Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Do Not Go Gentle into That Good Night: The Tragic Death of Brian Arredondo


Guest Blog

Do Not Go Gentle into That Good Night: The Tragic Death of Brian Arredondo

Linda Pershing, with Lara Bell

Brian with Fr. Carlos at memorial for
Ales, shortly before Brian's death


Brian Arredondo never really recovered from his brother’s death in the Iraq War. When they were kids, Brian adored his older brother Alexander and tagged along with him whenever he could. They were often seen playing together in parks and schoolyards in communities surrounding Boston, Massachusetts, and Bangor, Maine, where they grew up. As teens the two boys were perfect targets for military recruiters: first-generation Americans on their father’s side (he emigrated from Costa Rica), working-class youth (Alex attended a technical high school where much of the curriculum focuses on job training), living with their mother after their parents divorced when they were young. Promises of career training, male camaraderie and “becoming a man,” appeals to patriotism, a $10,000 signing bonus, and funding for college enticed Alex Arredondo to join the marines, just a month before September 11, 2011.

Brian was distraught and seemed to lose his focus and motivation when Alex enlisted. Shortly thereafter, he dropped out of high school at the beginning of tenth grade. On August 25, 2004, a sniper’s bullet to the head killed Alex during his second deployment to Iraq. Brian’s world fell apart. On the day Alex was killed, military officials came to his mother’s house in Bangor to notify the family. Brian, 17 years old at the time, was home alone. He guessed why they were there, but they wouldn’t tell him the news until his mother, Victoria Foley, arrived. As they waited around the corner in the government van, Brian got an emotional call from his father, Carlos Arredondo, who was living in Florida at the time and had also just been notified about Alex’s death. Brian became desperate, punching holes in the walls as he paced the floor, waiting for his mother to get home. After she arrived, Brian tried to call his father to talk with him again. His distraught stepmother, Mélida Arredondo, answered the phone and told Brian to turn on the television: news coverage of a burning van outside his father’s home. Reporters announced that Carlos Arredondo had set fire to the van and been caught in the blaze. In disbelief Brian saw his father on fire, rolling on the ground, trying to extinguish the flames. Carlos lay unconscious in a hospital intensive care, burn unit for two days and nearly died from the incident. Nine days later, accompanied by two medics, he attended Alex’s wake, funeral mass, and burial on a stretcher, wrapped in bandages and with a morphine drip to numb the pain. The story made international news.

Arredondo Brothers by Gina Johnson
Eventually, the war in Iraq took the lives of both brothers. Flash forward seven years to December 19, 2011, when Brian’s mother and her partner found Brian hanging from the rafters of a shed in the backyard, where he had been living. No longer able to quell his despair, Brian killed himself at the age of 24. Near his body all he left was a copy of an email instant conversation between his stepmother Mélida Arredondo and a marine in Alex’s unit, who had been at his side when Alex died. Brian committed suicide the day after U.S. troops were “officially” withdrawn from Iraq.[1] Perhaps he couldn’t face the fact that, unlike other soldiers, his brother would not be coming home.

The gross inequality between the rich and the poor in our country define this story. Try to imagine an alternate reality: what if Jenna Bush, the daughter of George W. and Laura Bush, enlisted in the marines and were killed by a sniper’s bullet in Iraq?  Imagine her twin sister Barbara struggling with debilitating depression and taking her own life seven years later. Would Bush and his cronies have been so willing to invade Iraq and launch a war if their own kids were going to pay the price? It’s unthinkable, of course, because the Bush twins had so many other options: Barbara attended Yale, and Jenna was offered a job as a correspondent on “The Today Show” after she graduated from college. Military recruiters target rural and lower income youth and first-generation Americans who have more restricted access to college and careers.

When soldiers die in battle, we tend to focus on the grief of parents and spouses. Siblings often fall through the cracks. Looking back at the years since Alex’s death, Mélida Arredondo commented that Brian’s life had been a “downward spiral” of anguish, depression, and self-destruction. Family members repeatedly reached out to Brian and tried to get him professional help for his depression, drug use, and trouble with the law. He accepted his family’s legal, monetary, and employment assistance but declined counseling. Instead, Brian put on a good front, smiling broadly and assuring the family that he was doing fine, or that he had made a new start and would do better in the future.

In retrospect, it’s clear that Brian was in distress. After Alex’s deployment to Iraq and subsequent death, Brian started self-medicating with drugs, which he often hid from his family. With time, his drug usage became more serious. He pleaded with parents and friends to loan him money, which they later learned he used to support his drug habit. He began using marijuana, and then cocaine. After one violent confrontation with the police, Brian was admitted to Bridgewater State Hospital for psychiatric evaluation in April 2011. The clinical evaluation report noted that Brian admitted to using Percocet and heroin at least once a day; hospital intake workers discovered injection track marks all over his arms.

After he was arrested for having an open alcohol container in his car, reckless driving, and several accidents, the state of Maine took away Brian’s driver’s license. He became dependent on parents and friends to transport him, which made working a job very difficult. On occasion he worked with his father and was employed at a pizza restaurant and as a janitor, but he never worked for more than a few months at a time. For most of the past seven years he was unemployed, which only exacerbated his feelings of helplessness and dependence on others.

This wasn’t the first time Brian tried to kill himself. While military officials were at his mother’s home, informing her about Alex’s death, Brian slipped away and ran into the street, looking for oncoming traffic. Later he told his parents that he wanted to be hit by a car. Still reeling from Alex’s death, in 2006 he tried to hang himself with an electric cord but failed when the cord broke. And in 2011, when police tried to arrest Brian on outstanding warrants, breaking in to the backyard shed while he was sleeping, he raised a machete and dared them to them to shoot him.

