Tao Te Ching

"Knowing Ignorance
is strength;
Ignoring Knowledge
is sickness."

-- Lao Tse

"My Speech to the Graduates"

"More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly." -- Woody Allen

C.O.: Questions for American Youth

The following information is based on the "What Do I Believe About War?" pamphlet that NISBCO published in the 1980s. Known today as The Center on Conscience & War, they can be found at: 1830 Connecticut Avenue, NW; Washington, DC, 20009; telephone: 202-483-2220; e-mail: nisbco@nisbco.org ; URL: http://www.nisbco.org

Elsewhere on this blog, I explain why I believe that people from the grassroots contribute to CCW.

There are three questions that young people should be considering, which will be important in helping to show a draft board that they are Conscientious Objectors. None of the three questions are easy to answer. I do not think that many people of any age could simply sit down and answer these without first giving them hours of thought. Thus, young people should take time to give these serious attention.

NISBCO advises people to talk to their relatives, teachers, and ministers/rabbis/clerics. Think of the influences that have helped develop your personal belief system. Remember, Conscientious Objection is a deep conviction, motivated by conscience, that prevents a person from participating in war. This conviction is based upon deeply held moral, ethical, and/or religious beliefs, which play a significant role in your day-to-day life.

Question #1: Describe the beliefs which are the basis for your claim for classification as a Conscientious Objector, including whether these beliefs would allow you to serve in a noncombatant position in the armed forces?

(This question asks you to describe in detail the basic principles that you claim guide your life. They can include religious beliefs and/or an ethical belief system. I suggest making a list of the principles and influences that are important to you; making an outline; and practice putting these thoughts into an "essay" form.)

Question #2: Describe how you acquired these beliefs.

(In answering this, include things such as formal religious training; people who have influenced your way of thinking; books you have read, or classes you have taken, that have helped you develop your belief system; and any specific experiences that have influenced your belief system.)

Question #3: Describe how your beliefs affect the way you live today, and the type of job/career you are hoping for?

(This is often the most difficult of the three questions for young people to answer. The answers do not have to describe "huge" events. Perhaps you have sent an anti-war letter to the editor of your local newspaper; attended an anti-war rally; considered a career in human services; said prayers for the innocent victims of wars; or any number of similar examples.)

Martin Luther King, Jr.: Conscientious Objector!

"Somehow this madness must cease. We must stop now. I speak as a child of God and brother to the suffering poor of Vietnam. I speak for those whose land is being laid waste, whose homes are being destroyed, whose culture is being subverted. I speak for the poor of America who are paying the double price of smashed hopes at home and death and corruption in Vietnam. I speak as a citizen of the world, for the world stands aghast at the path we have taken. I speak as an American to the leaders of my own nation. The great initiative in this war is ours. The initiative to stop it must be ours."

Martin Luther King, Jr; "A Time To Break Silence"
April 4, 1967; Riverside Church, NYC

Tadodaho Leon Shenandoah

Leon Shenandoah was the FaithKeeper of the Eel Clan of the Onondaga Nation, located in what is now Upstate New York near Syracuse. As such, he served on the 14-member Council Of Chiefs for North America's "Keepers of the Central Fire" at Onondaga. He was then selected by the Haudenosaunee, or Six Nations Iroquois Confederacy, to serve as the Tadodaho, or the head of the fifty member Grand Council of Chiefs.

The Haudenosaunee Grand Council of Chiefs is recognized by Native American peoples as the last traditional form of Indian government in North America. The Haudenosaunee are respected by "4th World Peoples" around the globe. Leon would come to national attention among the non-Indian peoples of the United States in 1971, shortly after he assumed the position of Tadodaho. The State of New York had decided to widen I-88 where it goes through Onondaga Nation Territory. Leon used his Condolence Cane to literally draw a line in the dirt, and announce that, "The United States stops here!" He led a month-long "sit-in" demonstration to keep the highway crews from being able to add a lane to the interstate on Onondaga Territory.

The sit-in drew national attention, perhaps particularly when former Beatle John Lennon and his wife, Yoko Ono, joined with the Indians. Although the sit-in was both peaceful, and occurred on Onondaga Territory, the NYS government appeared to be preparing to escalate tensions when large amounts of heavily-armed state police were gathering to invade the sovereign Indian nation.

But suddenly, the inmates at Attica State Prison began their infamous riot. The same NYS Troopers who were preparing to invade Onondaga were sent to Attica State Prison. Dozens of people died when the police stormed he prison.

"Those bullets were meant for us," Leon would later explain. "The prisoners at Attica took the killing instead of us. They died and we lived."

Leon is featured in the book "The Wisdom Keepers," by National Geographic Senior Writer Harvey Arden and Steve Wall, Beyond Words Publishing, 1990. (Also see Leon in the 9-87 and 3-89 National Geographics.) In this book, Harvey asked Leon about violence and peace, and about power.

"I myself have no power," Leon said. "It's the people behind me who have the power. Real power comes only from the Creator. It's in his hands. But if you are asking me about strength, not power, then I can say the greatest strength is gentleness."

In October of 1985, Tadodaho Leon Shenandoah addressed the General Assembly of the United Nations. In part, he told the U.N. -- and the world -- that: "These are our times and our responsibilities. Every human being has a sacred duty to protect the welfare of our Mother Earth, from whom all life comes. In order to do this, we must recognize the enemy -- the one within us. We must begin with ourselves ....

"We must live in harmony with the Natural World and recognize that excessive exploitation can only lead to our own destruction. We cannot trade the welfare of our future generations for profit now. We must abide by the Natural Law or be victim of its ultimate reality.

"We must stand together, the four sacred colors of man, as the one family that we are, in the interest of peace. We must abolish nuclear and conventional weapons of war. When warriors are leaders, you will have war. We must raise leaders of peace. We must unite the religions of the world as the spiritual force strong enough to prevail in peace.

"It is no longer good enough to cry 'peace.' We must act 'peace,' live 'peace,' and march in 'peace' in alliance with the people of the world.

"We are the spiritual energy that is thousands of times stronger than nuclear energy. Our energy is the combined will of all people with the spirit of the Natural World, to be of one body, one heart, and one mind for peace."

Center on Conscience and War

Many years ago, I was introduced to the work of the National Interreligious Service Board for Conscientious Objectors (NISBCO). Today, this wonderful organization goes by the name The Center on Conscience & War. As we move closer to the day that the Bush administration has to renew the military draft in order to force moderate and low-income youth to fight the wars this administration continues to start, I think we need to take a closer look at the CCW.

The Executive Director, J.E. McNeil, recently sent out a note that began with one of my favorite Mahatma Gandhi quotes: "When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth has always won. There have been murderers and tyrants, and for a time they seem invincible. But in the end, they always fall." That's a favorite quote from my of my best friends who posts on the Democratic Underground.

