IraqJournal.org

Regular reports from Iraq Coordinated by Jeremy Scahill of Democracy Now

As the Bush administration threatens a massive attack on Iraq, many within the corporate media have chosen to become cheerleaders for the war cause. The words "we" and "us" and "our forces" are used so frequently by major corporate media personalities that it has become difficult to figure out if it is the Bush Administration or the media that are gearing up to bomb Iraq.

With Washington on the verge of seeking to destroy an already devastated country, a group of independent journalists and activists - working together with Democracy Now!, the nationally distributed community radio and television program - are breaking ranks with the war chorus. Coordinated by Democracy Now! correspondent Jeremy Scahill and videographer Jacqueline Soohen on the ground in Baghdad, IraqJournal provides a forum for the distribution of independent information and views from Iraq.

CAGreens.org

Ecology & Earth Stewardship
Social Justice & Liveable Communities
Peace & Nonviolence
Democracy & Electoral Reform
Community-Based Sustainable Economics

10 Key Values:
Ecological Wisdom
Grassroots Democracy
Social Justice
Nonviolence
Decentralization
Community-Based Economics
Feminism
Respect for Diversity
Global Responsibility
Sustainability

1stHeadlines.com

Top Breaking News Headlines.

Bandelier.net

This is a site dedicated to the dissemination of truth. It is a collection of columns and news articles that preserves the dreams of a free press. The site began after a 2-month backpacking trip through Switzerland, Italy and Spain which opened our eyes to the sometimes hideous realities of American policies and politics. Literally 99.999% of the people we encountered on our journey questioned the motives of an empire gone mad, and wanted to know how Americans could possibly be held in the dark for so long.

What Makes Mainstream Media Mainstream by Noam Chomsky

Part of the reason why I write about the media is because I am interested in the whole intellectual culture, and the part of it that is easiest to study is the media. It comes out every day. You can do a systematic investigation. You can compare yesterday’s version to today’s version. There is a lot of evidence about what’s played up and what isn’t and the way things are structured.

My impression is the media aren’t very different from scholarship or from, say, journals of intellectual opinion—there are some extra constraints—but it’s not radically different. They interact, which is why people go up and back quite easily among them.

You look at the media, or at any institution you want to understand. You ask questions about its internal institutional structure. You want to know something about their setting in the broader society. How do they relate to other systems of power and authority? If you’re lucky, there is an internal record from leading people in the information system which tells you what they are up to (it is sort of a doctrinal system). That doesn’t mean the public relations handouts but what they say to each other about what they are up to. There is quite a lot of interesting documentation.

Those are three major sources of information about the nature of the media. You want to study them the way, say, a scientist would study some complex molecule or something. You take a look at the structure and then make some hypothesis based on the structure as to what the media product is likely to look like. Then you investigate the media product and see how well it conforms to the hypotheses. Virtually all work in media analysis is this last part—trying to study carefully just what the media product is and whether it conforms to obvious assumptions about the nature and structure of the media.

Well, what do you find? First of all, you find that there are different media which do different things, like the entertainment/Hollywood, soap operas, and so on, or even most of the newspapers in the country (the overwhelming majority of them). They are directing the mass audience.

There is another sector of the media, the elite media, sometimes called the agenda-setting media because they are the ones with the big resources, they set the framework in which everyone else operates. The New York Times and CBS, that kind of thing. Their audience is mostly privileged people. The people who read the New York Times—people who are wealthy or part of what is sometimes called the political class—they are actually involved in the political system in an ongoing fashion. They are basically managers of one sort or another. They can be political managers, business managers (like corporate executives or that sort of thing), doctoral managers (like university professors), or other journalists who are involved in organizing the way people think and look at things.

The elite media set a framework within which others operate. If you are watching the Associated Press, who grind out a constant flow of news, in the mid-afternoon it breaks and there is something that comes along every day that says "Notice to Editors: Tomorrow’s New York Times is going to have the following stories on the front page." The point of that is, if you’re an editor of a newspaper in Dayton, Ohio and you don’t have the resources to figure out what the news is, or you don’t want to think about it anyway, this tells you what the news is. These are the stories for the quarter page that you are going to devote to something other than local affairs or diverting your audience. These are the stories that you put there because that’s what the New York Times tells us is what you’re supposed to care about tomorrow. If you are an editor in Dayton, Ohio, you would sort of have to do that, because you don’t have much else in the way of resources. If you get off line, if you’re producing stories that the big press doesn’t like, you’ll hear about it pretty soon. In fact, what just happened at San Jose Mercury News is a dramatic example of this. So there are a lot of ways in which power plays can drive you right back into line if you move out. If you try to break the mold, you’re not going to last long. That framework works pretty well, and it is understandable that it is just a reflection of obvious power structures.

The real mass media are basically trying to divert people. Let them do something else, but don’t bother us (us being the people who run the show). Let them get interested in professional sports, for example. Let everybody be crazed about professional sports or sex scandals or the personalities and their problems or something like that. Anything, as long as it isn’t serious. Of course, the serious stuff is for the big guys. "We" take care of that.

AmericanFreePress.net

The MEDIA IS THE ENEMY
Find out why maverick, independent grass-roots media voices such as American Free Press have declared all-out war on the elite-controlled Big Media Monopoly in America and around the globe . . .

In the old Soviet Union, the government controlled the media. Not a word of substance could be published without prior approval from the Bolshevik commissars. Today, in the United States, the situation is starkly similar. But most Americans don’t even know it.

In the United States today, it is a select handful of super-rich families and tightly-knit financial interests—a plutocratic elite—who own the Big Media and who control the government through their ownership of that media. . . .

Every single one of the major media outlets is controlled by this powerful interlocking combine.