His troubled relationships with young women and problems with anger management signaled another facet of his distress. Almost immediately after his brother’s death, Brian became involved with a young woman—perhaps to replace his close relationship with his brother. Her father didn’t approve, had a violent confrontation with Brian, and got a restraining order to prevent him from coming to their home. Their relationship was rocky and punctuated by abusive and destructive behavior. A second young woman also pursued Brian. There was jealousy and abuse on all sides. There were multiple incidents involving interpersonal violence and destruction of property. Girlfriends and parents called the police, who arrested Brian several times. By 2011, Brian faced a number of misdemeanor and felony charges, which had escalated in the past several years. He was scheduled to go to court on December 21, 2011, two days after he died. His mother recalled that Brian told her that he expected to be sentenced to a minimum of two years in prison, which probably wasn’t a realistic assessment. Francis J. DiMento, Jr., his attorney, told us in an interview that he thought it unlikely that Brian would do jail time for these offences (Interview, June 7, 2012).

In response to Alex’s death, Mélida and Carlos Arredondo began to speak out about their experiences. They became peace activists and advocates for support services for military personnel and their families. Carlos creates memorials designed to raise awareness about the significance of Alex’s life and sacrifice, using his military boots and uniform, medals, large photos of Alex and Brian, and numerous other mementos with personal meaning.[2] Sometimes he also displays a full-size coffin, calling on viewers to visualize the real cost of war in terms of individual human lives. Mélida and Carlos are well known for their activism in the Boston area, where they have lived for many years. They make it a point to meet with public officials at community events, sharing with them the stories of their sons’ deaths and advocating for support services for military personnel and their families. In retrospect, since Brian’s death they have worried that they didn’t pay enough attention to him, wrapped up, instead, in their grieving for Alex and their dedication to activism. His mother, Victoria Foley, sorrowfully recounted that he seemed depressed and remote in the days before his suicide, and her attempts to get Brian into counseling were unsuccessful. The boys’ deaths have taken an enormous toll on their families. The loss has redefined their lives forever, leaving them to deal with the deep despair of losing two children to the Iraq War.

This tragic series of events is a brutal reminder of the devastation that war brings: two young sons dead, with parents and family members left to wade through the unbearable grief, self-blame, devastated lives, and the narrative of youth dashed to pieces by death and sorrow. Brian never really accepted his brother’s enlistment in the military or his death in Iraq. In response, his life became a succession of dangerous actions and disastrous decisions, sending him down a path to self-destruction. It’s certainly possible to interpret Brian’s suicide as an expression of hopelessness. It’s also possible to consider that Brian ended his life as an act of resistance, reminiscent of Dylan Thomas’ epic admonition to “rage, rage against the dying of the light.” 

Perhaps—compounded by substance abuse, problems with interpersonal relationships, dropping out of school, and troubles with the law—it was a refusal or inability to accept that the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq made sense. Many Americans willingly accepted, or remained silent, when Bush and his advisors launched these foolish wars, and as Obama continues them, increasing drone strikes in the region and ramping up U.S. involvement in Afghanistan while withdrawing troops from Iraq. Many stood on the sidelines watching as other people’s sons and daughters—usually the poorest and those with the fewest options—were swept up in the patriotic fervor, recruited by the military, and sent off to fight. Now we pay the price of public apathy and complicity. The deaths of Brian and Alexander Arredondo diminish us all.


[1] See reports that the U.S. is planning to “replace its direct occupation both with an army of State Department contractors inside Iraq and a massive deployment of combat troops in Kuwait” (Ditz, Jason. “US Abandons Largest Iraq Base: 20 Left.” Antiwar.com. Retrieved June 16, 2012, http://news.antiwar.com/2011/11/07/us-abandons-largest-iraq-base-20-left/). Journalist Tom Bowman reported that the U.S. continues to supply 15,000 diplomats to Iraq, “making it the largest U.S. diplomatic operation abroad. Those diplomats will be protected by a private army consisting of as many as 5,000 security contractors who will carry assault weapons and fly armed helicopters” (Bowman, Tom. “No U.S. Troops, But An Army Of Contractors In Iraq.” NPR. Retrieved June 16, 2011,

http://www.npr.org/2011/12/27/144198497/no-u-s-troops-but-an-army-of-contractors-in-iraq). In October 2011 White House aides told reporters that
4,000-5,000 defense contractors will remain in Iraq, and that “a few US military personnel will be based in Iraq temporarily from time to time, just as they are in
other countries with links to the US such as Egypt and Jordan, White House aides said. These would primarily be trainers helping out with new equipment bought from the US, such as F-16 fighters Iraq purchased last month” (MacAskill, Ewen. “Iraq Rejects US Request to Maintain Bases After Troop Withdrawal.” The Guardian. Retrieved June 16, 2012, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/21/iraq-rejects-us-plea-bases).

[1] See Pershing, Linda, with Nishelle Y. Bellinger. “From Sorrow to Activism: A Father’s Memorial to His Son Alexander Arredondo, Killed in the U.S. Occupation of Iraq.” Journal of American Folklore 123(488):179–217.


Linda Pershing, Professor, Department of Women’s Studies, California State University San Marcos, Lpershing@csusm.edu


BECOME A SOAPBOX SUPERSTAR





Cindy Sheehan's Soapbox relies on the kindness of its friends and supporters to stay on the air and in the streets.


