Bay . Area . United . Against . War                     
Local Actions and Campaigns:



Good Anti-War Calendars:

  • Next BAUAW Meeting:


    Recent BAUAW Newsletter Posts:
  • BAUAW NEWSLETTER - FRIDAY, JANUARY 12, 2007
  • BAUAW NEWSLETTER - FRIDAY, JANUARY 12, 2007
  • BAUAW NEWSLETTER - THURSDAY, JANUARY 11, 2007
  • BAUAW NEWSLETTER - WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 10, 2007
  • BAUAW NEWSLETTER - TUESDAY, JANUARY 9, 2007
  • BAUAW NEWSLETTER - MONDAY, JANUARY 8, 2007
  • BAUAW NEWSLETTER - MONDAY, JANUARY 8, 2007
  • BAUAW NEWSLETTER - SATURDAY, JANUARY 6, 2007
  • BAUAW NEWSLETTER - THURSDAY, JANUARY 4, 2007
  • BAUAW NEWSLETTER - MONDAY, JANUARY 1, 2007

    Archives:
    09/05/2004 - 09/11/2004 09/12/2004 - 09/18/2004 09/19/2004 - 09/25/2004 09/26/2004 - 10/02/2004 10/03/2004 - 10/09/2004 10/10/2004 - 10/16/2004 10/17/2004 - 10/23/2004 10/24/2004 - 10/30/2004 10/31/2004 - 11/06/2004 11/07/2004 - 11/13/2004 11/14/2004 - 11/20/2004 11/21/2004 - 11/27/2004 11/28/2004 - 12/04/2004 12/05/2004 - 12/11/2004 12/12/2004 - 12/18/2004 12/19/2004 - 12/25/2004 12/26/2004 - 01/01/2005 01/02/2005 - 01/08/2005 01/09/2005 - 01/15/2005 01/16/2005 - 01/22/2005 01/23/2005 - 01/29/2005 02/13/2005 - 02/19/2005 02/20/2005 - 02/26/2005 02/27/2005 - 03/05/2005 03/06/2005 - 03/12/2005 03/13/2005 - 03/19/2005 03/20/2005 - 03/26/2005 03/27/2005 - 04/02/2005 04/03/2005 - 04/09/2005 04/10/2005 - 04/16/2005 04/17/2005 - 04/23/2005 04/24/2005 - 04/30/2005 05/01/2005 - 05/07/2005 05/08/2005 - 05/14/2005 05/15/2005 - 05/21/2005 05/22/2005 - 05/28/2005 05/29/2005 - 06/04/2005 06/05/2005 - 06/11/2005 06/12/2005 - 06/18/2005 06/19/2005 - 06/25/2005 06/26/2005 - 07/02/2005 07/03/2005 - 07/09/2005 07/10/2005 - 07/16/2005 07/17/2005 - 07/23/2005 07/24/2005 - 07/30/2005 07/31/2005 - 08/06/2005 08/07/2005 - 08/13/2005 08/14/2005 - 08/20/2005 08/21/2005 - 08/27/2005 08/28/2005 - 09/03/2005 09/04/2005 - 09/10/2005 09/11/2005 - 09/17/2005 09/18/2005 - 09/24/2005 09/25/2005 - 10/01/2005 10/16/2005 - 10/22/2005 11/06/2005 - 11/12/2005 02/12/2006 - 02/18/2006 02/19/2006 - 02/25/2006 03/05/2006 - 03/11/2006 03/12/2006 - 03/18/2006 03/19/2006 - 03/25/2006 03/26/2006 - 04/01/2006 04/02/2006 - 04/08/2006 04/09/2006 - 04/15/2006 04/16/2006 - 04/22/2006 04/23/2006 - 04/29/2006 04/30/2006 - 05/06/2006 05/07/2006 - 05/13/2006 05/21/2006 - 05/27/2006 05/28/2006 - 06/03/2006 06/04/2006 - 06/10/2006 06/11/2006 - 06/17/2006 06/18/2006 - 06/24/2006 07/02/2006 - 07/08/2006 07/23/2006 - 07/29/2006 07/30/2006 - 08/05/2006 08/06/2006 - 08/12/2006 08/13/2006 - 08/19/2006 08/20/2006 - 08/26/2006 08/27/2006 - 09/02/2006 09/03/2006 - 09/09/2006 09/10/2006 - 09/16/2006 09/17/2006 - 09/23/2006 09/24/2006 - 09/30/2006 10/01/2006 - 10/07/2006 10/08/2006 - 10/14/2006 10/15/2006 - 10/21/2006 10/22/2006 - 10/28/2006 10/29/2006 - 11/04/2006 11/05/2006 - 11/11/2006 11/12/2006 - 11/18/2006 11/19/2006 - 11/25/2006 11/26/2006 - 12/02/2006 12/03/2006 - 12/09/2006 12/10/2006 - 12/16/2006 12/17/2006 - 12/23/2006 12/24/2006 - 12/30/2006 12/31/2006 - 01/06/2007 01/07/2007 - 01/13/2007