BareWitness.org

We are not affiliated to any group but support all efforts to bring about peace and sense in the world. We are just a small group of who decided that we had to do something, anything, to show that we cared and are not persuaded that war is the answer. And if Genetically Modified or Engineered crops and food is the answer, we sure didn't understand the question.

Slash.Autonomedia.org

Anonymous Comrade writes:
"La Paz, May 24 (Prensa Latina) The leader of Bolivia´s Movement toward Socialism (MAS), Evo Morales, has issued a call for unity to defend national sovereignty in the face of threats of US intervention in this country.

Bolivian Government Denounces Destabilization Attempts

In a mass meeting held Monday to demand a constituent assembly to unite and transform Bolivia, Morales condemned continous threats and accusations by George W. Bush administration officials against the popular movement in this nation.

Downing Street Memo

SECRET AND STRICTLY PERSONAL - UK EYES ONLY

DAVID MANNING
From: Matthew Rycroft
Date: 23 July 2002
S 195 /02

cc: Defence Secretary, Foreign Secretary, Attorney-General, Sir Richard Wilson, John Scarlett, Francis Richards, CDS, C, Jonathan Powell, Sally Morgan, Alastair Campbell

IRAQ: PRIME MINISTER'S MEETING, 23 JULY

Copy addressees and you met the Prime Minister on 23 July to discuss Iraq.

This record is extremely sensitive. No further copies should be made. It should be shown only to those with a genuine need to know its contents.

John Scarlett summarised the intelligence and latest JIC assessment. Saddam's regime was tough and based on extreme fear. The only way to overthrow it was likely to be by massive military action. Saddam was worried and expected an attack, probably by air and land, but he was not convinced that it would be immediate or overwhelming. His regime expected their neighbours to line up with the US. Saddam knew that regular army morale was poor. Real support for Saddam among the public was probably narrowly based.

C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.

CDS said that military planners would brief CENTCOM on 1-2 August, Rumsfeld on 3 August and Bush on 4 August.

The two broad US options were:

(a) Generated Start. A slow build-up of 250,000 US troops, a short (72 hour) air campaign, then a move up to Baghdad from the south. Lead time of 90 days (30 days preparation plus 60 days deployment to Kuwait).

(b) Running Start. Use forces already in theatre (3 x 6,000), continuous air campaign, initiated by an Iraqi casus belli. Total lead time of 60 days with the air campaign beginning even earlier. A hazardous option.

The US saw the UK (and Kuwait) as essential, with basing in Diego Garcia and Cyprus critical for either option. Turkey and other Gulf states were also important, but less vital. The three main options for UK involvement were:

(i) Basing in Diego Garcia and Cyprus, plus three SF squadrons.

(ii) As above, with maritime and air assets in addition.

(iii) As above, plus a land contribution of up to 40,000, perhaps with a discrete role in Northern Iraq entering from Turkey, tying down two Iraqi divisions.

The Defence Secretary said that the US had already begun "spikes of activity" to put pressure on the regime. No decisions had been taken, but he thought the most likely timing in US minds for military action to begin was January, with the timeline beginning 30 days before the US Congressional elections.

The Foreign Secretary said he would discuss this with Colin Powell this week. It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force.

The Attorney-General said that the desire for regime change was not a legal base for military action. There were three possible legal bases: self-defence, humanitarian intervention, or UNSC authorisation. The first and second could not be the base in this case. Relying on UNSCR 1205 of three years ago would be difficult. The situation might of course change.

The Prime Minister said that it would make a big difference politically and legally if Saddam refused to allow in the UN inspectors. Regime change and WMD were linked in the sense that it was the regime that was producing the WMD. There were different strategies for dealing with Libya and Iran. If the political context were right, people would support regime change. The two key issues were whether the military plan worked and whether we had the political strategy to give the military plan the space to work.

On the first, CDS said that we did not know yet if the US battleplan was workable. The military were continuing to ask lots of questions.

For instance, what were the consequences, if Saddam used WMD on day one, or if Baghdad did not collapse and urban warfighting began? You said that Saddam could also use his WMD on Kuwait. Or on Israel, added the Defence Secretary.

The Foreign Secretary thought the US would not go ahead with a military plan unless convinced that it was a winning strategy. On this, US and UK interests converged. But on the political strategy, there could be US/UK differences. Despite US resistance, we should explore discreetly the ultimatum. Saddam would continue to play hard-ball with the UN.

John Scarlett assessed that Saddam would allow the inspectors back in only when he thought the threat of military action was real.

The Defence Secretary said that if the Prime Minister wanted UK military involvement, he would need to decide this early. He cautioned that many in the US did not think it worth going down the ultimatum route. It would be important for the Prime Minister to set out the political context to Bush.

Conclusions:

(a) We should work on the assumption that the UK would take part in any military action. But we needed a fuller picture of US planning before we could take any firm decisions. CDS should tell the US military that we were considering a range of options.

(b) The Prime Minister would revert on the question of whether funds could be spent in preparation for this operation.

(c) CDS would send the Prime Minister full details of the proposed military campaign and possible UK contributions by the end of the week.

(d) The Foreign Secretary would send the Prime Minister the background on the UN inspectors, and discreetly work up the ultimatum to Saddam.

He would also send the Prime Minister advice on the positions of countries in the region especially Turkey, and of the key EU member states.

(e) John Scarlett would send the Prime Minister a full intelligence update.

(f) We must not ignore the legal issues: the Attorney-General would consider legal advice with FCO/MOD legal advisers.

(I have written separately to commission this follow-up work.)

