She will travel to Washington, DC on Tuesday to participate in an alternative State of the Union event.

   

American anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan, left, greets the crowd while Juana Ferrer, second right, from Dominican Republic and Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, right, look on during the 6th World Social Forum in Caracas, Venezuela, Friday, Jan. 27, 2006. Man, second left is unidentified. (AP Photo/Fernando Llano)

      U.S. activist Cindy Sheehan waves to the crowd as she arrives at the meetingof World Social Forum Organizations with Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez in Caracas, Venezuela January 27, 2006. The sixth world forum, an event that began in Port Alegre in Brazil, has registered more than 67,000 participants and starts with a march against imperialism and war that will likely focus on U.S. President George W. Bush and the conflict in Iraq. REUTERS/Howard Yanes       U.S. peace activist Cindy Sheehan (L) stands next to Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez during a meeting with World Social Forum Organizations in Caracas, Venezuela January 27, 2006. The sixth world forum, an event that began in Port Alegre in Brazil, has registered more than 67,000 participants and starts with a march against imperialism and war that will likely focus on U.S. President George W. Bush and the conflict in Iraq. REUTERS/Howard Yanes

 

Chávez hosts ideological antidote to Davos forum
By Andy Webb-Vidal in Caracas
Published: January 27 2006 23:01 | Last updated: January 27 2006 23:01

The annual ideological antidote to the World Economic Forum was winding up in Caracas on Friday under the shadow of host President Hugo Chávez.

About 70,000 people from across the Americas, Europe and Asia attended this year’s World Social Forum, to debate international politics, trade and indigenous rights.

The delegations made a stark contrast to pictures of world leaders in Davos: among their number were dreadlock-bearded travellers juggling atop unicycles, ageing leftwing activists, indigenous folk sporting Andean ponchos and guitar-strumming women in pony-tails from upstate Oregon.

While some 2,000 events were planned for debate, there was near universal criticism of the US military presence in Iraq.

Cindy Sheehan, 48, the American woman who was stirred into campaigning against the war inIraq by her soldier son’s death in 2004, stole most of the limelight.

‘’Most Americans want our troops home by the end of 2006. But that’s far too late. Every minute that we wait, more blood is spilled,’’ she said. ‘’George Bush still continues his evil rhetoric that he is waging a war on terrorism, and he is really waging a war of terrorism against the world.’’

Mrs Sheehan’s rhetoric chimed perfectly with that of Mr Chávez, who was expected to address the forum late on Friday. This year’s forum, unlike last year’s in Brazil, where the first was also held in 2001, has failed to attract any visiting heads of state. Brazil’s president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, was expected to attend, but cancelled.

Roger Annis, 53, an aircraft engineer from Vancouver, who represents the Canada-Haiti action network, was happy enough to see some of the city’s sprawling, and spreading, slums, rather than Mr Chávez in person.

‘’What we see in Venezuela is very encouraging,’’ said Mr Annis. “It’s a government that not only in words but also in deeds is committed to improving the lot of the poorest people.’’

YES! Kerry filibuster Alito! YES! Kennedy TOO!

  Daily Kos: Filibuster Alito Filibuster Alito by John Kerry Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 05:28:43 PM PDT

Do I support a filibuster? The answer is yes.  

Yesterday Senator Kennedy and I spoke with our colleagues about it. I don't have a shred of doubt in my opposition to Sam Alto's nomination. I know Senator Kennedy does not either. He has truly been a great leader in the effort to oppose Judge Alito.  

I spent a lot of time over the last years thinking about the Supreme Court and who America needs on the highest court in the land. So I don't hesitate a minute in saying that Sam Alito is not that person. His entire legal career shows that, if confirmed, he will take America backwards. People can say all they want that "elections have consequences." Trust me, more than anyone I understand that. But that seems like an awfully convoluted rationale for me to stay silent about Judge Alito's nomination.