CLICK HERE TO SEE A LIST OF MONTHLY SUPPORTERS AND ADD YOUR NAME TO THE LIST! 










IF YOU DON'T LIKE TO USE CREDIT (YEA) OR
PAYPAL, CHECKS/MONEY ORDERS CAN BE
SENT TO:

CINDY SHEEHAN'S SOAPBOX, LLC
PO BOX 6264
VACAVILLE, CA 95696



Tuesday, June 26, 2012

Jimmy Carter’s Penance?

By Missy Beattie

In a New York Times (NYT) opinion piece, Jimmy Carter opens with: “The United States is abandoning its role as the global champion of human rights.”

I read these words and focus on the present tense of “is”. And I think: When was this country ever anything but an imperialist nation? When was the US anything but an enemy of human rights? And I think about the blood on the hands of Jimmy Carter whose presidency was a devastating illustration of inhumanity.

Here’s a significant example: It was Jimmy Carter and his National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski who were responsible for the rise of the Taliban and arming and training the mujahideen. Brzezinski wrote the ending of Carter’s State of the Union Address, delivered on January 23, 1980:
An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force.
Afghanistan, in the late 1970s, was a secular country, providing free education to men and women. And it was allied with the Soviet Union. When the US recruited Islamic fundamentalists to come to Afghanistan for CIA training, the Soviets were drawn into war.

The Reagan Administration continued its predecessor’s aggression in Afghanistan.

Carter’s legacy includes not only Osama bin Laden and the mujahideen, but, also, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Khmer Rouge, and the Shah of Iran.

Later, after leaving office, Carter, assumed the role of “impartial” election monitor. He traveled to Haiti after arranging a meeting with Bertrand Aristide who was running for president of the country and demanded that Aristide withdraw. Aristide’s offense: He was supported by an overwhelming majority of Haitians and wasn’t a puppet of the US government. Refusing, Aristide went on to win the election but, later, was ousted in a coup supported by the US. Carter’s original choice, Marc Bazin, backed by the US, was appointed Prime Minister. Carter defended General Raoul Cedras, a member of the governing junta responsible for the murder of thousands of Haitians who supported Aristides, saying, “I believe he [Cedras] would be a worthy Sunday school teacher.”

In 2006, Simon and Schuster published Carter’s book, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, in which the recipient of the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize states, “Israel's continued control and colonization of Palestinian land have been the primary obstacles to a comprehensive peace agreement in the Holy Land."

I’ve wondered, often, if this, along with the former president’s work with Habitat for Humanity, is his attempt at redemption.

Carter closes his NYT piece with this call to action:
As concerned citizens, we must persuade Washington to reverse course and regain moral leadership according to international human rights norms that we had officially adopted as our own and cherished throughout the years.
It’s impossible, though, for “concerned citizens” to make our voices heard in a “Washington” that listens and is lulled only to and by Wall Street greed. Certainly, Carter knows this.

Freedom of Choice

No comment....


Monday, June 25, 2012

Tangled, Weakening Webs: Paraguay, Syria and the Last Ditch Efforts of a Crumbling Elite Class

I'm not going to say I know a lot about South American politics. I do know more than most people in the United States do, which is to say "nothing". So, even knowing next to nothing I am seeing a bigger pattern here, one of panic, one of over-extending themselves everywhere while trying to retain of a World increasingly set against the Powers That Be in the US.

I know this is hard for the average North American to think about. In our minds, before the Western colonization there was nothing here. Ok, a few Pocahontases and some really weird people who made pyramids and cut people's heads off. Then after we got here, anything South of our border reads like this to Joe Six pack: "All them Mexican countries... lessee, drug lords, poor people trying to steal our jobs, then further down, all there is is jungles and a few resorts." If you press them a little, they might remember that "One of those countries has some oil, got too big for their britches and some of them are downright pinko, like that Castro." They have no idea about any of our interventionism in South America and the Caribbean. To them, it is a no-mans land, other than a place to go on vacation in some enclave of whiteness and drink too much rum. A place that must not be able to run themselves, they have so many regime changes... never once thinking that those changes are due to a constant battle between US interests and the people trying to be autonomous and free of our tyranny.

Chances are, none see our hand in the Coup d'etat in Paraguay.

Photobucket


A primer:

I've written much about it, how Clueless of the Caribbean we are when it comes to places like Haiti and Puerto Rico struggling to be free of us I wrote last June. Has awareness improved?

Cuba, Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua and Venezuela have just submitted to the UN for the 13th time a request that Puerto Rico be free and independent.

Meanwhile, the ACLU is reporting the US-backed Police in Puerto Rico documented cases of "excessive force, sometimes deadly, to suppress speech, subdue protesters, and target ethnic and racial minorities" against those who want Independence.

What follows is formulaic US puppets' accusations of it being "about" drugs, and asking for our intervention. This, in turn, overshadows the fact that we recently overturned PR delegates the right to vote in committee.

So much for representation, eh? See the full chart in my "clueless" post for more detail on places like American Samoa, Guam, Virgin Islands, Gitmo and others. Its hard to get to express the depth of our control without giving at least a brief history lesson.

Here's a news flash! THE USA DID 9/11 BEYOND ANY REASONABLE DOUBT. The first one, I mean.

...the torture and murder of thousands upon thousands of Chileans were "disappeared" or outright assassinated by the brutal killer Pinochet in 1973? More than 130,000 citizens were imprisoned in the following years for daring to want the right to self-determination.