MATTHEW RYCROFT

(Rycroft was a Downing Street foreign policy aide)

2005 Project Censored Award

Scientists uncover radioactive trail in Afghanistan by Stephanie Hiller

"Astounding" levels of uranium in the urine of Afghan civilians

Four months after the attacks in Afghanistan by the US and its allies, under the banner of Operation Enduring Freedom, a team of Canadian scientists led by former US Army adviser Dr. Asaf Durakovic, went to the battlefields to test Afghan civilians for evidence of depleted uranium. What they found shocked them.

Instead of depleted uranium, they found medically significant levels of non-depleted uranium in the urine of 100 percent of civilians tested, who live near bomb sites -- 400% to 2000% higher than the normal population baseline. Where did it come from?

Uranium does exist in nature. But all of the likely natural sources -- anomalous geological and agricultural conditions, uranium extracted from weapons production cycles, pottery, uranium mining -- were ruled out. While Al-Qaeda had small nuclear weapons, it did not have the means to deliver them. The uranium had to come from weaponry used during the recent war.

Non-depleted uranium, explains the first of two reports by the medical team, is the feed stock of the enrichment phase of the fuel and weapons development cycles. "NDU" is more radioactive than depleted uranium, whose use, beginning with the first Gulf war, has stirred considerable controversy, with government sources generally insisting that it is relatively innocuous. Nevertheless, more than 221,000 American soldiers are now on disability due to severe war-related symptoms attributed to the mysterious "Gulf War Syndrome" and a growing legion of independent scientists and war vets, among them former Army health physicist Doug Rokke and independent researcher Dai Williams, have marshalled stunning evidence that depleted uranium is the cause.

NDU is arguably not significantly more dangerous than DU; speakers at a panel discussion on uraniums weaponry held in Oakland, CA, last December 4, including Patricia Axelrod and Leuren Moret, argue that the issue of nondepleted uranium is nothing more than a red herring to distract attention from concerns about DU. But if the use of NDU indicates experimental application of new nuclear weapons, as the UMRC suggests, then it should alert the public that proliferation of small nuclear weaponry, proposed for some future use, has in fact already begun.

At the six sites studied by the UMRC research team -- two in Kabul, and others in villages South East of the city -- some type of bunker buster bombs had been employed to penetrate multiple levels of concrete and explode under buildings or in the subterranean tunnels Al Qaeda had used as military installations. In all but one location, the hits were accurate. Bombs penetrated roofs without exploding -- "a clue to the weapons' sophistication" -- in some cases punching through concrete floors before detonating. At the Yaka Root Radio Station, "the blast traveled through the walls, destroying equipment stored outside and damaging adjoining buildings and trees. No fire or heat effects were observed in the buildings or on the combustible materials (trees and wooden structures) outside the buildings."

Subjects interviewed reported large, dense dust clouds and smoke plumes rising from the point of impact, an acrid smell, followed by burning of the nasal passages, throat and upper respiratory tract.

Reports of that study and a subsequent one by the Uranium Medical Research Center in Canada are posted at the UMRC's web site. The author of the second study, Tedd Weyman, concludes his report with the following story:

http://www.awakenedwoman.com/umrc.htm

FreedomForum.org

The Freedom Forum is a nonpartisan foundation dedicated to free press, free speech and free spirit for all people. The foundation focuses on three priorities: the Newseum, First Amendment freedoms and newsroom diversity.

Military Families Speak Out

Press Advisory
May 20, 2005
Contact: Ryan Fletcher 202-641-0277 Nancy Lessin 617-320-5301

Military Families Speak Out About Recruiting Practices:
Families say “Examine the Real Problem - Call for A Stand-Down on the War in Iraq!

WASHINGTON, D.C. - On Friday, May 20, 2005 the Army is holding a one-day nationwide halt to recruiting, to allow reflection on proper recruiting practices and on how to ensure recruiters are using ethical methods of recruiting. Military families with loved ones who have been recruited, and who have served or are serving in Iraq, or who have died as a result of the war in Iraq, say the Army's public relations activities of May 20th will not solve the problem of illegal, immoral and unethical recruiting practices. The fundamental problem is that recruiters are required to sign up new recruits for an illegal, immoral and unethical war that is itself based on lies. The Army's 'stand-down' will focus attention on a 'few bad apple' recruiters and, if anything, a need for 'more training.' But recruiters have been given the job of selling a bad product, and are being placed under intense pressure to increase their sales. Bad recruiting practices are the inevitable result. Instead of playing PR games, Military Families Speak Out calls on the Army, the other branches of the military, the Bush Administration and Congress to call a stand-down on the war.

Anti-War AND Anti-Lie

http://www.monbiot.com/
George Monbiot is the author of the best selling books The Age of Consent: a manifesto for a new world order and Captive State: the corporate takeover of Britain; as well as the investigative travel books Poisoned Arrows, Amazon Watershed and No Man’s Land. He writes a weekly column for the Guardian newspaper.

http://www.pushhamburger.com/
No daily sensationalism here, just the stuff to keep you informed, alert, thinking, active.

SFWeekly.com

SF Weekly is San Francisco's smartest publication. That's because we take journalism seriously, but not so seriously that we let ourselves be guided by an agenda. In fact, we cherish our political independence: The paper has repeatedly challenged massive public subsidies for private developments by leading San Francisco business interests--but it has also blamed liberal political advocates for fostering inhumane conditions at a city jail. Add to our array of public-interest stories a comprehensive entertainment guide--led by incisive, award-winning writing on the cultural scene--and you'll see why SF Weekly has acquired a loyal audience of active, urban professionals, an audience as diverse as the city we cover.

International Day Against Homophobia

The International Day Against Homophobia "will articulate action and reflection in order to struggle against all physical, moral, or symbolic violence related to sexual orientation or to gender identity. It intends to inspire, support, and coordinate all initiatives contributing to the equality among citizens in right, as well as in fact, and to achieve this in all countries where action is possible. According to opinion widely held, homosexuality is said to be freer today than ever before. For the slightly more attentive observer, the situation is globally very different.