McNeil continued: "It is easy to look at the future and get gloomy. The prospect of a draft seems greater now than it has in the last 30 years. The military is forcing people to stay in Iraq against their will and well beyond the expected ends of their contracts. We appear poised on the invasion of Iran and increased conflict with North Korea."

It has become clear that the administration will have to have large numbers of new soldiers to continue with its occupation of Iraq. And it is also evident that this president believes that he is following a divine plan to declare war on Islamic culture, and that the vice president is intent upon securing as many oil wells in the Middle East as possible. The combination of religious delusion and devilish greed spells war.

The CCW is a national organization that works with the grassroots level. They travel from city to city, town to town, and work to help people understand what the current (and expected) military and draft laws are (and will be). The talk "about our rights and responsibilities in relation to a potential draft and the continuing militarization of our schools. We can, one by one, lobby our congressional representatives and make sure that they understand what being a conscientious objector means and what we can and cannot do. The center does this in your names -- and more."

The CCW is on an extremely limited budget. They really do not have big donors. I believe that most county agencies, and many city departments across the country have larger budgets. But they are resourceful. They turn that to their advantage in a creative way. No one can tell them to fall in line, unlike many wealthier organizations. No one can tell them how high to jump, with an implied threat that if they don't jump, their budge will get cut. And no one can tell them to shut up. Unlike our congressional representatives, no one has to explain to them what a conscience is.

In the upcoming weeks, the Water Man Spouts blog will be featuring more about this wonderful organization. In the mean time, I strongly urge you to send a donation of any size to them at: The Center on Conscience & War; 1830 Connecticut Avenue, NW; Washington, DC, 20009; telephone: 202-483-2220; Fax: 202-483-1246.

e-mail: nisbco@nisbco.org

URL: http://www.nisbco.org

Thank you!

SPLC Report

Many people are aware that incidents of racism, sexism, and other forms of violence that is rooted in hatred and ignorance is on the rise in the United States. In fact, much of it is from an organized effort on the part of white supremacists who are intent upon attacking Jewish people; those who are black, brown red, and yellow; women; homosexuals; and even those who they consider to be liberal. I am sad to say that some of the organizations who spread the disease of hatred have become more powerful politically under the Bush administration than they have at any time since the days of the KKK and Jim Crow.

I am certainly not saying that the republican party is responsible for the rise in hatred. But I am saying that many republicans endorse the disease of hatred. And this didn't stop back in 1998, when former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott was exposed for having strong ties to the Council of Conservative Citizens. The CCC is a white supremacist organization; CCC is simply an updated play on KKK. Same people; same goals.

My friend Morris Dees, the founder of the Southern Poverty Law Center, informed me that: "Since the incident in 1998, the CCC has become even more extremist for its racist, anti-Semitic remarks and white supremacist propaganda. The Republican National Committee has gone so far as to urge its members not to join or attend any CCC functions.

"Apparently some politicians aren't listening.

"We've compiled a list of 26 elected officials in four Southern states who have either attended or spoken at local CCC meetings. They have included a governor, a Congressman, and a state Supreme Court justice.

"The CCC strives to portray itself as mainstream and legitimate. But it is one of 751 hate groups operating in this country. That's why it is so important for the Intelligence Project to expose these organizations for what they really are."

The success of the SPLC depends upon people like us. I am hoping that you will read more about the SPLC, and support its many important projects. In this day and age, it is important that we invest what money we can afford to donate wisely. I have found the SPLC to be one of the best investments in the United States.

Here are two internet sites you can visit to learn more about the Southern Poverty Law Center. I am not sure this blog will "connect" you to them; however, these are the "addresses" that you should try:

www.splcenter.org

and

www.tolerance.org

Also, write to: SPLC; 400 Washington Ave; Montgomery, AL 36104

Thank you for your consideration!

Alberto Gonzales: When Irish Eyes Aren't Smiling

The US Senate begins confirmation hearings for Alberto Gonzales today. President Bush has nominated Gonzales to replace Attorney General John Ashcroft as the head of the Department of Justice. Senate democrats are expected to question Gonzales, who is Bush's White House counsel, on his role in a series of communications with the the Justice Department on internment and torture in the "war on terror." Republicans are confident that the democrats will not stop Gonzales from being confirmed, because doing so could offend Hispanic voters.

It is rumored that President Bush will nominate Gonzales to serve on the US Supreme Court in 2006. Again, they believe they will get him by democrats in an election year, because no politician will dare to offend the Hispanic voting block. This thinking ignores another ethnic voting block that is taking interest in Gonzales' advocating policies of internment and torture. Irish Americans have a history with the tactics of internment and torture, most recently in Northern Ireland. Some of it may be of interest to the American public, and it may sound very familiar.

Much of this information comes from books by Irish author Tim Pat Coogan. He has a series of books on Irish history. For this essay, I will use his books "The IRA" and "The Troubles: Ireland's Ordeal 1966-1996 and the Search for Peace" as sources. I strongly recommend his books to anyone interested in the politics of Ireland.

In the late 1960s and early '70s, there was a growing "civil rights" movement in Northern Ireland. This movement was influenced by the civil rights movement in the United States. The Catholics in Northern Ireland were as oppressed a people as either the African American or Native Americans in the United States. Not surprisingly, the Irish movement resembled those of the blacks and Indians in the US in the 1960s.

It is important to remember that Northern Ireland was no more of a country than Iraq. Both were "created" at about the same time by England. Both were attempts by the British government to secure access to the natural resources of foreign lands for the decaying "British Empire."

As the civil rights movement gained strength, the Protestant population in Northern Ireland began systematic intimidation of the Catholic neighborhoods. In response, the Catholics began to organize groups similar to the Black Panthers and American Indian Movement (AIM) in the USA. The best known of these was the Irish Republican Army (IRA), a group with historic roots in all of Ireland. Then, as violence between the Catholics and Protestants escalated, the British introduced more troops as "peace-keepers" in Northern Ireland.