  • BAUAW NEWSLETTER
    Subscribe/Unsubscribe

    Saturday, January 13, 2007
     

    BAUAW NEWSLETTER - SATURDAY, JANUARY 13, 2007

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    Guantanamo Uncassified
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5E3w7ME6Fs

    Blue Man Group on Global Warming
    http://video. google.com/ videoplay? docid=8453442377 878175440

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    REPORT BACK ON VENEZUELA-Tonight!

    7:00 PM Saturday, January 13
    522 Valencia Street, 3rd Floor Auditorium

    Hear about:

    -Factories run by workers

    -The election turnout for Hugo Chavez

    -Occupied factories

    -Socialism of the 21st Century

    See: A short film on current developments in Venezuela.

    Speakers:

    -John Peterson, National Secretary of US Hands Off Venezuela,
    Participant in HOV’s International Delegation to Venezuela

    -Mel Martynne and Mary Eliasar, participants in Global
    Exchange’s Election Delegation in Venezuela

    -Nell Myhand and Lori Nairne, Global Women’s Strike,
    San Francisco Bay Area

    An opportunity for discussion will follow the presentations.

    Sponsored by Hands Off Venezuela

    Hands Off Venezuela is an international organization dedicated
    to the principle that the people of Venezuela have the right to
    determine their own destiny without interference from foreign
    countries.

    Contact info: (415) 786-1680, email:
    sfbay@ushov.org web www.ushov.org

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    MARCH for JUSTICE!
    DEFEND BOATMEN'S UNION
    SUNDAY, JANUARY 14 Rally at Pier 3 11:00AM
    (Hornblower's Headquarters)
    The Embarcadero
    near Harry Bridges Plaza & The Ferry Building
    San Francisco, CA, 94101

    This January 14th the Inland Boatmen's Union and the Masters Mates and
    Pilots will increase the street heat against Terry Macrae's Alcatraz
    Cruises.

    This past December 9th saw a thousand union members and their allies,
    representing 50 unions, maritime and shoreside in the largest waterfront
    demonstration in years. This coincided with a stop work meeting and port
    shutdown by the Bay Area longshore locals.

    The day before Martin Luther King's birthday we will redouble our efforts to
    defend unionized maritime labor in San Francisco and to support the 55
    working families who lost their jobs over 4 months ago.

    We remember that Dr King was assassinated while supporting a garbage workers
    strike in Memphis. He clearly recognized that social justice is unachievable
    without economic justice!

    Organized labor and its allies must maintain these street actions to send an
    unmistakable message to MacRae that a non union ferry operation in the heart
    of the San Francisco waterfront is unacceptable!"

    ALL OUT SUNDAY, JANUARY 14!
    - AN INJURY TO ONE IS AN INJURY TO ALL
    Join IBU-ILWU & MMP on Martin Luther King's Birthday Weekend as we RALLY &
    MARCH for JUSTICE!
    Rally at Pier 3 11:00AM
    (Hornblower's Headquarters)
    The Embarcadero
    near Harry Bridges Plaza & The Ferry Building
    San Francisco, CA, 94101

    March to the Alcatraz Ferry at Pier 31/33 (on the Embarcadero)

    Assemble 10:30AM Harry Bridges Plaza in front of the Ferry Building
    more info:
    http://www.alcatrazunion.com

    for a pdf of the Jan. 14th flyer
    http://www.alcatrazunion.com/PDF/ibu_fly3.pdf

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    RALLY AND MARCH TO END THE WAR ON IRAQ
    SATURDAY, JANUARY 27, 2007, 12 NOON
    POWELL AND MARKET STREETS, S.F.
    Troops out of Iraq NOW!
    Stop racism against Arabs and Muslims!
    End the Occupation of Palestine!