Despite homosexuality's apparent visibilty [in the street, in the newspapers, on television, at the movies, recent legislative advances made in many countries for the recognition of same sex couples], the more attentive observer notes that the situation is globally very different. Indeed the 20th century was the most violently homophobic period of history: deportation to concentration camps under the Nazi regime, Soviet gulags, blackmail and persecution in the United States in the McCarthy era... Homosexuality is discriminated against everywhere: in at least 80 countries, homosexual acts are forbidden by law in many countries, the punishment can exceed ten years in prison; sometimes, the law prescribes life imprisonment. And in a dozen countries, capital punishment may be actually carried out. In Africa, recently, several presidents have brutally acted on their will to combat personally this "scourge" which they consider "anti-African". Even in other countries where homosexuality is not considered a crime, persecutions have multiplied. In Brazil, for example, death squads and skin heads spread terror: 1,960 homophobic murders have been officially reported between 1980 and 2000. In these conditions, it is difficult to think that "tolerance" is gaining ground. So, homophobia appears more violent today than ever before.

The Fear Behind the Phobia

Islamic Republic News Agency

The Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA) was established in 1934 by the Foreign Ministry of Iran as the country's official national news outlet. For the next six years it operated under the Iranian Foreign Ministry working to disseminate national and international news. Pars Agency, as it was then known, published a bulletin twice a day in French and in Persian which it circulated among government officials, international news agencies in Tehran and the local press.

In May 1940, the General Tablighat Department was founded and the agency then became an affiliate of the department organizationally.

Agence France Press (AFP) was the first international news agency whose reports Pars Agency used. Gradually, the Iranian news agency expanded its sources of news stories to include those of Reuters, the Associated Press (AP) and the United Press International (UPI). An agreement with the Anatolia News Agency of Turkey further expanded the agency's news outlets to countries worldwide. The link-up also enabled it to provide classified bulletins to a limited number of high-ranking public officials.

It was in 1954 that Pars Agency made a significant move forward. It recruited better-educated people thereby improving its professional services while continuing to avail of dispatches of international newsagencies. It also went on air with radio broadcasts of international
news which it translated into Persian and offered to subscribers
locally.

Expanding further in news coverage, it operated under the supervision of various state offices and ministries such as the Ministry of Culture, Ministry of Post, Telegraph and Telephones, Office of the Prime Minister and the Labor Ministry until 1947. In 1957, the General Department of Tablighat fell under the supervision of the Publications Department of Tehran Radio as an independent department.

In 1963 the Information Ministry was created and activities of Pars Agency was brought under this ministry. Its name was changed to `Pars News Agency,' or PANA, which then began operating 'round the clock.

In July 1975 a bill was passed by the country's legislature which established the Ministry of Information and Tourism and changed the status of Pars News Agency to a joint public stock with capital assetsof about 300 million rials. It then became an affiliate of the new ministry. Its Articles of Association in 23 paragraphs and notes were adopted by the then National Consultative Assembly of Iran.

After the triumph of the Islamic Revolution in February 1979 the revolution's council, in June 1979, decided to rename the Ministry of Information and Tourism to the National Guidance Ministry (or Ministry of National Guidance). This was followed in December, 1981 bya bill passed by the Islamic Consultative Assembly (Majlis) changing the name of the country's official news agency from Pars News Agency to Islamic Republic News Agency.

Be The Media.Visioning Media / Media Bill of Rights

Blogging from the audience, hallways and streets of the 2005 National Conference for Media Reform

The question is, what is public media and it's role in society? These are the big questions we're asking of individuals and institutions, and we're going to ask you. We hope over time you give them some good consideration, and hope you'll reask those questions and ask them of friends, family, neighbors and elected representatives.

We hope will come up with answers that will collectively serve our nation, and have a construtive dialogue about public media.

First the questions:
1. what is public media and how does it serve society?
What should a sustainable public media econlogy look like?
How can it encompass news, public affairs, education, arts and culture, civic engagement.
How does it fit within the media reform movement?
How do we develop strategies and tactics to realize those goals?

What infrastructre does our public media need to have.
How do we ensure ease of use for producers, distributers and users?

The Bill of rights is the foundation for thinking of that structure.

Sustainability. What models of financing should we explore? Should we explore multiple methods? Tax, portion of spectrum sales, advertising?

Governance. What standards do we put in place to ensure accountability and transparency, to offer true diversity.

Another theme is the role of public media in society -- what can it provide that won't be provided by private media?

Should an explicit role be to stimulate creative innovation?

Movement building. How do form stronger alliances? Do we start with mapping all aspects of media reform and independent production?

Do we work more closely together to avoid duplication?

These are the questions we need to answer in order to address the issue. Public media needs to be reformed.

How do we do it?

The National Conference for Media Reform May 13, 14 and 15 - St. Louis

Conference presenters will represent diverse perspectives on media policy issues and media reform activism. Speakers will include activists, academics, artists, policymakers, journalists, and leaders from various local, regional, and national groups. This list will be updated regularly. Confirmed presenters include:

Rana Abbas, American-Arab Anti Discrimination Committee

Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein, Federal Communications Commission