The British military became convinced that most of the IRA support was "imported" from the Irish Free State. Thus, they began a crackdown on the borders, and on Catholic neighborhoods in the communities experiencing unrest. Coogan describes how "the British Army was the IRA's best recruiting agent. The saturation was such that at one stage there were 2,000 soldiers billeted in Paddy Devlin's Belfast consituency alone, one to every ten voters. On a specimen Saturday night Devlin counted thirty army vehicles in the district. Soldiers moved along in groups of twenty or more, dispersed on both sides of the street, guns at the ready." (The Troubles; page 137)

Paddy Devlin himself describes the British military's tactics: "I was downright angry at the mindless harassment, degrading obstruction and casual brutality the soldiers meted out to all who came in their path. I spent hours boiling over in anger and frustration, incoherent with rage, complaining to arrogant, overbearing British officers who failed to see the damage they were doing, the way they were walking into the trap the ruthless Provos had laid for them and how they were only acting as recruitment sergeants for the Provos." (ibid)

Devlin then identifies the single factor (the quality of military intelligence) that plunged Northern Ireland into an anarchy that resembles the Iraq that Bush created: "They failed to understand that many families shared common surnames, but were not related .... they arrested fathers when they wanted the sons and the sons when they were after the fathers. Innocent teenage boys and old men thus found themselves held at the point of a British rifle, and many of the people I dealt with then were so alienated by the experience that they joined the Provos and later became notorious terrorists." (ibid)

As the conflict intensified, it became obvious to the British military that the IRA had grown in strength in Northern Ireland. It was no longer possible to pretend that infiltraters from the Irish Free State were the cause of all the troubles. The sealing of the borders, curfews, and raids were no longer keeping the Catholics docile. Hence, a committee known as GEN 42 began to meet at Downing Street in England to decide on new tactics to combat the rise in Catholic nationalism.

The new strategy was called the "toothpaste policy": the British military would squeeze the Catholic community until they vomited out the IRA. It would focus more on those in the community who promoted "revolutionary" ideas, rather than those who committed the acts of terrorism. The idea was to "dry up" the ocean of Catholic water in which the radicals swam. They would call these tactics a "sustained opposition to terrorism," which served as a code for internment without trial, and torture to force "confessions."

The British had "plans for the systematic employment of torture against detainees. This policy had its origins in earlier British experience, in theatres such as Aden, Cyprus, Kenya, and in the brainwashing techniques employed against American and British servicemen in Korea. These were subsequently adopted by the British Army against EOKA during the Cyprus campaign. This type of expertise was unknown in the RUC and the British had to set up a special team of instructors to train the RUC Special Branch. The nature and extent of these preparations were both fully understood and sanctioned by the proper authorities within the Ministry of Defence, British intelligence and the upper echelons" of the British government, Coogan writes. (The Troubles; page 149)

The fact that this plan was not a new policy for the British is indicated by the fact that they not only had specific lists of Irish Catholics to be interned and tortured, but they had four sites already prepared for this operation. Known as "Operation Demetrius," these actions were never as successful as they were brutal. They started with a "trial run" that netted 48 suspects; this gave a two week warning to those who were actually involved in terrorist activity.

Next, when the British intelligence attempted to round up 450 suspects, they were only able to find 350 "targets." Because the actual terrorists were safely hidden "underground," those gathered up included people never associated with the IRA, as well as many who had been active in the late 1940s, but had been "retired" for decades. Many more were guilty of nothing more than writing about freedom.

Of the 350 suspects, 104 were released within 48 hours. The secret police had simply picked up the wrong person in 104 of 350 cases, which indicates a 30% rate of very inaccurate information. Still, in their 48 hours of incarceration, each of these 104 men were subjected to severe torture.

The tortures that the Catholics interned without trial in Northern Ireland sound very similar to what Mr. Gonzales has advocated for use in Iraq. The techniques include hooding, sleep deprivation, white noise, starvation, forced standing for extended periods spreadeagled and leaning against a wall on finger-tips, and sexual humiliation and torture. Men were kicked in the testicles, and raped with batons. Some were forced to run on broken glass bare-footed.

Coogan writes: "These techniques were accompanied by continual harassment, blows, insults, questioning. This treatment usually went on for six and seven days. It produced acute anxiety states, personality changes, depression and, sometimes, an early death. I spoke to a psychiatrist who had the thankless task of trying to rehabilitate some of the interrogation victims (at the behest of the British Government), and he told me that they were 'broken men', most of whom did not survive into their fifties." (The Troubles; page 150)

The community outrage was such that the British were forced to set up a committee to investigate the abuses. Known as the Compton Inquiry, it gave new meaning to the term "white-wash" when it determined the victims were subjected to "ill treatment," but not "brutality." After a human rights commission concluded the Irish were severely tortured, the case was sent to the European Court of Human Rights. After being dragged out for two years, the ECHR concluded there was no systematic torture. While a few low-ranking individuals ma have crossed the line, they found the policy avoided torture, and merely included "inhumane and degrading treatment."

It is interesting to note that during this period, the IRA enjoyed the most wide-spread support it ever had in Northern Ireland. As a result, there was a terrible increase in explosive violence that killed and maimed far too many people. Young and old, male and female, Catholic and Protestant, Irish and English, hundreds of people -- most of them innocent of any crime -- died in the reign of terror that resembles today's Iraq.

And so today, as Alberto Gonzales is questioned by the Senate, Irish Americans will recognize what type of man he is. We know exactly what he represents.

Out-foxed: DU, the NYT, and Fox News.

There were "conspiracy theories" featured in reports in the New York Times and on Fox News today. These were in regard to theories that the U.S. military was responsible for the earthquake that caused the tsunami that destroyed so much of southeast Asia. According to this theory, the military exploded nuclear weapons in the ocean, thus setting off a chain reaction.

This theory has been reported in recent days as making the rounds with militant Islamists in the Middle east. Today's articles tied it to the Democratic Underground, a left-wing discussion forum found on the internet. Many on the DU are concerned, and for good reason. This seems like an attempt not only to discredit the site by exposing some rather paranoid and delusional thinking. But more, it kind of identifies DU as not unlike the Nation of Islam of the 1960s: extremists that give comfort to the enemies of our country. And that's a shame, because the membership of DU is actually composed of primarily patriotic Americans who are very concerned with the political, social, and economic problems this nation faces.

In fact, there have been a series of DU threads that have discussed the diseased theory that the US military purposely caused the tsunami. Most DUers that responded on these threads strongly rejected this "theory." But it was still used, on the same day, by two of the major main-stream media to discredit DU.

"Skinner," the person who owns/runs DU, has responded with a thread that details his writing a letter to the editor of the NY Times; his decision to ignore Fox News; and his decision to delete any future threads that propose any connection between WMDs and earth quakes.

On one hand, this seems boldly undemocratic: not only should people be encouraged to write to the Times and Fox, because in theory the forum is not supposed to be limited to what Skinner deems correct, but it also precludes the discussion of traditional Native American and "New Age" beliefs about the earth being alive, and reacting as a living organism to things such as pollution and the explosive destruction of its surface. In traditional thought, human beings certainly do not "control" earthquakes; yet human behavior may indeed be part of the cause of environmental shifts, including global warming. Yet that topic is no longer allowed on DU. I view this as a victory for those who seek to discredit DU.