    Over 3,000 dead American soldiers, hundreds of thousands
    of dead Iraqis. It's time to put a stop to the war machine.
    Millions of people voted to get the Republicans out and
    end the war, but we can't leave it up to the Democrats
    to do the only reasonable thing:
    BRING ALL THE TROOPS HOME NOW FROM IRAQ!

    President Bush just announced his intent to escalate the
    number of troops in Iraq by over 20,000 more troops.

    It's time to get the anti-war movement back in the streets!
    On January 27, hundreds of thousands of people will march
    in Washington, DC to demand an end to the war.

    We're bringing the same message to the streets of San Francisco.
    Make your own signs and banners and march with your friends,
    family, co-workers, class-mates, church, union or organization.
    Join us to show Bush and the new Democratic Congress
    that the anti-war movement is back.

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    MARCH AND RALLY IN SAN FRANCISCO
    SUNDAY, MARCH 18, 2007
    (The annual St. Patrick's Day Parade is taking
    place on Sat., March 17 in SF.)
    ASSEMBLE 12:00 NOON
    JUSTIN HERMAN PLAZA -
    MARCH TO CIVIC CENTER
    For more information:
    http://www.actionsf.org/#local4
    answer@actionsf.org
    Phone: 415-821-6545
    Fax: 415-821-5782

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    ARTICLES IN FULL:
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    1) Deja vu, 67 to 07
    "... what happened on January 10, 1967 ...
    alan pogue wrote:
    alanpogue@mac. com
    Thu, 11 Jan 2007
    From: alan pogue
    alanpogue@mac. com
    To: Tomas Heikkala
    tomas_heikkala@ yahoo.com
    [VIA Email...bw]

    2) George Bush once again proved that he is a mass killer.
    By Don Vasicek, Producer of "The San Creek Massacre,"
    a documentary film.
    http://www.donvasicek.com
    [VIA Email...bw]

    3) Open Letter to Members of the United States Congress from
    Former Special Forces Soldier Stan Goff:
    [Via Email - www.marxmail.org ...bw]

    4)  AMERICAN FRIENDS SERVICE COMMITTEE JOINS AMERICA
    SAYS NO TO THE PRESIDENT’S CALL FOR MORE TROOPS IN IRAQ
    “Not One More Death, Not One More Dollar”
    and Bring the Troops Home Now!
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE            
    Contact:           
    Sandra Schwartz cell (415) 999-2436
    Stephen McNeil cell (415) 350-9305 
    January 11, 2007
    [VIA Email...bw]

    5) Oaxaca Government Wants Police Back
    January 11, 2007
    http://www.plenglish.com/article.asp?ID=%7B1369D774-0BE2-4FC7-905F-1580013B196F%7D&language=EN

    6) G.I.’s in Iraq Raid Iranians’ Offices
    By JAMES GLANZ
    January 12, 2007
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/12/world/middleeast/12raid.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

    7) Military Eases Its Rules for Mobilizing Reserves
    By DAVID S. CLOUD
    January 12, 2007
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/12/washington/12guard.html

    8) Massachusetts Rescinds Deal on Policing Immigration
    By KATIE ZEZIMA
    January 12, 2007
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/12/us/12patrick.html

    9) PENTAGON INTENSIFIES PRESSURE ON IRAN
    By Jay Solomon
    "Amid Push to Stabilize Iraq, U.S. Seeks to Curb Influence of Tehran
    Throughout Region"
    Wall Street Journal
    January 12, 2007 Page A4
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116856948010274729.html
    (subscribers only)

    10) Why we stand for immediate withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Iraq
    We call on the U.S. to get out of Iraq — not in six months, not in a year, but now.
    Sign the Petition at:
    http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/OutNow/

    11) Statement by AFL-CIO President John Sweeney On the President's
    Proposal to Expand American Troops in Iraq
    January 11, 2007
    http://www.aflcio.org/mediacenter/prsptm/pr01112007.cfm

    12) Judge demands to know whereabouts of Colo. suspects in Swift raid
    By ROBERT WELLER, The Associated Press
    Jan 12, 2007 11:22 AM (23 hrs ago)
    http://www.examiner.com/a-505424~Judge_demands_to_know_whereabouts_of_Colo__suspects_in_Swift_raid.html

    13) DECLARATION OF THE INDIGENOUS WORLD URANIUM SUMMIT
    Window Rock, Navajo Nation, USA
    December 2, 2006
    [VIA Email...bw]