Amalia Anderson, League of Rural Voters

John Arnold, Wayne State University

Medea Benjamin, Global Exchange

Frank Blethen, Seattle Times

Karen Bond, media activist

Wally Bowen, Mountain Area Information Network

João Brant, Intervozes, Brazil

David Brock, Media Matters for America

Sue Buske, The Buske Group

Michael Calabrese, New America Foundation

Ann Chaitovitz, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists

Rev. Robert Chase, United Church of Christ

Jeff Chester, Center for Digital Democracy

Inja Coates, Media Tank

Jeff Cohen, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting

Lauren Coletta, Public Interest Public Airwaves Coaliton / Common Cause

Mark Cooper, Consumer Federation of America

Commissioner Michael Copps, Federal Communications Commission

Malkia Cyril, Youth Media Council

Lauren Glen Davitian, CCTV Center for Media & Democracy

Liza Dichter, Center for International Media Action

John Dunbar, The Center for Public Integrity

Harold Feld, Media Access Project

Saskia Fischer, Media Empowerment Project; United Church of Christ

Laura Flanders, Air America Radio

Bill Fletcher Jr., Trans Africa Forum

Linda Foley, The Newspaper Guild / CWA

Glen Ford, Black Commentator

Al Franken, Air America Radio, author

Des Freedman, Goldsmiths College, University of London

Eric Galatas, Free Speech TV

Susan Gleason, YES! Magazine; Reclaim the Media

Juan Gonzalez, New York Daily News

Amy Goodman, Democracy Now!

Peter Grant, Communications and Entertainment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault

Robert Greenwald, Director; Outfoxed

Robert Hackett, Simon Fraser University

Marjorie Heins, Brennan Center for Justice - Free Expression Policy Project

Jim Hightower, Author; Commentator

Leonard Hill, Leonard Hill Films

Representative Maurice Hinchey, US Congress

James Horwood, partner, Spiegel & McDiarmid

Janine Jackson, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting

Morgan Jindrich, Consumers Union

Linda Jue, Independent Press Association

Myoungjoon Kim, MediaACT (South Korea)

Gene Kimmelman, Consumers Union

Naomi Klein, Author, Activist

George Lakoff, UC Berkeley, author

Peggy Law, National Radio Project; MediaWorks

Jonathan Lawson, Reclaim the Media

Sydney Levy, Media Alliance

Mark Lloyd, Center for American Progress

Stephen Macek, North Central College; Chicago Media Action

Jerry Mander, International Forum on Globalization

Bob McCannon, New Mexico Media Literacy Project

Robert McChesney, Founder, Free Press

Carrie McLaren, Stay Free! Magazine

R. Sean McLaughlin, Alliance for Community Media

Kembrew McLeod, University of Iowa

Sascha Meinrath, Champaign-Urbana Community Wireless Network

Ed Mierzwinski, U.S. Public Interest Research Group

Susanna Montezemolo, Consumers Union

Alyce Myatt, multimedia consultant

Garry Neill, International Network for Cultural Diversity

John Nichols, The Nation

Emmanuel Njenga Njuguna, Association for Progressive Communications, South Africa

David Olson, Cable Communications Director; City of Portland

Jeff Perlstein, Media Alliance

Carol Pierson, National Federation of Community Broadcasters

Chellie Pingree, Common Cause

Jonathan Rintels, Center for Creative Voices in Media

Tammy Ko Robinson, Video Machete

Luis Enrique Romero, APAGA

Randy Ross, Native Networking Policy Center

Nan Rubin, Community Media Services

Lisa Rudman, National Radio Project

Representative Bernie Sanders, US Congress

Representative Jan Schakowsky, US Congress

Graciela Baroni Selaimen, RITS, Brazil

Andrew Schwartzman, Media Access Project

Josh Seidenfeld, The SPIN Project

Rinku Sen, Color Lines magazine

Roanne Robinson-Shaddox, Native Networking Policy Center

Josh Silver, Executive Director, Free Press

Kavita Singh, Community Technology Centers' Network

Jeff Smith, Grand Rapids Institute for Information Democracy

Norman Solomon, Institute for Public Accuracy

Nestor Soto, UPAGRA

Thenmozhi Soundararajan, Third World Majority

Jerry Starr, Citizens for Independent Public Broadcasting

Federico Subervi, The Latinos and Media Project

Makani Themba-Nixon, The Praxis Project

Karen Toering, Reclaim the Media

Jenny Toomey, Future of Music Coalition

Pete Tridish, Prometheus Radio Project

Gloria Tristani, United Church of Christ

Tim Walker, Adbusters Media Foundation

Antwuan Wallace, Funding Exchange

Representative Diane Watson, US Congress

Adam Werbach, Common Assets

Celia Wexler, Common Cause

Granville Williams, Campaign for Press and Broadcasting Freedom (United Kingdom)

Rob Williams, MEME films; acme coalition

Dr. Ernest J. Wilson, Corporation for Public Broadcasting

Karen Young, Media Democracy Chicago

IraqFoundation.org

The Iraq Foundation is a non-profit, 501(C)3 corporation, working for democracy and human rights in Iraq, and for a better international understanding of Iraq's potential as a contributor to political stability and economic progress in the Middle East.

The Foundation was established in 1991 by Iraqi expatriates with the purpose of working with Iraqis and non-Iraqis in promoting its vision. The Foundation is non-partisan, non-sectarian and non-ethnic, and is not affiliated with any other organization or political party.

All contributions to the Iraq Foundation are tax-deductible in the US.

Philosophy
With its educated population and oil reserves, Iraq commands considerable human and natural resources and enjoys a tradition of intellectual and economic prominence in the Middle East. A peaceful Iraq can serve as a stabilizing force and as a catalyst for security and economic prosperity in the region. However, Iraq will only live in peace within its borders and with its neighbors once democracy and accountable government are established. The Iraqi people will only flourish when their civil and human rights are respected.

Objectives
* To expand the constituency for democracy among Iraqis. The Foundation works extensively with expatriate Iraqis, who today constitute over 10% of the Iraqi population. Whenever possible, the Foundation maintains direct or indirect contacts within Iraq as well.