This was another CIA backed attempt to stop the People-based government of Allende, a leftist and replace him with a brutal dictator from the furthest reaches of the neo-con right. President Salvador Allende was murdered in the coup, though there are claims he committed suicide.

Right now, there are student protests happening in Chile in opposition to the Chilean government's trying to privatize education; the student march to stand for it being a social right. They feel it should not be a profiteering enterprise. This is HUGE, yet nary a word about the "Springs" happening on our own continent makes our press.


You weren't supposed to notice the Honduran Coup June of 2009.

You aren't likely to even have heard of the attempted coup in Ecuador after they cut themselves out of the IMF.

You have no idea in this time of economic hardship, that we are throwing 20 MILLION at overthrowing Chavez in their election. Your tax dollars tamper with elections in a sovereign nation, while you cannot get health care. Nice, eh?

We, here are painfully unaware of the perpetual war on ALBA Nations waged perpetually by the US/Western money interests.

The Contras being backed by our drug/arms sales to overthrow the People's movement is the closest we get to having a clue about our thousands of interventions in South America.

http://www.yachana.org/teaching//resources/interventions.html

Photobucket


Paraguay:

So, the latest Western intervention, coup d'etat just happened in Paraguay. Fernando Lugo, former Catholic Bishop was a leftist struggling to help the poor and return some of the stolen by the rich lands to the people. Reactions have been almost unanimous in denunciation of this act, but other than Venezuela fairly toothless.

We have been intervening in Paraguay for years, propping up the rightist Laino in the early 80's. This is no different. We could not let a leftist stand, and surely had a hand in the parliamentary trickery that ousted a legally and democratically elected even "kind of" leftist remain in power.

Even Uruguay voted to not let the new President attend a MERCOSUR summit! Only Costa Rica and Uruguay have been traditionally the "whitest" and most western-friendly of nations, have remained relatively untouched by our CIA. Lets face it, they were friendly enough to our interests to not have needed to. Yet Costa Rica, long holding a face-value "nuetral" status has since 2010 allowed US troops on their soil under the ever-hand "drug danger" allegation that nearly always is the smoke screen for pushing back on any leftist movement. If the people want power, if the people want to thrive from their own resources, rather than allow a few rich Norte Americanos to profit off them? Drugs or "human rights violations" are always the go-to cover story.

These are the bare bones of the stories that make up the atrocities done by the US to our Southern neighbors. A primer, if you will. We on the left are more prone to questioning what is happening in our Middle Eastern and African forays... yet pay so little attention to what is happening on our own continents.

I wonder what it is about Junes and Septembers with our CIA and S.A.?

COMMON THREADS:

It is becoming more and more apparent daily that Syria and all her atrocities is backed and funded by the CIA and that the Houla Massacre was the act of NATO allies not Assad.

Lets see, that would be Syria that just made trade agreements with Iran and Venezuela. Syria, whose allies and trading partners Russia and China refuse to allow the US to create another Libyan type fiasco.

Any of us remotely aware at all realizes that Iraq was over oil, and Iran will be over control of the Straits of Hormuz through which it flows.

Iraq and Af/Pak over-extended our troops, but the uptick, hell tsunami of dronings have eased the need for boots on the ground.

Photobucket


We are now in:

Iraq Afghanistan Pakistan Somalia Libya Syria Yemen Uganda

We are banging the drums of war at, and infiltrating Iran as well.

We are suddenly militarizing and overthrowing at an increasing rate any leftist countries in South and Central America.

We are arming drones against our own civilians and calling them enemy combatants with kill on sight orders.

It really does plead for the leap of logic to explain why now, why when the US economy is about to crash, when all Western Nations are about to be sucked down the swirling ponzi drain of inequity with us, would they possibly want to expend the time and energy to work so hard to subvert other Nations?

The answer my friends is couched smack dab in the question with those with eyes to see.

The US has become the bane and bully of the World, and is rapidly losing traditional Western support among traditionally "with them" Nations. At least among the people who are demonstrating in Occupies around the globe. They are desperate that the Nations trading outside their interests do not spread the most frightening thing of all: The idea that post-collapse we must never again allow an Elite Class to exploit resources up to the hand of the few at the expense of the many.

Strategically, they know that there is really no more they can tap out of a broke, unemployed and largely unemployable class of serfs in the United States, and are looking for smaller, less armed Countries from which to create a new base for their hegemony.

If nothing else, taking over a smaller country and setting up a dictator there, insures somewhere to hide for our War criminals, much like the Nazis did after their War Crimes.

If this "ship" is going down, they are in a mad scramble to snatch and grab what they can, where they can, and hoard it to tide themselves over whatever Armageddon they have created.

The BRIC countries, those who have decided to trade outside of the dollar; the ALBA countries, anyone with even soft-pink economies like the Scandinavian countries all are enemies to their goals. The former seen as "evil to be destroyed"; the latter as "stupid nanny states to be punished" in their propaganda.

There is no portend of a Global Revolution than the desperation of the Predatory Capitalist Class to grossly over-extend themselves in order to hedge their last minute bets on either surviving, escaping or controlling things from somewhere else on a smaller scale, where they still may live as Kings among paupers.

Because to them? The only other option is unthinkable.

Photobucket

Sunday, June 24, 2012

The Age of Obama

From Hope and Change 
to the 
Age of Revolt


This Sunday (June 24) on
Cindy Sheehan's Soapbox,
Cindy welcomes and interviews
revolutionary Political Cartoonist/Author
Ted Rall.