    14) Pentagon Sees Move in Somalia as Blueprint
    By MARK MAZZETTI
    January 13, 2007
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/13/world/africa/13proxy.html?_r=1&ref=world&oref=slogin

    15) Iraq's Death Squads
    [A bit of history to remember...bw]
    Sunday, December 4, 2005; B06
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/03/AR2005120300881.html

    16) Military Expands Domestic Surveillance
    By ERIC LICHTBLAU and MARK MAZZETTI
    January 14, 2007
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/14/washington/14spy.html?hp&ex=1168750800&en=203bd3d1f0cd9644&ei=5094&partner=homepage

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    1) Déjà vu, 67 to 07
    "... what happened on January 10, 1967 ...
    alan pogue wrote:
    alanpogue@mac. com
    Thu, 11 Jan 2007
    From: alan pogue
    alanpogue@mac. com
    To: Tomas Heikkala
    tomas_heikkala@ yahoo.com
    [VIA Email...bw]

    "... what happened on January 10, 1967 ...

    The big news story that night? President Lyndon B. Johnson's State of the
    Union address.

    The topic that dominated all others: Vietnam.

    I'm going to guide you to some excerpts of that address -- exactly 40 years
    ago tonight.See how it compares to some of the excerpts from the Bush
    speech,"... tonight victory wont be declared on deck of a battleship."

    *LBJ, Jan. 10, 1967*: We have chosen to fight a limited war in Vietnam in an
    attempt to prevent a larger war--a war almost certain to follow, I believe,
    if the Communists succeed in overrunning and taking over South Vietnam by
    aggression and by force. I believe, and I am supported by some authority,
    that if they are not checked now the world can expect to pay a greater price
    to check them later.

    *GWB, Jan. 10, 2007*: Tonight in Iraq, the Armed Forces of the United States
    are engaged in a struggle that will determine the direction of the global
    war on terror and our safety here at home. The new strategy I outline
    tonight will change America's course in Iraq, and help us succeed in the
    fight against terror.

    *LBJ, Jan. 10, 1967*: I wish I could report to you that the conflict is
    almost over. This I cannot do. We face more cost, more loss, and more agony.
    For the end is not yet. I cannot promise you that it will come this year--or
    come next year. Our adversary still believes, I think, tonight, that he can
    go on fighting longer than we can, and longer than we and our allies will be
    prepared to stand up and resist.

    *GWB, Jan. 10, 2007*: Our past efforts to secure Baghdad failed for two
    principal reasons: There were not enough Iraqi and American troops to secure
    neighborhoods that had been cleared of terrorists and insurgents. And there
    were too many restrictions on the troops we did have.

    *LBJ, Jan. 10, 1967*: Our South Vietnamese allies are also being tested
    tonight. Because they must provide real security to the people living in the
    countryside. And this means reducing the terrorism and the armed attacks
    which kidnaped and killed 26,900 civilians in the last 32 months, to levels
    where they can be successfully controlled by the regular South Vietnamese
    security forces. It means bringing to the villagers an effective civilian
    government that they can respect, and that they can rely upon and that they
    can participate in, and that they can have a personal stake in. We hope that
    government is now beginning to emerge.

    *GWB, Jan. 10, 2007*: Only the Iraqis can end the sectarian violence and
    secure their people. And their government has put forward an aggressive plan
    to do it.

    *LBJ, Jan. 10, 1967*: This forward movement is rooted in the ambitions and
    the interests of Asian nations themselves. It was precisely this movement
    that we hoped to accelerate when I spoke at Johns Hopkins in Baltimore in
    April 1965, and I pledged "a much more massive effort to improve the life of
    man" in that part of the world, in the hope that we could take some of the
    funds that we were spending on bullets and bombs and spend it on schools and
    production.

    *GWB, Jan. 10, 2007:* A successful strategy for Iraq goes beyond military
    operations. Ordinary Iraqi citizens must see that military operations are
    accompanied by visible improvements in their neighborhoods and communities.
    So America will hold the Iraqi government to the benchmarks it has
    announced.

    *LBJ, Jan. 10, 1967*: We have chosen to fight a limited war in Vietnam in an
    attempt to prevent a larger war--a war almost certain to follow, I believe,
    if the Communists succeed in overrunning and taking over South Vietnam by
    aggression and by force. I believe, and I am supported by some authority,
    that if they are not checked now the world can expect to pay a greater price
    to check them later.