* To highlight human rights abuses in Iraq. Human rights abuses by the Iraqi state, dismal for the past thirty years, have escalated and multiplied. In a 1995 report, the UN Special Rapporteur for Human Rights called Iraq's human rights situation the worst of any country since World War II. Without sufficient recognition and exposure of the problem, it will be impossible to embark on a healthy future for Iraq.

* To educate non-Iraqis about Iraq and strengthen support for a democratic new beginning. The Foundation endeavors to give a clear understanding of the consequences of totalitarianism in Iraq and the cost in personal suffering, economic collapse, and social disintegration.

* To educate non-Iraqis about the potential for Iraq to become a major contributor to democratic reform and socio-economic development in the region in a climate of democracy and an open society.

Counterpunch.org

"We've got all the right enemies."
CounterPunch is the bi-weekly muckraking newsletter edited by Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair. Twice a month we bring our readers the stories that the corporate press never prints. We aren't side-line journalists here at CounterPunch. Ours is muckraking with a radical attitude and nothing makes us happier than when CounterPunch readers write in to say how useful they've found our newsletter in their battles against the war machine, big business and the rapers of nature.

We're in our sixth year now and have exceptionally loyal readers, who have delighted in our irreverent and biting approach. Time and again they tell us they're sick of dull, predictable writing. They want fresh facts, a newsletter that they can enjoy rather than just endure--and we give it to them. Barbara Ehrenreich says, "CounterPunch makes me think. It makes me laugh. Above all it tells me things I didn't know."

Here at CounterPunch we have many friends and all the right enemies. And, guaranteed, you'll never see any of us on the pundit line up at MSNBC. We try to stay beyond the pale.

AirAmericaRadio.com

Janeane Garofalo
Actress/Comedienne/Activist Janeane Garofalo has been consistently working in film and television since she got her start in 1992. This winter she completed the film Stay, with Ewan McGregor and Naomi Watts, and can be seen in the recently released Wonderland, with Val Kilmer.

In addition to a demanding shooting schedule, Janeane continues to perform spoken word and stand-up comedy around the country. Janeane is currently working on a book for Simon and Schuster, titled For Those About to Salute, We Will Rock You which will be a collection of humorous, politically themed essays. A lightning rod for controversy, Janeane's well informed opinions and honesty have inspired laughs, as well as striking a chord with the left, right and everything in between.

Janeane is probably most known for her memorable and critically acclaimed roles in The Truth About Cats and Dogs, Steal This Movie, Copland and Reality Bites, as well as for her specific brand of sharp wit and comedy shown in her roles in Romy and Michelle's High School Reunion, Bye Bye Love, Mystery Men, Clay Pigeons, The Minus Man and The Cable Guy, directed by her friend Ben Stiller. Ben and Janeane also co-authored the best seller Feel This Book (Ballantine May 1999). Janeane was also a cast member of the Emmy Award-winning Ben Stiller Show.

Janeane played the role of Paula, the acerbic talent booker, on The Larry Sander's Show, for which she received an Emmy nomination in 1997 and two Cable Ace nominations. During the fall of '94 she joined the cast of Saturday Night Live. Some of Janeane's other television work includes two specials for HBO and the series finale of Mad About You.

*

Sam Seder
Sam Seder is a writer, director and actor, living in New York City. Seder's writer/director credits include the feature length comedies, Who's The Caboose? and A Bad Situationist and the television shows, Beat Cops and Pilot Season, currently running on the Trio Network. Besides writing pilots for CBS, NBC and Universal Studios, Seder also directed Comedy Central's, I'm With Busey.

Raised in Worcester, Massachusetts, Seder's interest in politics first manifested itself in a position serving the Worcester Charter Commission. He later interned in Washington for Congressman Brian Donnelly and was responsible for maintaining the Congressman's supply of Busch beer and Merit Ultra Lights.

Later, Seder interned for the Energy Commission in the Connecticut State Assembly, where his decision to earn a living as a comedian was edified.

UnansweredQuesitons.net

An on-line community of concerned citizens, researchers, independent investigators and journalists asking and exploring unanswered questions. Our intention is to add energy to those who participate in a spirit of independent, non-partisan and useful inquiry. We believe that good questions can lead to answers and solutions. We believe in transparency that supports people and possibilities with uncommon sense.

We are starting with questions about 9-11 the US and international response to 9-11. These questions lead to deeper questions about the sustainability and integrity of our cultures, our governments and our economy.

MeatisMurder.blogspot.com

freepers and hippies and trolls oh my!
this blog still under construct and is going get some construct from frederoil blog construchun company. this a place for animal news and news of em weird. a place to get away from em politics for awhile wether you a freeper or hippie or troll. blog theme song found here! hat tip for theme song go to shipman of rantburg. hope you are enjoy! signed muck4doo (majority report radio blogger)

Muck's other blog

WhatSmells.com

1. whatsmell.com is a non-racist site.

2. whatsmell.com doesn't claim to be perfect! But makes ever effort to stay up to date on information sources. If there are any questions, please click the forum link in the menu list to visit the set aside area where all that 'care' are welcome to comment and share!

3. whatsmell.com is a nonviolent, nonterroist site.

4. whatsmell.com doesn't mind sharing it's running cost!

5. whatsmell.com doesn't track your Internet viewing history like 99.9% of others sites do with 'cookies'.

6. whatsmell.com doesn't like war weapons with a range greater than 2 inches past the users nose.

7. whatsmell.com reserves the right to have a sense of humor.

8. whatsmell.com reserves the right to only fear the Big Guy that made everything for all, not the BANKERS that want everything that the Big Guy made for all!

9. whatsmell.com reserves the right to, reserve some rights.