Ted's new book is called:
The Age of Obama: From Hope and Change
to the Age of Revolt

Click for ordering info

Tune in at 2pm (Pacific Time) at

or anytime at the archives at:

www.CindySheehansSoapbox.com


CLICK TED'S PICTURE TO GO TO HIS WEBSITE



Tuesday, June 19, 2012

99% For Obama? MoveOn Plays the Election Game Again

By Edmund Berger

On May 9th, Joshua Kahn Russell of 350.org and the National Domestic Workers Alliance’s Harmony Goldberg published a piece on ZNet defending the now controversial 99% Spring coalition. Russell and Goldberg have reason to justify this movement, one that has been attacked by many as an attempt by the moderates as a well-planned co-option of Occupy: both 350.org and the National Domestic Workers Alliance are key participants in the 99% Spring, and both are far more moderate organizations than perhaps Russell and Goldberg themselves. The presence of moderate voices alongside the far more radical participants, they argue, is not a reason to scream ‘co-option;’ instead, they define it as “alliance building,” a practical application of Antonio Gramsci’s idea of building a power bloc beyond the working class to challenge capital. But many, including myself, have argued that the 99% Spring is distinctively reminiscent of MoveOn’s Americans Against Escalation in Iraq, which tapped grassroots political energy and diluted its adversarial potentials by channeling it into a voting base for a president who has shown himself to just as willing – if not more so – than Bush when it comes to militarized hijinks overseas. Russell and Goldberg, on the other hand, disavow this line of thinking. “…lets put aside the important discussion of whether or not engaging in electoral work to some extent will be a necessary part of a radical process in this country,” they write, before later adding “Our enemy is existing power structures promoted by the 1% and elites in both political parties who prop them up.”[1]

Sometimes the “elites” who prop up each respective party are deceptive. MoveOn, regardless of the protestations of many of its ground-level members, has an undisputed history of operating in close proximity with the Democratic Party. The upper management are certainly not 1%ers, but many of them drift in and out of the nebulous circuits surrounding the party, like the Democratic National Convention, and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. These aren’t the people who control the purse strings per se, but they are the people that transform corporate money into action. And it doesn’t have to mean political ads, speech tours, and publicity stunts. If the Koch Brothers have taught us one thing, corporate money can create an interactive campaign machine at the grassroots level. With this end mind, it would appear that MoveOn is continuing the 99% Spring’s appropriation of Occupy jargon, but unlike the coalition itself, this tactic makes no qualms that Obama’s reelection is the agenda on the table.
               
          The latest trick in MoveOn’s bag is “99airlines,” a creative strategy built to counter the slew of campaign ads that saturated the media during election season. 99airlines will consist of planes flying over political rallies, towing banners attacking the prevalence of corporate money in politics. Neat idea, but the kicker? An email blast sent out by Justin Ruben, MoveOn’s current executive director and architect of the organization’s 2004 election activism, reveals that 99airline’s target will be rallies held for Mitt Romney. That is well and good, but nowhere in the email are there any plans to navigate the skies above Obama fundraisers. Instead, we’re treated with electoral soapboxing about how 99airlines “will transform Romney fundraisers into an opportunity to remind voters what he really stands for—corporations and the 1%.” Apparently top Obama donors – which have included Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan & Chase, CitiGroup, Google, Microsoft, General Electric, Morgan Stanley – don’t make the cut as 1% corporations in MoveOn’s campaign. The funny thing is that Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley, and CitiGroup are, in actuality, Romney’s top donors in the present election cycle.

This case of one-sided grandstanding becomes even more opaque when one looks at some of the proposed banners for the campaign, many of which focus on Romney’s former employer Bain Capital. It is true that Bain, worth some $66 billion from its twenty-eight year run in the financial services sector (where it frequently partners with Goldman Sachs in corporate acquisitions buyouts), is indicative of the high levels of income inequality in America; Obama himself has used Romney’s affiliation with Bain as a populist-style rhetorical point. However, regardless of Obama’s public stance, Bain has chipped in to the president’s reelection campaign fund.[2] While the amount of money is significantly lower than Bain’s contributions to Romney, it’s clear that corporations do not see too much of an adversary in Obama, and why should they? Corporate welfare – namely bailouts - means that CEOs still get their giant bonuses regardless of the turbulent economic climate. Of course, this only matters when a Republican in office, not a Democrat.

A second email from MoveOn about the 99airlines drives the point home even further. “Imagine if Mitt Romney and his Super PAC friends had to deal with the sights and sounds of airplanes following them everywhere, reminding Americans how Romney stands for corporations and the 1%.” This email, one that completely sidesteps the fact that Obama’s own super PAC is a frequent recipient of money from corporations and powerful lobbying firms, was sent out by MoveOn’s National Campaign Director, Garlin Gilchrist II. Interestingly enough, in 2008 Gilchrist served as a social media director for the Obama campaign, while a firm that he had founded two years earlier, Opportunity Technology, LLC, is credited on his LinkedIn page as the “Creator [and] implementer of advanced social media and Internet strategy plans for non-profit organizations, political campaigns, including the Washington for Obama campaign…”

Furthermore, Gilchrist is a trainer at the New Organizing Institute (NOI), a close partner of MoveOn and member of the 99% Spring coalition. The NOI itself is staffed with participants in Obama’s 2008 campaign. For example, another trainer is Tom Matzzie, who engineered MoveOn’s Americans Against Escalation in Iraq, while their technology, communications, and campaign teams includes individuals who organized for the Obama campaign in Wisconsin, Texas, Indiana, Mississippi, Iowa, and Pennsylvania. Judith Freeman, NOI’s founder, executive director, and official representative in the 99% Spring, served on Obama’s media team, and has recently lauded the president’s reelection campaign for its ability to tap into social networking with greater efficiency than the 2008 cycle. “They’ve taken everything we’ve learned since 2008 in offline and online campaigning, and built it in there,” she says.[3] One can’t help but wonder if, in some way, this is referring to the useful appropriation of anti-corporate and anti-establishment sentiments that are swirling around in the grassroots arena.