    *GWB, Jan. 10, 2007*: The challenge playing out across the broader Middle
    East is more than a military conflict. It is the decisive ideological
    struggle of our timeŠIn the long run, the most realistic way to protect the
    American people is to provide a hopeful alternative to the hateful ideology
    of the enemy by advancing liberty across a troubled region.

    *LBJ, Jan. 10, 1967*: A time of testing--yes. And a time of transition. The
    transition is sometimes slow; sometimes unpopular; almost always very
    painful; and often quite dangerous. But we have lived with danger for a long
    time before, and we shall live with it for a long time yet to come. We know
    that "man is born unto trouble." We also know that this Nation was not
    forged and did not survive and grow and prosper without a great deal of
    sacrifice from a great many men.

    *GWB, Jan. 10, 2007*: Victory will not look like the ones our fathers and
    grandfathers achieved. There will be no surrender ceremony on the deck of a
    battleshipŠA democratic Iraq will not be perfect. But it will be a country
    that fights terrorists instead of harboring them and it will help bring a
    future of peace and security for our children and grandchildren.

    Not much to add here -- the words of Lyndon Johnson and George W. Bush
    pretty much speak for themselves.

    Two things, though.

    *First of all, ** 7,917 American troop had died in Vietnam through the
    end of 1966* *, or ten days before Johnson's speech. From the beginning
    of 1967 though the end of the war, an addition 50,285 -- more than six
    times as many -- Americans would lose their lives*.

    Also, and we're not endorsing this action by any means, then or now, but it
    is interesting to note that in that 1967 SOTU, LBJ also called for a 6
    percent surcharge on personal and corporate income taxes to pay for the cost
    of the war. That's a level of responsibility -- and yes, sacrifice -- for
    war that our current president is unwilling to take."
    *"E-Day":It was 40years ago today*

    January 10, 2006

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    2) George Bush once again proved that he is a mass killer.
    By Don Vasicek, Producer of "The San Creek Massacre,"
    a documentary film.
    http://www.donvasicek.com
    [VIA Email...bw]

    "On January 10, 2007, the President of the United States, George
    Bush, once again proved that he is a mass killer. He ignored the
    Iraq Study Group Report, complied and put together by some of the
    greatest minds we have in America. He virtually thumbed his nose at
    the report. He is closer to being a dictator, than any other
    president in the history of the United States. He and his chronies
    are direct threats to all that we, as Americans, hold dear. Amongst
    other things that he stated on his televised speech, was that he
    knows there will be more American and Iraqi casualties with the surge
    of the 20,000 troops being placed in Iraq. He added, in so many of
    his choice words, something like, that this is what is needed for us
    to prevail in Iraq. Then, he moved on with his speech.

    In my interpretation of this, I see it as an indictment against human
    beings, human beings who will die because of one man's (Cheney and a
    couple of other thugs as well) desire to "win" so that he can leave a
    "positive" legacy about himself in history books. Our soldiers and
    civilians in Iraq are victims of poor leadership. Victims of sick
    leadership. Victims of a person who believes it is more vital to
    "win" than to preserve human life. Victims of a person who spends
    more money in Bagdad than in New Orleans, a city in the United
    States of America. Victims of a power monger who does what he wants to do
    when he wants to do it (see how he circumvented the law to get Thomas
    Bolton, a thug, in my opinion, into the United Nations as US
    Ambassador, as one example).

    What has Bush learned since the Viet Nam War? He has proved to me
    that he has learned nothing. He believes that might over right
    works. While people were dying in Viet Nam, Bush was sniffing coke
    and getting drunk, how could he have learned anything of the horrors
    of war? One has to care before they can learn. One learns by living
    in the trenches of everyday life in America to survive, not by living
    in an elitist world where reality is composed of power brokering, at
    the expense of human beings.

    During his presidency, Bush (it is difficult for me to address him as
    President Bush for it degrades the office of the Presidency in my
    opinion) has always done what he's wanted to do, regardless of the
    law, regardless of the loss of life, and regardless of the welfare
    for the people of the United States. He also stated that if Iraqi
    President Milaki doesn't conform to his wishes and take control of
    the sectarian violence, that Milaki will lose the support of the
    American people. This is outrageous! It is misleading. It is a
    lie! I did not vote for this man. I have never supported the War in
    Iraq, or any other war during my 66 years of life. I don't want this
    man speaking for me. This man should be impeached and thrown out of
    office. He should be put on trial for murder, just like Saddam
    Hussein was. This man is a danger to the American way of life."