The "how" to disrupt is easy enough to understand. DU is a relatively open forum, with members across the United States and in Canada. For several years since the 2000 election, it grew in popularity with the "democratic left." While it does not tend to attract conservative democrats, DU served as a meeting place for the elder hippies from the 1960s and early '70s; for a wide range of well-educated young adults who came of age between 1976 and 1996; and to the young and often angry "younger generation."

These are the people who tend to recognize that George W. Bush was not elected president in 2000. Rather, he was installed by conservative right-wing republicans. Many DUers in 2004 went to see Michael Moore's movie "Fahrenheit 9/11," and were active in the presidential campaign. And so they attracted the attention of conservative right-wing republicans.

Many DUers believe that the United States played some role in 9-11. The two most popular theories are LIHOP (let it happen on purpose) and MIHOP (made it happen on purpose). Of course, a number of DUers, like myself, do not subscribe to either of these theories. But that is far less important to republicans than the fact that others do believe what main-stream America would rapidly identify as a paranoid conspiracy theory.

During the election campaign, some main-stream democrats attempted to tap the potential of DUers to become a grass-roots political force. Indeed, DU had a window of opportunity to serve much in the manner that the Howard Dean supporters had. And many did just that, although their activities were largely outside of DU. Yet the democrats were not the only ones who saw this potential to activate and to organize the democratic left.

Just before the election, for example, a republican disrupter attempted to get DUers to "make the news" with reports of a nuclear attack being planned on an American city. The same DU administrators who today feel that a theory that US bombs in the ocean is so foolish it must be deleted, did not feel the same about the theory that Dick Cheney had planned a nuclear attack on an American city. I trust the reader will recognize that if the NY Times or Fox News reported on the numerous long threads describing this pre-election attack, it would discredit DU much in the manner of the current foolishness.

It is interesting to note that just after the election, both Chris Heinz and Elizabeth Edwards posted a number of interesting comments on threads on DU. And around then, TIME mentioned DU as a source of democratic opinions in a nice article.

Yet, as the energy from the election was leaving DU, and many of the more experienced and insightful members faded away, its membership grew. As this happened, DU became somewhat more bureaucratic, creating "groups" for certain subjects that the administrator was in favor of, and discouraging others. The combination of factors created fertile ground for those who wanted to disrupt and discredit DU.

In fact, the true target likely is not DU. Rather, it is to discredit those, such as Edwards and Heinz, who were somehow associated with it. Perhaps no one more so than Will Pitt, the most creative voice on the forum. Pitt is a gifted author with the ability to reach -- and actually convince -- a group that goes far beyond the democratic left. And it goes beyond that. "Oh, you question the election results in Ohio? But aren't you one of those nuts who says the army caused the tsunami?"

The sad thing is that those few republicans who attempted to pull this off were easily able to. This wasn't the work of any high-level operatives; it was more likely a bunch of "young republicans" with a little insight into history. They likely remember that it was easy to infiltrate and disrupt that old Nation of Islam in the 1960s. The leadership was too busy counting the contributions from the new members to recognize what was happening.