FreedomUnderground.org

FU is a forum mainly for people who realize that it is the citizen who is sovereign, and master of the government. The citizen holds all rights. The government has no unalienable rights. The citizens, in order to establish an organized and sustainable society, created a contract called the Constitution of the United States. In that contract we created a government. We gave it certain specific responsibilites and the minimal powers necessary to adequately carry out those delegated responsibilites. We never gave the government any rights; nor did we give it authority to assume any rights. I hold those truths to be self evident.

While FU is primarily for Constitutionalists, I don't think we should bar any ideology so long as its adherents are willing to post and debate in good faith.

FU is not a "family friendly" board. That is a canard used to stifle dissent. Teenagers are too busy thinking about sex and beer to hang out on a boring political site. A reasonable amount of cussin' is OK. Most of us are middle aged, or better, and the newness of cussin' has worn off. So, we're not likely to spray paint the walls. On the other hand, most of us are honest enough, and hard-headed enough, that we're not going to call a pile of shit a cheese souffle. A spade is, in fact, a spade (or a "fucking shovel" in west Fort Worth.)

Brad DeLong

A Professor of Economics at the University of California at Berkeley and is a Research Associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research. He is also Chair of Berkeley's "Political Economy of Industrial Societies" International and Area Studies major, and Associate Director of Berkeley's COINS center. From 1993-1995 he worked for the Clinton Administration's Department of the Treasury as one of the Deputy Assistant Secretaries for Economic Policy. He has taught at Boston University, Harvard University, and MIT in addition to Berkeley. He tries to focus his research on economic history, business cycles, economic growth, comparative technological revolutions, and the history of economic thought.

He has a substantial internet presence as well. His website can be found at http://www.j-bradford-delong.net

Religious Left by Renee in Ohio

The origins of my Religious Left blog:
I was getting ready to post a link to my Religious Left blog in the open thread, just to let people know that I'm going to continue to post updates and links to various articles about the "No Dems Allowed" Baptist church in North Carolina. Last night, for example, I added excerpts from Rev. Barry Lynn of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State and Rev. Dr. C. Welton Gaddy of the Interfaith Alliance. But I decided to rework this into a diary, because I still hear people wonder aloud, "where is the religious left?" It's everywhere, actually--my blog is just one of many places you can start looking.

Recently, I was asked to write up a blurb about my blog for the newsletter of my church. The actual "about me" page on my blog was way too wordy to serve that purpose, so it actually took me the greater part of an evening to come up with something reasonably consise. Below the fold is what I shared about my Religious Left blog and why I started it nearly two years ago.

Over the past few years, as I have learned my way around the Internet, I have really come to appreciate the networking potential it offers. As the mother of young children (at one point a homeschooler) I found it to be a vital resource for finding information and making connections. I even found my way to Saint Stephen's via the Internet, after searching The Center for Progressive Christianity web site for a member church in my area.

When I discovered the Center for Progressive Christianity, I was, of course, thrilled, but my second reaction was "Why did it take me so long to find out about this? I also lamented the fact that the face of Christianity looked a lot like George W. Bush or Jerry Falwell to many people. Even though it felt really out of character for me to start talking about religion--unbidden, whether people wanted to hear it or not--I felt I was being called to do so. I created a weblog called The Religious Left as my way of answering that call with Mary's "Yes" instead of Jonah's "Run away!!!"

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/5/7/94432/16178

PlasticRevolution.org

The idea is simple:
1. Take a credit card of yours cut it up.
2. Take half of the pieces and send it in with your next bill with a letter stating you have stopped using the card.
3. Send it in by registered mail.

and/or The 2nd part to the effort:
1. Take all credit card offer letters and collect them.
2. Open them and separate out the postage paid envelopes.
3. Shred the rest of the contents to protect your identity.
4. Print a letter to put into the business reply envelope. sample (use the sample if you want)
5. Put these in a a pile and build them up until the send date on this web page.
6. Send them in!

Facts about the Bankruptcy Bill:
Lobbying paid for by the credit card industry
Loopholes for rich people so they can STILL shelter assets while the disadvantaged are more responsible for their debts
Hurts the 'Red States' the most, where there is the least work
and people end up broke through no fault of their own

Timeline for action:
They passed it. @#*$!!! Oh well, as far as I'm concerned this is just getting going...bite back!!

Congressional Travel

Power Trips
Reforms in recent years have made many of the lush perks once enjoyed by Congress disappear.

But not all, certainly not travel. That's the conclusion of an investigation by Marketplace, American RadioWorks, and a team of graduate students from Northwestern's Medill School of Journalism, who cataloged every privately sponsored trip taken by members of the House or Senate since 2000.

The result: Over $14 million spent by corporations, universities, and other outside interests, sending representatives around the world, for sometimes questionable reasons.

At this site, you can learn how much your representative and senators have accepted in travel expenses. And you can see how they compare to their colleagues.

Democratic Party
Number of trips for party members: 2729
Total spent on party members: $7,805,362.87
Percentage of total spent on party: 54.3%

Independent Party
Number of trips for party members: 22
Total spent on party members: $53,830.93
Percentage of total spent on party: 0.4%

Republican Party
Number of trips for party members: 2095
Total spent on party members: $6,512,990.35
Percentage of total spent on party: 45.3%

CodePink4Peace.org

CODEPINK is a women initiated grassroots peace and social justice movement that seeks positive social change through proactive, creative protest and non-violent direct action.