    January 11, 2007

    Donald L. Vasicek
    Olympus Films+, LLC
    http://us.imdb.com/Name?Vasicek,+Don
    http://www.donvasicek.com
    dvasicek@earthlink.net
    303-903-2103

    The Sand Creek Massacre Documentary Film Project
    consists of eight parts and can be viewed at:

    http:// www.donvasicek.com

    1. Award-winning trailer (1:45) (completed)
    Click on Sand Creek Massace, then Trailer.

    2. Award-winning documentary short (6:37)(completed)
    Click on Shop.

    3. Educational Documentary Presentation (completed).
    Click on Shop.

    4. Two-hour, six part series documentary film titled "Ghosts of Sand
    Creek" (goes into production when money is raised).
    Click on Sand Creek Massacre, then on Proposal.

    5. Book (will be written when money is in place.)

    6. Interactive Media (goes into production when money is raised.)

    7. Curriculum/Lesson Plans (completed and available.)
    Click on Shop.

    8. Study Guide (completed and available).
    Click on Shop.

    Donald L. Vasicek
    Olympus Films+, LLC
    http://us.imdb.com/Name?Vasicek,+Don
    http://www.donvasicek.com
    dvasicek@earthlink.net
    303-903-2103

    Letter to Don Vasicek
    By Bonnie Weinstein, www.bauaw.org

    Dear Don,

    I just viewed your powerful documentary, The Sand Creek Massacre.
    I can't get the words out of my mind, question to Rivington from
    a soldier: "Should we kill the children?" answer, "Nits make lice."

    This horror needs to be exposed. I am so honored that you sent this
    to me. We are meeting this Monday evening and I will make the
    proposal for a film festival. I want this to be first on the list.
    Meanwhile, I will circulate this to our members for review over
    the weekend.

    I profoundly feel that this information has terrific relevance for
    today.

    We can't let this continue to slide!

    Again, I am so honored. I thank you so much.

    In solidarity,

    Bonnie Weinstein, www.buaw.org

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    3) Open Letter to Members of the United States Congress from
    Former Special Forces Soldier Stan Goff:
    [Via Email - www.marxmail.org ...bw]
    http://stangoff.com/?p=444

    The Bush-Maliki Plan, now called The Surge, to deploy an additional 20,000
    US troops to Iraq is a last-ditch effort to prevent a decisive US political
    defeat in Iraq. The principle purpose of this „surge‰ is to destroy the
    Mehdi Army of Muqtada al Sadr , who broke his alliance with the Maliki
    government after Maliki met with George Bush to confirm Iraqi government
    submission to US forces two months ago. Sadr enjoys immense local support
    from almost 3 million Iraqis, and is a very popular figure through most of
    the Southern half of Iraq. Not only will the attempt to use this „surge‰
    to destroy the Mehdi Army inflict massive civilian casualties in the
    tightly-packed warrens of Sadr City, it will ignite a popular rebellion
    among Shia, from Baghdad to Um Qasr, that will effectively destroy what is
    left of the legitimacy of the Maliki „government.‰

    Opposing this „surge‰ is not only politically smart for Democrats; it is a
    moral imperative because of the civilian casualties that are certain to
    accrue. But it is also a maneuver to dodge the larger issue of the war
    itself, and of the 2006 election‚s implicit demand that the US withdraw
    from Iraq. Now is the time to put as much local pressure as possible on
    both parties‚ Senators and Representatives in order to accelerate the
    inevitable US withdrawal from Iraq at the least costing lives. It is in
    that spirit that this Open Letter to Members of the United States Congress
    is offered.

    Please distribute this Open Letter to Members of the United States Congress
    as widely as possible, with the suggestions for using it.

    Suggestion 1: Sign a copy and send it by email and paper mail to your own
    Congressperson.

    Suggestion 2: Have a group from the same Congressional district sign it
    and send it to your Representatives and Senators.

    Suggestion 3: Circulate the letter to as many people and organizations as
    possible in your city, county, or state, and send copies to both Senators
    and all Representatives.

    Suggestion 4: Set up local web sites and lists to garner signatures, and
    publish the letter and signatories in the local liberal entertainment
    weekly. Then send copies of the paper to both Senators and all
    Congresspersons.