The Waterman Paper

The Waterman Paper
July 24, 2004
By H2O Man
This paper examines the possibility that Vice President Dick Cheney orchestrated the "leaking" of CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity to the news media in the summer of 2003, in order to accomplish three goals.
These include (1) to punish Joseph Wilson for challenging "16 words" in President Bush's 1-28-03 State of the Union address; and (2) to intimidate other sources from publicly challenging the White House's version of events involving the "war on terrorism" and the US invasion of Iraq. Both of these goals are well-known from numerous reports on this White House scandal.
The other, (3) is that VP Cheney was attempting to derail an investigation that Plame may have been involved in at the time that her identity was exposed. This third potential goal has not been the subject of any major media attention.
The author of this paper put it forward on an internet forum, the Democratic Underground, in early July, 2004. The resulting eleven DU "threads," which consist of over 3,000 posts from interested citizens across the country, is the only known forum debating this theory.
Besides the eleven DU "Plame Indictment" threads, the information in this paper comes from the following four sources: The Politics of Truth, by Joseph Wilson; Worse Than Watergate, by John Dean; Don't Tread on Joseph Wilson, NYT book review by John Dean on 5-23-04; and Plenty to Swear About, by Joe Klein, Time, 7-5-04.
Time Line
While the case involving Wilson's investigation in Niger, and the White House's efforts to expose Plame is long and complicated, this paper will focus on a "time line" established by Wilson in his book.
1. Jan '02: The first reports of a Niger-Iraq uranium connection surface in the White House.
2. Feb '02: Wilson is asked to investigate by the CIA.
3. March '02: Wilson returns from Niger and briefs the CIA on the investigation. His conclusion supports those of two others that there was no Niger-Iraq connection.
4. Jan '03: Bush includes the "16 words" in his State of the Union address.
5. On or about March 5, '03: the CIA gives VP Cheney an oral report, informing him of Wilson's conclusions.
6. March 7, '03: the IAEA announces the US's documents on Niger-Iraq are forgeries.
7. March 8, '03: (a) a State Department spokesperson admits, "We fell for it" in regard to the forged document; (b) Wilson tells CNN that the State Department has more information on the subject; and (c) a workshop meeting is held in VP Cheney's office. It is attended by top republican officials, possibly including Cheney, Scooter Libby, and Newt Gingrich. The group discusses ways to discredit Wilson.
8. June 8, '03: Condoleeza Rice denies knowledge of the weakness of the Niger uranium claim on Meet The Press. She states, "Maybe someone down in the bowels of the Agency knew about this, but nobody in my circles."
9. July 6, '03: Wilson's NYT op-ed is published. By the following day, two senior White House officials began contacting at least six reporters, informing them of Valerie Plame's identity as a CIA operative.
10. July 8, '03: Reporter Robert Novak tells a complete stranger on a Washington street: "Wilson's an asshole. The CIA sent him. His wife, Valerie, works for the CIA. She's a weapons of mass destruction specialist. She sent him." In the following days, Novak would ask the CIA for confirmation of Plame's identity. He was asked not to print her name or identity in any article regarding Wilson.
11. July 14, '03: Novak's article exposes Plame.
12. July 20, '03: NBC's Andrea Mitchell tells Wilson that senior White House officials told her that the "real story" was not the 16 words, but was Wilson and his wife.
13. July 21, '03: NBC's Chris Matthews tells Wilson that Karl Rove called him and said," Wilson's wife is fair game." Matthews said he would confirm that if asked.
This time line indicates that while the exposing of Plame's identity was a result of Wilson's op-ed, it was also part of a larger strategy that had been planned in VP Cheney's office since March 8. It clearly confirms goal #1: by exposing Plame, and putting her safety at risk, the White House had severely punished Joseph Wilson.
It also supports goal #2: the White House had a strategy to intimidate any other potential intelligence operatives from exposing the administration for distorting information regarding Iraq.
Likewise, the exposing of Plame supports goal #3: exposing Plame put an immediate end to any activities that Plame was participating in at the time. This is supported by Wilson (pg 345): "She immediately began to prepare a checklist of things she needed to do to minimize the fall-out to the projects she was working on."
Also, Wilson notes: "Compromising the officer means compromising a career, a network, and every person with who the officer might have ever worked. Slips of the tongue cost people their lives." (pg 13)
The Leakers' Identities
Robert Novak sourced his story to two senior White House officials. Other reporters, including Andrea Mitchell, made mention of the two unidentified senior White House officials. These two are among the at least six reporters contacted by these two officials.
Chris Matthew's call identifies Karl Rove as being involved in the efforts to make "Wilson's wife ... fair game." This call took place after the calls from the senior officials to the six reporters.
Wilson's book indicates a belief that the two senior officials were Lewis "Scooter" Libby and Eliot Abrams. Abrams is no stranger to White House disgrace, having been convicted on two charges during the Iran-Contra scandal.
There is evidence the three were operating with the knowledge of, and perhaps under the direction of VP Cheney. The March 8 "workshop" in VP Cheney's office indicates that this was a long-standing, well-organized effort to discredit Wilson. As Wilson notes (pg 387) : "... a plan to attack me had been formed before the moment. It was cocked and ready to fire .... an organized smear campaign directed from the highest reaches of the White House."
Cheney and Pre-War Intelligence
Those involved in the "workshop" to discredit Wilson were also active in efforts to influence pre-war intelligence reports. On page 6, Wilson discusses "leaks" that Cheney, Libby, and Newt Gingrich pressured the intelligence community "to skew intelligence analysists" to fit their own needs.
On page 338, Wilson notes that these three reportedly intimidated analysts by implying, "if you do a 'Wilson' on us, we will do worse to you."
Wilson notes (pg 434) that VP Cheney runs a "parallel national security office," which has no congressional oversight, and hence can "circumvent long-standing and accepted reporting structures and to skew decision-making practices."
As a result, as reported by Joe Klein in Time (7-5-04) "the intelligence community is at war with the White House." Klein notes that "multiple intelligence sources" indicated to him their belief that Cheny strong-armed out-going CIA Director George Tenet, to make him support Cheney and Rumsfeld's positions on Iraq.
Cheney, Niger, and Wilson's Trip
Wilson notes a report on a possible Niger-Iraq yellow cake uranium transaction had "aroused the interests of Vice President Dick Cheney." (pg 14) Cheney's office "had tasked the CIA to determine if there was any truth to the report." (pg 14)
It is clear that Cheney was aware of the Niger report, and had directed his office to have the CIA do an investigation of it. There is evidence that on March 5, the CIA gave VP Cheney an oral report on Wilson's findings. This was three days before the State Department spokesperson told the media, "We fell for it," and that Wilson told CNN that the State Department had more information on that subject. March 8 was also the day that the "workshop" to discredit Wilson was held in Cheney's office.
"What I Didn't Find" vs "16 Words"
The White House retracted President Bush's infamous 16 words immediately after Wilson's op-ed appeared in the New York Times.
On 7-13-03, Condi Rice told Fox News Sunday that, "It is ludicrous to suggest that the president of the United States went to war on the question of whether Saddam Hussein sought uranium from Africa."
On 7-14-03, Robert Novak exposed Valerie Plame's identity. It is important to recognize that Novak was aware that Plame was an operative who specialized in WMDs, and that he had been asked by the CIA not to reveal her identity, or even print her name, in an article on Wilson.
The White House continued to engage in efforts to discredit Wilson, including sending three identical e-mails of "talking points" to Keith Olbermann when Wilson was appearing on MSNBC's Countdown.
1982 Intelligence Identity Protection Act
Wilson notes that the administration had already acknowledged the Niger-Iraq link was unsubstantiated, and that logically, they should have focused attention on how the 16 words made their way into the president's State of the Union address. The effort to expose Plame's identity made little sense. (pg 7)
Later, he continues with, "The White House gained nothing by publicizing Valerie's name..." (pg 7)
"Then it struck me that the attack by Rove and the administration on my wife had little to do with her, but a lot to do with others who might be tempted to speak out." (pgs 5-6)
"The decision of the president's people to come after me .... arose from no concerns over the emergence of secrets from my mission -- there weren't any." (pg 339)
"However offensive, there was a certain logic to it. If you have something to hide, one way to keep it secret is to threaten anyone who might expose it. But it was too late to silence me." (pg 338)
Goal #3: Why Cheney Exposed Plame
Wilson notes that Sandy Berger, President Clinton's national security advisor, pointed out that since the Bush people had never backed down before, the fact that they had been "so quick to admit their error this time meant they must have something more important to protect." (pg 4)
In Worse Than Watergate, John Dean calls the exposing of Plame the "Dirtiest of Dirty Tricks." He writes that "revealing her identity damaged the national security and her career, and resulted in the loss of a valuable government asset." He called this action "literally life-threatening." (pgs 170-171)
What could have possibly been so important to VP Cheney that he oversaw the violating of the 1982 IIPA, and risked a White House scandal? The answer clearly can not be found in goals #1 or #2.
The answer, which supports goal #3, appears in Klein's article: "Furthermore, there is intense anger over the White House's revealing the identity of Plame, who may have been active in a sting operation involving the trafficking of WMD components. ..... 'Only a very high-ranking official could have had access to the knowledge that Plame was on the payroll' of the CIA, an intelligence source told me."
And that very high-ranking official may have known through his parallel national security office about the activities that Plame was involved with at that time. The answer to goal #3 likely is to be found in the checklist of things Valerie Plame did to mitigate the damage done by Novak's article immediately after she read it.
Conclusions
This paper presents direct evidence that the intelligence group that operates out of VP Cheney's office orchestrated the exposure of Valerie Plame as a CIA operative, in order to realize goal #1, the "punishing" of Joseph Wilson for publicly challenging President Bush.
It includes both direct and circumstantial evidence from sources including Wilson, Dean, Klein, and others, that indicates they also had goal #2 in mind: to intimidate any other potential sources that could challenge their reasons for invading Iraq, as well as other measures in their "war on terorism."
Yet these two goals alone do not explain why VP Cheney would (1) take part in a measure that would violate a federal law against exposing a CIA operative, or (2) risk a serious scandal for the Bush Administration.
The possibility that VP Cheney was hoping to derail a sting operation involving Valerie Plame, which is our identified goal #3, does explain why VP Cheney would condone the breaking of the federal law, and risk the most serious scandal that this administration faces.
Further research by an ad hoc DU "think tank" has identified possible connections between businesses connected to VP Cheney that may be associated with the sale of WMD components to countries in the Middle East. It is our belief that this theory and the evidence that supports it needs a more in-depth investigation.