“ We call on women around the world to rise up and oppose the war in Iraq. We call on mothers, grandmothers, sisters, and daughters, on workers, students, teachers, healers, artists, writers, singers, poets and every ordinary outraged woman willing to be outrageous for peace. Women have been the guardians of life—not because we are better or purer or more innately nurturing than men, but because the men have busied themselves making war. Because of our responsibility to the next generation, because of our own love for our families and communities and this country that we are a part of, we understand the love of a mother in Iraq for her children and the driving desire of that child for life” —Starhawk

With this call CODEPINK came to the face and space of the national leadership to protest the pre-emptive strike in Iraq. Medea Benjamin, Starhawk, Jodie Evans, Diane Wilson and approximately 100 other women kicked off CODEPINK on November 17, 2002. They marched through the streets of Washington, DC and set up for a four month vigil in front of the White House. The name CODEPINK plays on the Bush Administration’s color-coded homeland security advisory system that signals terrorist threats. While Bush’s color coded alerts are based on fear, the CODEPINK alert is based on compassion and is a feisty call for women and men to “wage peace.”

Through March 8th, International Women’s Day, CODEPINK held a daily, all-day peace vigil in front of the White House. The Women’s Peace Vigil inspired people from all walks of life, and from all over the country to stand for peace. Many organizations sponsored days: Greenpeace, WILPF, WAND, Public Citizen, NOW, Women for Women International, Neighbors for Peace and Justice, among others. On March 8th, CODEPINK celebrated women as global peacemakers with a week of activities, rally and march to encircle the White House in pink. Over 10,000 people participated. Among them, Alice Walker, Maxine Hong Kingston, Jody Williams, Susan Griffen, Starhawk, and Medea Benjamin.

Since then CODEPINK has become a worldwide network of women and men committed to working for peace and social justice. There are over 80 active CODEPINK communities. Some groups have 10 participants, others have over 100. Each groups acts autonomously of CODEPINK-Central. Each group does its own dreaming, and scheming. Some groups take over bridges while others hand out pink flowers with messages of peace attached to them.

CODEPINK-Central serves to connect CODEPINK groups with the international network of global peacemakers. By placing a contact email on the CODEPINK website, local CODEPINK groups make themselves accessible to those in their area who would like to get involved. CODEPINK Central also supplies groups with a range of CODEPINK merchandise to increase visibility: pink scarves, buttons, bumper stickers, and tee-shirts. CODEPINK Central also provides local CODEPINK groups with organizing tips, overarching national campaigns and initiatives. By tapping into the network CODEPINKers coordinate our energies and efforts. More than 30,000 people currently receiving the weekly CODEPINK alert.

Besides grassroots organizing Stateside, CODEPINK women have traveled to Iraq where they helped to establish the Occupation Watch Center. CODEPINK co-creator Gael Murphy has been key to the development of the international coalition of organizations and the management of Center staff. The first all-women CODEPINK peace delegation went to Iraq in February 2003. Another delegation travelled to Iraq in November, December and January and February 2004. CODEPINK members were also in Jordan in 2004 to deliver humanitarian aid to the refugees of Fallujah and another delegation is traveling to Iran in April of 2005.

IndependentJudiciary.com

Alliance for Justice Judicial Selection Project
Since its inception in 1985, the Alliance's Judicial Selection Project has taken the lead in raising the visibility of the importance of the federal courts. The Project monitors judicial nominations at all levels of the federal bench. It encourages public participation in the selection and confirmation process and raises public awareness about the significant impact the federal judiciary has on the country. The Project promotes support for the nomination and confirmation of fair and qualified judges who have demonstrated a commitment to equal justice.

The work of the Project includes: collecting and analyzing information on judicial nominees for members of the bar, Congress, and the public; promoting standards for federal judges; and organizing coalitions of labor, civil rights, environmental and other public interest groups around particular nominees.

JSP also works on a wide variety of projects related to access to justice. In the current administration, we have produced reports on all nominees to the Courts of Appeals. We frequently place articles and op-eds on issues related to the judiciary and its impact on U.S. policy.

AllYourBrand.org

Because, this weekend, the thought of a bunch of cynical, imagination-deficient marketeers sitting around conference tables planning how they could take a very funny meme and use it to make me covet speakers and sneakers and other shit I don't need made me want to puke, that's why.

So, I figured, why not pre-hijack the meme and serve it up to them so that they know:
* Yes, we saw this coming.
* No, it's not clever or funny.
* No, we, as members of your target demographic, are not now positively pre-disposed toward your product.

Obviously, a lot of the inspiration for this comes originally from Adbusters. But I'm not some militant anti-corporate warrior. I'm just your average media-saturated, bozo-filtering consumer and this is my personal innoculation against whatever nice, easy-to-swallow, blue-lit, "down with the kids", ironic, straight-to-camera with a wink and a "Hey, you got me" smirk, meta-post-modern, faux-honesty / faux-deceit, triple dummy-fake, shake 'n bake media sheen that these people are going to cloaks themselves in and come at me with. I want to be tired, tired, tired of this by the time they get their act together.

Some of the ads here could actually work. Some are stupid and about as subtle as a brick to the forehead. Others are plain-old vicious and largely futile kicks in the nads of companies I don't like, consumer society, or whatever I happen to fix my attention on - it's strangely addictive and, hey, there's got to be some fun in doing this! But there aren't that many here yet, and there could be so many. Maybe someone else is doing this already. But I haven't seen it.

The one weird thing is that the phrase itself seems to have this weird talismanic power - with the AYBABTU hammer in your hand, everything looks like a nail. It's a lens that will make you see things in a different and often disturbing way. I started out doing plausible, clever-clever ads, and ended up somewhere else altogether. You'll know when you try it.

Seriously... pick it up. Feel the power in it. Now throw it at something.

What do you see?

Vincent O' Keeffe
26th February, 2001

http://www.planettribes.com/allyourbase/

DKOSopedia.com

The free political encyclopedia.

Welcome to the dKosopedia, a collaborative project of the DailyKos community to build a political encyclopedia. The dKosopedia is written from a left/progressive/liberal/Democratic point of view while also attempting to fairly acknowledge the other side's take. It was started in April of 2004, and currently consists of 2824 articles.