    Suggestion 5: Come up with more creative suggestions∑ and implement them, now.

    ***

    Open Letter to Members of the United States Congress

    We the undersigned are opposed to the Bush administration‚s continuing war
    in Iraq, but we are also disappointed with much of Congress – Republican
    and Democrat – as well as with much of the media, for failing to explain
    the real situation in Iraq and refusing to take decisive steps to halt the
    US-led occupation.

    Media and therefore Congressional representations of the situation in Iraq
    are not just over-simplified; they are deceptive.

    (1) There is never any mention of oil in these accounts. Both the media
    and most members of Congress are pretending that the US government‚s
    preoccupation with Iraq has nothing to do with fossil energy reserves; but
    most people in the US know that were it not for oil, the US government
    would have little interest in the region or its people. We do not believe
    that continuing the US addiction to oil (five percent of the world‚s
    population consuming 25% of its oil) is a valid reason to bomb and invade
    other nations and engage in wars of aggression.

    (2) Media and Congressional accounts of the war almost always suggest that
    the war in Iraq – however „flawed‰ – is part of something called the Global
    War on Terrorism. But there can be no such thing as a war on a tactic, so
    we have to ask ourselves if this is not just another one-size-fits-all
    pretext for future military adventures. Iraq is not now nor has it ever
    been a threat to the security of people in the United States.

    (3) There is no such thing as an Iraqi government except inside the Green
    Zone. Congressional and the media accounts constantly refer to the Iraqi
    government as the entity that requires US military assistance to become the
    guarantor of Iraqi security. But the relationship of all Iraqi forces
    demonstrates that this is a dangerous fantasy. The Maliki government – or
    any other government that relies on US military protection to survive for a
    week – commands the loyalty of only a fraction of the armed actors in
    Iraq. The armed forces being trained for that „government‰ are themselves
    loyal to factions with agendas, and these forces are filled with
    opportunists and infiltrators. With 80% of Iraqis now asking for an end to
    the Anglo-American occupation, and the Iraqis themselves identified not
    merely as Sunni or Shia (as simplified accounts have it), but of three
    major armed Shia factions, two major Sunni armed factions, and a Kurdish
    militia of 100,000 that resides in the north itself is divided into two
    camps, there is no possibility of one faction gaining the acquiescence of
    the whole Iraqi population and the various armed expressions of
    populations. The Ma.liki-Bush „surge‰ plan is designed to eliminate
    Maliki‚s Shia and Sunni opposition inside Baghdad.

    (4) The various sectors of the Iraqi population share one goal: they want
    stability to rebuild. This goal cannot be accomplished without
    negotiations between the various groups. With most Iraqis now supporting
    armed resistance to the Anglo-American occupation, no sector that is
    identified with the occupation can gain legitimacy in the eyes of most
    Iraqis. American support for any Iraqi „government‰ is not preventing
    so-called „sectarian‰ violence, it is incubating it. There may be some
    fighting in Iraq after a US withdrawal, but the balance of forces and their
    geographical dispersion are more likely to produce negotiations than
    protracted civil war. At any rate, it is not the role of the US government
    to shape the future of Iraq. What our government has already done to the
    future of Iraqis is quite enough, thank you. Iraqis are far more qualified
    to figure this out than the US Departments of State and Defense.

    (5) An exit is not a strategy; it is a command. Elaborate plans about how
    to withdraw are the responsibility of the military commanders, not
    Congress. Most members of Congress wouldn‚t know how to run a rifle
    platoon for an hour, much less the en masse redeployment of 150,000
    troops. Leaving is a technical and tactical exercise. What is required,
    and what requires the political will of Congress – by de-funding the war –
    is the order to withdraw. Your job is the what, not the how.

    (6) Half-measures happen while people continue to die. Opposing a „surge‰
    in troop levels, but failing to oppose the war, is a half-measure.

    (7) It has been said that „cutting and running‰ would send the „wrong
    message‰ to the world about the US∑ as if being ground down in a
    humiliating series of daily defeats hasn‚t already accomplished this.
    That‚s what they are. Defeats. Speak plainly. Military success is not
    predicated on tactical outcomes; but on political outcomes. By this
    measure, the US has already lost the war in Iraq. We never should have
    gone there in the first place. If this is about preserving the „national
    masculinity,‰ then every life lost in this effort is a pure sin. This
    machismo is the ideology of gangsters.