The Revolutionary Presidency vs. the Bill of Rights

This paper will examine the dangers to constitutional democracy posed by the Bush Administration. It will review the concepts of separation of federal powers, the practice of the balancing of those powers, and scrutinize several areas where Bush/Cheney have corrupted this constitutional system that our democracy is based upon.

This paper will focus primarily on how the growing menace of an Imperial Presidency of the Nixon era has become the threatening reality of the Revolutionary Presidency today.

2) The Balance of Powers
A- The theories behind the constitutional democracy of the United States are the "distinctive American contribution(s) to the art of government." (The Imperial Presidency; Schlesinger; pg vii)

The idea of the 13 Colonies forming a confederate federal state came directly from meetings between Founding Fathers, primarily Ben Franklin, and the Grand Council of the Haudenosaunee, or Six Nations Iroquois Confederacy. Jefferson was influenced by the Iroquois' concepts of the freedoms of individuals; these, along with the contributions of progressive European thought (found primarily in France), led to the Bill of Rights.

However, in European history, governments had assumed a unified authority that allowed them to control, and deny, basic human rights to citizens of the state. Jefferson and Madison and others created the more perfect union, which allowed citizens to control the government through a series of checks and balances implied in the separation of powers on the federal level.

B- The three branches of the federal government are the executive, legislative, and judiciary. These three are intended to form a balanced triangle. The separation of powers is not intended to make all three to be locked into an equal status; rather, it offers checks and balances that creates an inertia that keeps any one branch from assuming unlimited powers. The goal, according to Justice Brandis (Myers v US 1926) is "not to promote efficiency, but to preclude the exercise of arbitrary power."

The executive, or the office of the president, has the implied power to provide leadership in emergency situations. In our early history, from the Revolutionary to the Civil War, this power was used only to respond to threats to the safety of citizens ( re: pirate attacks, which generally came from Tripoli, and which share important parallels with today's situation) and wars with foreign nations.

In these cases, these emergency powers were only intended for a brief period, before congressional controls took over. The Senate is the seat of the actual war powers. Further, according to Supreme Court Justice James Wilson, "The House of Representatives ... forms the grand inquest of the state. They will diligently inquire into grievances, arising both from men and things." (Grand Inquest; New York; 1961; pgs 22-30)

C- The history of democracy has been imperfect in the United States. The most basic rights have been denied to both groups and individuals, based upon their sex, age, race, and religion. Issues including gay marriage show that we still have a long way to go.

Yet, for all of its faults, our constitutional democracy has shown the greatest of promise. The efforts of each generation of Americans have brought us closer to providing the rights of free people to a larger, more inclusive population. This is a great nation.

From the Revolutionary to the Civil War was known as the "Golden Age" of the congress. Also, the sequence of presidents, and the series of federal courts moved the nation towards the promise of the Founding Fathers, found in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

The reasons were found not only in those great documents, but in that separation and balance of powers at the federal level. These insured the Bill of Rights was a living entity. In fact, while many today note that President Lincoln suspended habeas corpus during the Civil war, there "was no effective censorship, no Sedition Act, no Espionage Act." (Schlesinger; pg 335)

However, after the Civil War, changes in the economy which were a result of the change from an agrarian to industrial national base, led directly to unprecedented influence of business on the national politics. This new level of extreme corruption led Mark Twain to refer to the phenomenon as the "Gilded Age" of politics.

It is important to note that all of industry would be connected, either directly or indirectly, to the production of oil. By 1870, all of the economies of the industrialized nations were based on oil. The significance of this is explored in greater detail in the book, "Farewell America."

D- Business interest rapidly became central to the decision-making processes of (1) citizens electing officials to the legislative and executive branches; and (2) the domestic and foreign policies of those elected officials in both branches. While the federal courts are defined as the branch that is supposed to "do the least harm to democracy," the changes in the executive and legislative branches created changes in the judiciary, just as surely as the pulling of two sides of a triangular mobile suspended above the crib of democracy.

Thus: (1) the president begins to increasingly dominate the legislative process; (2) the congress increasingly delegates its authority to the president; and (3) the federal courts tend to become "activist" to offset congressional impotence. And despite the best of intentions, and while acknowledging the value of many progressive decisions, the federal courts should not be "activist," as the dangers posed by current federal courts demonstrate.

3) Threats to our Constitutional Democracy

The deteriorative influences of business interests on the separation of federal powers accelerated during WW2. If we examine the relationship of the competition of the world economy on American political life, we can note a progression in the executive branch (including FDR, Truman, Ike, JFK, & LBJ) moving towards the Imperial Presidency of the Nixon Era. The two areas where this threat to our constitutional democracy were concentrated were (a) the war powers, and (b) secrecy. (Schlesinger)
The history of the war powers in terms of the president responding to a threat to the nation's security evolved significantly after WW2. This was due to the influence of the military industrial complex. All American foreign policy, with the exception of some initial attempts by JFK which ended on 11-22-1963, equated the access to foreign resources with national security, and domestic security with bureaucratic secrecy.
This was in opposition to the 64th Federalist Paper, in which John Jay interpreted the Constitution to recognize but two needs for federal secrecy: (1) diplomatic negotiations, and (2) intelligence.

Democracy by its very nature demands the disclosure of information by all three branches of government. Even among the widely varying opinions of the Founding Fathers, there was complete agreement that the free diffusion of information was vital to insure a stable federal government.

Yet as the executive branch created an elastic definition of "national security," the presidents began a more undemocratic relationship with the bureaucracies of the military industrial complex. And the instinct of bureaucracy is "to increase the superiority of the professionally informed by keeping their knowledge and intentions secret." (Max Weber: Essays in Sociology; Grath & Mills; New York; 1946)

4) External Threats to our Constitutional Democracy

The external threats to the USA from WW2 to the present tend to fit into three groups: the Nazi/ Axis powers; the communist menace; and the Islamic terrorist/"axis of evil" group of today. With the exceptions of Pearl Harbor and 9-11, all defined threats to our national interest tended to be defined as occurring in other countries, either to American business interests, or to trading partners. The cultural implications of Pearl Harbor and 9-11 are obvious.

Another external threat to our national security has become known to a large segment of our population through a cultural phenomenon, Michael Moore's movie "F 9-11." The threat is posed by foreign investments going beyond a few acres of land, or shares in a corporate stock. F 9-11 demonstrates clearly that a significant segment of our economy is controlled by foreign governments. One, for example, is Saudi Arabia. The Saudi royal family shows no appreciation for constitutional democracy.