It’s great to point out that Mitt Romney is, to use MoveOn-speak, “Mr. 1%,” but their methodology of touting this fact while ignoring that his opposition is, for all intents and purposes, both deceptive and manipulative. It is political maneuvering at its finest: excluding crucial information paints a lopsided and unbalanced picture of reality, a form of reality that fully propagandized and instilled with intent. Such bastardizations are no different than MoveOn’s alleged qualms with corporate money in politics, since both hijack the political system to its own ends and not that of the mass constituency of the nation. What is even worse about this case is that the imagery and sensations being drawn upon are an extremely radical ethos that, in practice, have bypassed the electoral process and sought to generate a truly participatory society, autonomous from the massive centralizations of wealth and power that occur in the head-on collision of national government with capitalist economics. In fact, to prop up Obama – a man whose time as president has seen the expansion of America’s interventionist mentality, the NDAA, cronyism and repeated failures to push for legitimate change – as someone who is far more representative of the everyperson than his GOP counterparts is an insult.

MoveOn’s slogan is ‘democracy in action.’ Maybe it’s time they put their money where their mouth is.


[1] Joshua Kahn Russell and Harmony Goldberg “New Radical Alliances for a New Era” ZNet May 9th, 2012 http://www.zcommunications.org/new-radical-alliances-for-a-new-era-by-joshua-kahn-russell
[2] Russ Choma “Obama’s Bain Backers” Open Secrets, May 22nd, 2012 http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/05/obamas-bain-backers.html
[i3] Sarah Lai Stirland “The New and Not-So-New in Obama’s ‘Dashboard’” TechPresident, Wednesday, May 23rd, 2012 http://techpresident.com/news/22232/obama-campaign-unveils-its-organizing-dashboard-focus-metrics

Barack Obama: The more insidious evil

Barack Obama: The More Insidious Evil"Our problem is that people are obedient all over the world in the face of poverty and starvation and stupidity, and war, and cruelty. Our problem is that people are obedient while the jails are full of petty thieves...(and) the grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem." --Howard Zinn

To be sure: Neither the corporate owned Democrat or the corporate owned Republican parties are viable choices for the struggling everyday ordinary Black, White, Brown, Red, and Yellow people of this nation. In fact, these corporate owned parties are the antithesis to the needs and hopes of ordinary people in this nation, and throughout Mother Earth.


The American Heritage College Dictionary defines the word 'insidious,' in relevant part, as "Working or spreading harmfully - in a subtle or stealthy manner. Beguiling, but harmful; alluring." Indeed, Mr. 'hope and change' - predator drone - 'you'll never see it coming' - U.S. president Barack Obama is the very embodiment of the word 'insidious.'


Barack Obama's secret negotiations with economic bloodsucking multinational corporations, his trillion dollar criminal 'bailout' of the corporate elite of Wall Street, his signing into law of the draconian indefinite detention (NDAA) horror, his ongoing wars in Afghanistan and elsewhere, his bombing of Libya, North Africa, his feverish clamp down on corporate and government 'whistleblowers,' and his infamous 'Kill List' are but a few of the horrible actions that Obama, has and is, engaging in under the cover of insidious stealth and beguilement.


Obama's flagrant violations of U.S. Constitutional and international law have, in less than four years, far surpassed even the outrages committed by his predecessors. His constant tactic of baiting the everyday people with omissions, half truths, and outright lies has quite possibly been the most insidiously effective against ordinary people of any U.S. president - ever.


Due, in substantial measure, to the support of many 'liberals,' so-called 'progressives,' and much of the 'left,' who hypocritically refuse to hold Barack Obama to the same standards of accountability as they did his Republican party predecessors, he has been able to hoodwink and emaciate the struggling everyday people of this nation. The Obama regime, from its very beginning, was (and continues to be) one of deception, subterfuge, political repression, and non-transparency. This is precisely why it was so crucial for the systemic power-brokers (both Democrat and Republican) to have ensured that the 'Obama brand' was, in 2008, installed as the head of the U.S. corporate/military Empire. The terribe damage that Barack Obama has inflicted upon the people of this nation and world is incalculable.
Back during the corporate 'election' cycle of 2008, relatively few people in this nation were aware of, or willing to face, the fact that an 'Obama brand' presidency would mean 'More Of The Same - Only Worse.' [Reference: An Obama Presidency - More Of The Same Only Worse, November 5, 2008


The time is here and now for everyday people of all colors to come to grips with reality. It is the political plantation / reservation corporate owned system of both Democrats and Republicans that is keeping us all enslaved economically, politically, and socially. We must follow the course of pragmatism versus cynicism by rejecting this entire corrupt political system. We must cease following the course of systemic cynicism and helplessness. Rather, we must seek out and find the ways and creative means to develop and bring about a political model that serves the people instead of pimping and emaciating them / us. Be assured that the Democrats and the Republicans will use every sordid means at their disposal to distort, subvert and crush the will of the people. But it is the people, just plain everyday ordinary people, who must recognize that we can no longer allow ourselves to be the canon fodder of this hypocritical, repugnant, and unjust corporate-owned system.