• John Kerry's diary :: ::

I voted against Justice Roberts, I feel even more strongly about Judge Alito. Why? Rather than live up to the promise of "equal justice under the law," he's consistently made it harder for the most disadvantaged Americans to have their day in court. He routinely defers to excessive government power regardless of how extreme or egregious the government's actions are. And, to this date, his only statement on record regarding a woman's right to privacy is that she doesn't have one.  

I said yesterday that President Bush had the opportunity to nominate someone who would unite the country in a time of extreme division. He chose not to do this, and that is his right.  But we have every right, in fact, we have a responsibility, to fight against a radical ideological shift on the Supreme Court. Just think about how this nomination came to be. Under fire from his conservative base for nominating Harriet Miers--a woman whose judicial philosophy they mercilessly attacked--President Bush broke to extreme right-wing demands.  

This was a coup.  

Miers was removed and Alito was installed to replace the swing vote on the Court. The President gave no thought to what the American people really wanted--or needed. So it's up to us to think about what America really needs - that's part of the true meaning of "advice and consent."  

Here's the bottom line though and I'll just be blunt and direct about it. It takes more than one or two people to filibuster. It's not "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington." I'm doing what I can, Senator Kennedy is doing what he can, but if, like me, you want to stop Judge Alito from becoming Justice Alito, we can't just preach to our own choir. We need even more of your advocacy.

Kerry and Kennedy Are Filibustering Alito! Vote is Monday! Call and Email Senators All Day Friday!!

Updates here.

Call Senators Immediately! See below.

Email here and here.

Call the Senators listed below, as well as your own, and tell them:
* a "No" vote is meaningless without a filibuster
* it is cowardly to only fight a fight when assured victory
* the American people need to see the Senate standing up for separation of powers and against the "Unitary Executive"

Use these toll free numbers to call the Capitol: 888-355-3588 or 888-818-6641.
If you can't get through, look up the Senator's District Office number in your phone book or here: http://www.congress.org/congressorg/directory/congdir.tt?command=congdir

First: Call the three Democrats (MaryLandrieu, Ken Salazar, and Dianne Feinstein) who oppose Alito but also said they oppose a filibuster. We must persuade them that a vote against Alito is meaningless if they don't support a filibuster.
Senator Salazar (D-CO) 202-224-5852
Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) 202-224-5824
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) 202-224-3841

Second: Call your own Democratic Senator: 888-355-3588 or 888-818-6641.
If you can't get through, look up the Senator's District Office number in your phone book or here:
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/directory/congdir.tt?command=congdir

Third: Unbelievably, three Democrats (Ben Nelson, Tim Johnson and Robert Byrd) support Alito! Tell them to either support filibuster or at least "don't get in the way."
Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) 202-224-6551
Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) 202-224-3954
Sen. Tim Johnson (D-SD) 202-224-5842

888-355-3588 or 888-818-6641. If you can't get through, look up the Senator's District Office number in your phone book or here:
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/directory/congdir.tt?command=congdir

Fourth: Call the "Red State" Democrats:
(Message same as above -- "No" is meaningless)
Tom Carper (DE)
Kent Conrad (ND)
Byron Dorgan (ND)
Blanche Lincoln (AR)
Mark Pryor (AR)

Fifth: Call these "Blue State" and pro-choice Republicans:
(Message: A "Unitary Executive" is dangerous to balance of powers--please do not get in the way of a filibuster.)
Lincoln Chafee (RI)
Susan Collins (ME)
Lisa Murkowsky (AK)
Bob Smith (OR)
Olympia Snowe (ME)
Ted Stevens (AK)

For extra credit, call all of the 2008 Presidential candidates who are sitting Senators--Evan Bayh, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Russ Feingold, and John Kerry--and tell them to either LEAD THE FILIBUSTER or KISS YOUR SUPPORT GOODBYE. 888-355-3588 or 888-818-6641.
If you can't get through, look up the Senator's District Office number in your phone book or here:
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/directory/congdir.tt?command=congdir

You can also send that message to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (202-224-2447) and the Democratic National Committee (202-863-8000).

Share what you learn with Democrats.com members here:
http://www.democrats.com/alito-8