Moore's movie demonstrates that the Saudi royal family is able to compromise the balance of powers in our federal government. Their influence with the Bush administration has stopped a serious investigation into what role they played in the 9-11 attack on the USA; allows them to manipulate what information becomes known to the American public; and interferes with the legal system, when James Baker represents the Saudis in a court action filed by the families of 9-11 victims.

5) The Revolutionary Presidency

The danger to our constitutional democracy could be measured in 2003 by the following: (a) the Bush administration was comprised almost exclusively by people with ties to business that define "conflicts of interest;" (b) both houses of congress, if not impotent, had at least agreed to a legislative abstinence of duty; the only elected representatives who attempted to stand up to the executive were from "minority" populations; and (c) the US Supreme Court had disgraced the judicial institution with its 2000 selection of Bush for president, based entirely upon political and economic interests.

The dangers of an imperial presidency pales in comparison to the current threat posed by the revolutionary presidency. Consider that: (a) George Bush has become the most absolute monarch of any world power in today's world. Add to that the fact that VP Cheney has more concentrated power than any dictator in world history, including Mao Tse-tung; (b) the congress is divided and weakened. The Senate has lost any control over the White House urge for increased war-making, and the House of Representatives no longer enquires into grievances, unless they concern issues such as oral sex rather than Enron, 9-11, the Plame exposure, or the disenfranchisement of tens of thousands of black citizens in Florida; and (c) the idea of 13 Colonies demanding freedom of speech is disgraced by 13 states having "libel" laws making it illegal to express concerns about food farms, or the safety of related "agro-business" food products. (Crimes Against Nature; Robert Kennedy, Jr.)

6) You Reap What You Sow

The Bush administration rules through fear, the "threats" to national security that they define, through manipulating the 9-11 national emergency, and through secrecy. Their policies pose a threat to individual liberties in order to benefit business interests, and they are the greatest threat to constitutional democracy today. The extent of this threat is exposed by a series of books associated with John Dean, Richard Clarke, Paul O'Neill, Robert Kennedy, Jr., and many others. It is also exposed to grass-roots America by the movie "F 9-11."

The reaction of the administration is to attempt to discredit the individuals involved in exposing the political corruption of this administration. This is not a new tactic. Before the FBI focused on Martin Luther King's sex life, before the COINTELPRO operations of the 1960s and '70s, we remember the efforts of two congressional leaders in the mid-50s. Senator Thomas Hennings, Jr. and Rep. John Moss questioned the bureaucratic secrecy that threatened the democratic system, by discussing why the government labeled a Pentagon study of the bow & arrow ("Silent Flashless Weapons") as "top secret." They were accused of threatening national security.

This administration and its corporate sponsors, including the news media, are involved in a similar campaign to discredit critics. This campaign includes Ambassador Joseph Wilson. (see Plame Indictment Threads #1-12)

An unintended consequence of the high level of bureaucratic secrecy is that it leads to no respect for individual secrecy. This is evident from a reading of the Patriot Act: things like medical and library records, which should be protected by the US Constitution, are no longer private.

Further, the exposure of Valerie Plame as a CIA operative stands as the most stark example of the administration's contempt for the rights to privacy implied by the Constitution. 7) ConclusionAt the time of the American Revolution, the "founding fathers" met in secret. They were almost exclusively from the "upper class," and needed to keep their actions secret from King George. While they may have spoken more openly as individuals, their group efforts were not known to the upper class, including the newspapers of the day.
However, the middle class and the poor spread the word. They were aware of King George's spies, so they spread the word on a democratic underground. It took root -- and grass roots democracy has been the most important part of the foundation for this country ever since. The grass roots are more powerful than those three branches of the federal government.
We're in similar circumstances today. Our president is no more in favor of democracy than old King George was. We have two chances of kicking him out of power. The most obvious is the election in November. But there's also the Plame Indictments.
If there is any life breath in the balance of powers, the legislative and judiciary must do their jobs. This is a criminal outfit. There are now numerous "upper class" people organizing to hold this administration liable for their crimes. It's not just democrats hoping to reclaim the presidency in 2004. It's a wide range of citizens who know that Bush and Cheney intend to fully destroy the constitutional democracy we should enjoy.
You and I aren't meeting in their secret get-togethers. We're that grass-roots democratic power. Our primary job is to continue to educate the public, register voters, and increase participation in those treasures defined by the Bill of Rights. Please work to spread the message about the Plame Indictments. We've seen a preview of the administration's late summer counter-offensive.
Let's expose them as totally offensive.
Thank you,H2O Man2004 Delegate of the Mississippi Freedom PartyDemocratic Underground Grass Roots Convention

In The Name of The Father

In the Name of the Father

Ten years ago, at a Chenango County Environmental Management Council meeting, we discussed the upcoming 25th anniversary of "Earth Day." EMC members talked about what they considered the ten most important environmental issues facing Chenango County.

I thought back 25 years, to when I was 11 years old. I lived on Mt. Moses, near the intersection of the Unadilla and Susquehanna Rivers, near Sidney, NY. An early pioneer wrote that the Indians burned the timber off Mt. Moses annually, and that it "afforded a fine prospect up and down the valley .... The deer were as numerous as cattle on a thousand hills .... and the rivers were alive, teaming with millions of fish..."

This early settler founded a community he called Unadilla, later re-named Sidney. He lived on a part of Mt. Moses known as "Brant Hill," named after Mohawk leader Joseph Brant. Significant events in the Revolutionary War occurred on and near Brant Hill, which marked New York's "western front" in those days.

I remember my elementary school principal telling my class about this chapter in our nation's history, and how that history came alive when this 11 year old boy walked upon Brant Hill. But, in the next 25 years, Brant Hill disappeared, having been mined for gravel.

My brother knew by the moon when turtles would come to lay eggs in a gravel bank near a swamp between Brant Hill and our house. Maybe they had laid their eggs there for hundreds, even thousands of years. One day, we watched 18 turtles come and lay eggs there. But that site is gone now as well. It was bulldozed, and a trailer sits where the turtles used to lay eggs.

There were springs that ran openly on the mountain behind our house. I used to sit near them for hours; I would drink the cool, clear water from these springs, and listen to the water's voice as it gushed out. The old man my father bought our property from showed me where he found 12 flint arrowheads near one spring. But all of those springs had dried up by 1995, likely because of the new developments on the mountain.

The old man had told me about a cave on the mountain, which he found when he was young. He gave me directions to it as old men do: go to the large White Pine, then go left to the third boulder, then go straight up to the ledges by the old logging road. I found the cave, which was hidden from plain view. I found arrowheads and spears and broken clay pottery in it. But the bulldozers that turn old logging roads into the pathways for new development have since destroyed this cave.