It's time for a change - REAL systemic change, brought about by we, the people. Yes, there will for a certainty be disagreements among we the people, for if there were not, someone would be lying. But do not allow our disagreements to continue to be used against us collectively. We must find the ways and creative means to collectively throw off the yoke of this system. We must do this thing in this long, protracted, and important struggle.


Turn off your televisions and turn on your minds! We're not hamsters endlessly running on a spinning wheel going nowhere. It's time to stop acting like hamsters and regain our collective wills and humanity.


Each one reach one. Each one teach one. Onward, then, my sisters and brothers! Onward!...



http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article21159.htm] They were then, too enthralled and allured by the corporate-backed, pro-Zionist, double-talking 'Obama brand.' However, It is clear now in 2012, that an increasing amount of people are painfully awakening from their corporate-induced slumber. Notwithstanding the ongoing fake skirmishes between the corporate Democrats and corporate Republicans, stoked by the U.S. corporate-stream media and heightened by this current 2012 corporate 'election' cycle; the fact remains that the entire system is utterly corrupt and that the Democrats and Republicans are two symbiotically-joined peas from the same systemic pod.

Read What Hollywood Execs Call Their Black Clients When They Think No One Is Watching!

Cynthia McKinney
The "N" Word from the Champs Elysée to Avenue of the Americas
13 June 2012
 
The latest Hollywood brouhaha over Gwyneth Paltrow’s decision to tweet the caption “ni**as in Paris for real” to accompany a picture of her with friends Jay-Z and Beyoncé while in Paris doesn’t compare to the new evidence of "fraud upon the Court"  that has emerged in a largely unnoticed civil rights case that very well should be reopened after being unfairly dismissed six years ago.  How about Hollywood executives regularly referring to their own clients, and Blacks in general, as "niggers," "niggas," "coons," "spooks," and "monkeys" while they intentionally discriminated against Black concert promoters, putting them out of business?  It is the contention of Leonard Rowe, perhaps the best-known and most successful of all Black concert promoters, that the regular use of these words by powerful Hollywood executives is a telling indicator of Hollywood's pervasively racist attitudes toward Blacks, an attitude that produced illegal trust-like business practices that essentially made Black concert promoters extinct.

How could these particular Hollywood executives do that? 
According to music industry veterans, once a Black entertainer "crossed over" to a White audience, Black concert promoters were almost never allowed to promote that entertainer again.  Moreover, according to Rowe, not once was a Black concert promoter allowed to promote a White entertainer.  According to Rowe, this collusion to fix profits effectively denied the Black community the spin-off economy associated with concerts and concert promotions, and the multiplier effect of dollars turning over in the Black community.  Someone presented  evidence to me that was just presented to District Judge Robert P. Patterson and Chief Judge Loretta A. Preska of the Southern District of New York:  a summary of the racially-charged words that were regularly used by these particular Hollywood executives: "nigger," "spade," "colored," "monkey," "nigga," "uncle tom," "spook," and "coon."  It makes for depressing reading:  page after page after page after page, the evidence provided to me shows the last name of the particular executive and the number of times that person used one of the above words in e-mail traffic.  It is 18 pages, with two pages mysteriously missing, of heartbreak where specifically the word "nigger" is used hundreds of times.  Even more to the point of "fraud upon the Court," decisions were made in Rowe's previous case without even a mention of the e-mail evidence.  In fact, Rowe was never given the e-mails that produced the 18-page summary sheet although he paid for them.  Rowe's case was dismissed by the Court at Summary Judgment.

To think that this is the way these Hollywood executives view their African-American clients is not only appalling, but represents more than a virtual throwback to the ignominious days of a Southern Plantation.  According to Marcus Washington who worked at William Morris, that company client list has included Bill Cosby, Whoopi Goldberg, Lauryn Hill, Rihanna, Outkast, Trya Banks, Serena Williams, LeBron James, Whitney Houston, Maxwell, Jill Scott, Erykah Badu, Spike Lee, Janet Jackson, Tyler Perry, Kanye West, Jay-Z, Usher, Halle Berry, Alicia Keys, Jennifer Hudson, Queen Latifah, and Denzel Washington to name a few. 

The evidence of how particular Hollywood executives referred to their own clients is available for anyone interested in seeing it.  Just click here:  http://www.scribd.com/doc/93697362/Rowe-Entertainment-Inc-v-William-Morris-Agency-et-al-98-8272-Breakdown-of-Racial-Epithets-Including-Nigger-Used-By-Execs-Email-Search-Re

And who exactly are these particular Hollywood executives?  Rowe's lawsuit is against The William Morris Agency (now known as William Morris Endeavor) and Creative Artists Agency, the biggest and the baddest of the bunch.  (And adding political muscle to this tawdry script, William Morris Endeavor is currently headed by Ari Emanuel, brother to the former Chief of Staff of President Obama and now Mayor of Chicago, Rahm Emanuel.)  For many aspiring Black entertainers, signing with these agencies represents a dream come true.  Too bad that this new evidence brought forward in the Leonard Rowe case shows how these agencies truly feel about African Americans when they think no one is watching.

Sadly, Leonard Rowe is not the only witness to Hollywood’s institutional racism.  Marcus Washington, with whom I have spoken, has his own sordid tale of life while employed at Hollywood’s titan--The William Morris Agency.  In published reports on the internet, Marcus, acting as his own lawyer, filed a $25 million lawsuit alleging racial discrimination in December 2010.  Among the many details in his 80-page complaint, Washington said that upon his entry into William Morris’ New York office in September of 2008, there were zero Black, zero Latino, and only one Asian-American Agent employed out of an executive staff of 50.  Washington wrote that he was the only Black hired into the Agent Trainee program and while he had recently graduated from the University of Miami with his Masters in Music Business and Entertainment Industries and helped co-manage the career of J Records singer/songwriter and now eight-time GRAMMY® nominated artist Jazmine Sullivan, all of his White counterparts advanced above him having considerably fewer academic achievements and less professional work experience. 

According to Washington, William Morris immediately sought to have Washington's case compelled into arbitration because of an arbitration agreement Washington signed as a condition of employment.  Washington argued that the provision which stated that “any issue” including ones of “discrimination” and “retaliation” were to be arbitrated was “unconscionable, tainted with illegality and malum in se” given the historical evidence presented to the Court showing the company’s 113-year history of systemic disparate treatment towards Blacks.  In July 2011, Washington's judge ruled in favor of William Morris.  In September 2011, Washington appealed to the Second Circuit that his lawsuit against William Morris was erroneously compelled into arbitration, and over the last nine months, Washington has attempted three times to have this decision reversed so that his case can be impartially decided in a public forum by a jury that reflects the diversity of New York City.  Each time, the Court has denied his appeal without providing a judicial opinion.  Sadly, this industry has been successful at keeping this type of racial discrimination away from the eyes of a jury.  But now, after acquiring the new evidence discovered in the Rowe case, Washington filed a motion in the Court to introduce evidence that various attorneys at Loeb & Loeb LLP--the law firm representing William Morris in both the Rowe and Washington cases--as well as judges, have been involved in a corrupt conspiracy to collude and commit “fraud upon the Court.

Because of what Rowe felt were unreliable lawyers colluding and conspiring with his opponents' lawyers, Rowe has joined Washington as a pro se litigant in the Southern District of New York.  They both have refiled their cases and they are awaiting decisions from the Court.  This time around, the Southern District Court of New York has the opportunity to do the right thing.  Both Rowe and Washington are involved in litigation that could produce landmark Civil Rights decisions.  Both of them are willing to share the evidence unearthed in the Rowe case that could deal a devastating blow to "business as usual" in the entertainment industry.

Leonard Rowe and Marcus Washington are available, together or individually, for interviews to explain their firsthand experiences with Hollywood, racism, or corruption in the U.S. justice system.

Leonard Rowe can be reached at roweentertain@aol.com
Marcus Washington can be reached at humanrights.areamust@gmail.com

Monday, June 18, 2012

Cindy Sheehan And Kathy Kelly On Drones - CIA Headquarters - 1/16/2010



On January 16th, 2010, Cindy Sheehan, Kathy Kelly, Debra Sweet, and several other activists gathered at CIA Headquarters in Langley, VA. to protest drone strikes.

Sunday, June 17, 2012

The Political Plantation (Soapbox for June 17)


Dear Friend,

Last week on the Soapbox, I presented a young activist named Edmund Berger who has written some detailed and well-researched articles about how movements and people are "astro-turfed" by establishment foundations and donors.

The show (listen here) illicited quite a response from people who had differing opinions, but the differing opinions didn't come in the form of details or research, just on the order of "how dare you!" As I point out in the enclosed article I wrote called: Inscrutable Icons of Liberaldom no one should be above analysis and knee-jerk attacks on the messenger are not helpful.

This week's show is something special as I interview our very good Soapbox friend, Brother Larry Pinkney, and we chat about Obama's "Hit List." Brother Larry is an editor and writes a column called, Keeping it Real at Black Commentator.
Brother Larry has quite an impressive resumé, which can be read here.

Our new show called, The Political Plantation, after what Brother Larry calls the attempts of the establishment to keep us tied to the slavery of partisan political politics.



Happy Father's Day to all fathers out there, but if you have some time at 2pm Pacific, the show can be heard at:

Community Progressive Radio

or anytime at the archives:

Cindy Sheehan's Soapbox.

Love & Peace
Cindy Sheehan
From Cartoonist Ted Rall
www.TedRall.com
The Inscrutable Icons of Liberaldom
by Cindy Sheehan

"In all affairs, it's a healthy thing now and then to hang a question mark on the things you have long taken for granted."
– Bertrand Russell



“Are you a good witch or a bad witch?”
Glinda the Good to Dorothy Gale, Wizard of Oz


I am always happy to get feedback about my radio show, Cindy Sheehan’s Soapbox, even if it’s bad—because I am happy that someone is listening—we work really hard to produce a relevant show...

CLICK HERE TO READ THE REST
Cindy Back in Cascadia to talk about Revolution, A Love Story and other topics of relevance.

CLICK HERE FOR LIST OF EVENTS IN EUGENE, PORTLAND, AND SALEM, OREGON

AND

EVERETT AND SEATTLE, WASHINGTON
FROM JUNE 22-27

CLICK FOR INFO
The Sunflower is a symbol of the anti-nuke movement and this Thursday, Cindy Sheehan, will be in federal court in Santa Barbara for her arrest at Vandenberg AFB in February opposing the test launch of the Minuteman Missile.

Cindy, Daniel Ellsberg and others are pleading "Not guilty" and the trial for this arrest will be on October 17th in Santa Barabara.

Civil Resistance, arrests, trials, etc, are time consuming and financially draining--please donate to help Cindy cover expenses for her trip and loss of time.

POPULAR POSTS