The developments and even the logging are not the only things that are killing the trees on Mt. Moses. By nature, a tree dies from the bottom up. But today, more trees are dying from the top down, which means that pollution in the air is killing them.

There were blueberry and strawberry fields on my father's side of the mountain, where every family in the neighborhood could pick for days and days. But they, too, have vanished.

When I was 11, there were several active farms on the mountain and the valley that the Indians called Tianaderha. By 1995, there was only one. Since then, the family who farmed that land for generations retired, and sold the land to a developer from New York City.

The name Tianaderha referred to the method of using nets to fish this section of the Unadilla River. I've found hundreds of the stones the Indians used to weight their nets with along the shore here. I used to fish that section of the river with my friends when I was that 11 year old boy. A few years back, while I was walking in a field looking for artifacts, I saw two boys, around 11 years old, who looked to be fishing where my friends and I had. However, when I got near enough to ask how the fish were biting, I saw that they had BB guns, not fishing poles. They told me that they liked to "shoot turds" that floated down the river.

We also used to fish at a reservoir on the mountain across the river. We would camp for days there, having fried fish for every meal. But the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation had found that the site was a toxic waste dumping grounds for local industries. For decades, industries illegally dumped their toxic wastes in and around this reservoir.

Finally, I told the other EMC members about how many of the people in our neighborhood had died young, from cancer. My childhood best friend's mother had recently died, and so his little baby daughter would never know her grandmother. This was the greatest change in the environment, and holds the greatest threat to the families who live there.

Nine days after this EMC meeting, my father died of cancer. He never told any of us that he was sick; even his own doctor didn't know. It is difficult for me to talk about this, even now, ten years later. But today, I would like to, because there are little children growing up in the neighborhood of my childhood, and they deserve to breathe clean air, and to drink clean water, and to be able to eat the produce from their families' gardens. And they deserve to know their grandparents.

No local government official has ever addressed the issue of the extensive environmental damage that has occurred in our area. One elected official told me that it was important not to scare people, as if the general public was somehow too stupid to recognize the high rates of cancer taking the lives of their family, friends, and neighbors.

Government bureaucrats on the state level, and the industry leaders that they are in bed with, say that there is no such thing as a cancer cluster. They insist that there is no solid proof that the toxic waste dump sites are related to the high rates of cancer in the surrounding populations. This is the lie that they are paid to tell.

Now, this does not mean that every government official at every level lacks the moral capacity to tell the truth. But it does mean that any of them who want to tell the public the truth are likely afraid to, because it might cost them their job. And it does mean that we would be wasting our time if we look to our government for answers.

However, we can put our time and energy to good use by looking towards another source for part of the answer. We can look to the people who had intimate knowledge of this land, and its mountains and fields and rivers, and its caves and springs. We can ask those people who lived here for thousands of years. And we can be confident that they will tell us the truth.

The truth is that at the time that Brant lived on part of Mt. Moses, there was a Seneca prophet who had a vision. The spiritual forces that nourish life on earth showed this holy man, Handsome Lake, that in the future, human beings would pollute the environment. Handsome Lake would teach the lessons of his vision. He taught us that when the pollution caused the water to be oily and heat up, human beings would suffer. When trees began to die from the top down, human beings would likewise become sick and die. And when the strawberries no longer grew, it would be because the soil had been damaged by pollution, and the soil would then damage human beings living upon it.

Handsome Lake told of these things at the same time that the early pioneer wrote about the clear water and beautiful mountains of what is now Sidney. Yet today, we witness the oily water of his vision. We see the trees dying as he told, from the top down. And there are very few strawberries, because the soil is contaminated with industrial poisons.

Handsome Lake told us that people would so damage the environment, that the sun would pose a danger to them. This from a people who called the sun "Uncle," and who recognized its life-sustaining energies as a gift from God. Today, two hundred years later, we have to wear sunscreen in the summer, to try to avoid skin cancer.

So today, I recognize that the destruction of the environment that has caused water to be unfit for human consumption, is responsible for the death of trees and strawberries. The same forces that destroyed Brant's Hill destroyed the turtles' gravel bank. And these same forces have killed about fifty people in the rural neighborhood I grew up in, including my father. And I must accept the fact that this same force will significantly reduce the life expectancy of many of the people who has lived there since that first Earth Day.

Yet I do not despair. For with Handsome Lake's prophecy came promise, that same great promise as held by the Christian church that my father attended. We see that promise in the second Old Testament book, Chronicles 7:14, "If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn away from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sins, and heal their land."

We need to look to new sources of leadership within our community. We will not find what we need within the present government officials, or agencies, or business leaders. Instead, we must tap other resources. One of the most important is clearly the student population. Those in K through 12, as well as those in college, need to lead the way. They must study the local conditions, conduct the technical studies on both the soil and the realities of the traditional Indian way of life, and to recognize the lies that the present leadership represents.

Equally important, we older people have to get actively involved with the inspired effort that our youth must take, in order to be able to deal with the environmental problems that confront the families living in our neighborhoods and communities. Because, after all, we want young people to have the opportunity to safely fish in the local rivers, rather than "shoot turds" that float by. And we want them to have living grandparents, and to live to be grandparents.

Water Thanks

Water Thanks

     by Joseph Bruchac

 

The drop of water

hangs from the faucet

pulsing, the heart

of the well still beating

 

I never drink water

Harold Elm told me

even from the sink

without saying

a prayer of thanks

 

the drop of water

trembles, holding

the face of all the worlds

---

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.

January 2, 2005

Is everybody in?
Is everybody in?
The ceremony is about to begin!
-- James Douglas Morrison

Water Man Spouts is a blog by H2O Man, formerly from sites including the Democratic Underground. This blog is an attempt to continue a discussion of the controversial Plame Case, as well as to cover other related topics of interest.

The Plame case had been the subject of a series of threads on the Democratic Underground, which had started in the late spring of 2004. Some of the "high points" of these threads included the "Waterman Paper," an essay that gave a brief outline of the Plame controversy, based largely upon information from Joseph Wilson's book, "The Politics of Truth."

By the time of the presidential election in November, 2004, the Plame case had expanded to include the "yellow cake" document forgeries, and the neocon spy scandal. These are issues that should be of interest and concern to all citizens interested in the American constitutional democracy.

In the up-coming weeks, this blog will offer a in-depth review of the Plame case. This will include information that was previously discussed on the DU threads, as well as more up-to-date and more highly detailed descriptions of the case as it unfolds.

I am hoping that the blog will provide both up-to-date information on the controversial case as it unfolds in early 2005, and will provide a place for interested parties to discuss Plame and related political/social/cultural issues.

Thank you for your interest and participation!

Sincerely,
Padraig O'Waterman