    (8) De-funding the war will not put troops in danger. Specific conditional
    allocations of funds can be made available for the sole purpose of
    conducting a re-deployment. Much of the money being used in Iraq is paying
    exorbitant prices to private contractors. The war is what is putting
    troops in danger, not cutting funds to continue an illegal and immoral war.

    In November 2006, the majority of voting Americans expressed its opposition
    to the war by putting Democrats back in control of Congress. You must
    understand that this was a „vote against,‰ not a „vote for.‰
    Many of us have been disappointed and even angered by Democratic complicity
    in this criminal war.

    Quit reading the wind, and start reading the weather. Since this horror
    began, support for US aggression in Iraq has gone from 90% to 30%. Ask
    yourself what the pattern is here. Republicans are already breaking ranks
    with the war. Democratic equivocation is establishing the basis for a
    historical reversal on the political question of the war. Those who are
    reading the weather will succeed in 2008. Those who are merely reading
    today's winds will be caught in the storm.

    We want out of Iraq. By 2008, the majority of voters will want out of
    Iraq, and want out immediately, as we do now. They will remember who had
    the courage to say this before it crossed the 50% tipping point.
    They will also remember those who had their eyes fixed on today‚s
    anemometer. You have one weapon to use against this administration – the
    power of the purse – and you must use it.

    Not one more day; not one more dime; not one more life; not one more lie.

    Cut the funds for the war, and bring the troops home now.

    www.marxmail.org

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    4)  AMERICAN FRIENDS SERVICE COMMITTEE JOINS AMERICA
    SAYS NO TO THE PRESIDENT’S CALL FOR MORE TROOPS IN IRAQ
    “Not One More Death, Not One More Dollar”
    and Bring the Troops Home Now!
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE            
    Contact:           
    Sandra Schwartz cell (415) 999-2436
    Stephen McNeil cell (415) 350-9305 
    January 11, 2007
    [VIA Email...bw]

    San Francisco, CA—The American Friends Service Committee calls
    on all Americans to voice their opposition to both the call for more
    troops in Iraq as well as the forthcoming funding supplemental for
    the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.  The U.S. public has clearly called
    for a new direction, and this is not it.  We call upon Congressional
    leadership to stop giving the Administration a blank check.  We call
    upon all to recognize in action that military force is not the solution
    to the war in Iraq.  Rebuilding Iraq remains an obligation under
    international law and cannot proceed until a political solution
    is achieved.  Contact you members of Congress:

    Senators Diane Feinstein at 415-393-0707
    Barbara Boxer at 415-403-0100
    Nancy Pelosi at 415-556-4862
    Ellen Tauscher at 925-932-8899
    Barbara Lee at 510-763-0360
    Tom Lantos at 415-566-5257

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    5) Oaxaca Government Wants Police Back
    January 11, 2007
    http://www.plenglish.com/article.asp?ID=%7B1369D774-0BE2-4FC7-905F-1580013B196F%7D&language=EN

    Mexico, Jan 11 (Prensa Latina) Ulises Ruiz, governor of the Mexican
    state of Oaxaca, requested that the Secretariat of Government on
    Thursday return the federal forces to help deal with the intensification
    of the social movement.

    At his first meeting with Francisco Ramirez, secretary of Government,
    Ruiz asked for a security boost in Oaxaca capital as the Popular
    Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca (APPO) reactivated its protest
    actions.

    The encounter came two days after denunciations against sexual
    abuse of fifteen APPO members, detained on Nov 25, by federal
    officers.

    It also coincides with the presentation of those events before
    the Chamber of Deputies and with the decision of legislators
    of the Democratic Revolution Party to take such denunciations
    to the international court The Hague.

    Ruiz's request is due to the new action plan by the social movement
    since the Secretariat of Government refused to resume talks on
    Monday, saying that APPO lacks a concrete agenda to transform
    Oaxaca.

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    6) G.I.’s in Iraq Raid Iranians’ Offices
    By JAMES GLANZ
    January 12, 2007
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/12/world/middleeast/12raid.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

    ERBIL, Iraq, Jan. 11 — American troops backed by attack helicopters
    and armored vehicles raided an Iranian diplomatic office in the dead
    of night early Thursday and detained as many as six of the Iranians
    working inside.

    The raid was the second surprise seizure of Iranians by the American
    military in Iraq in recent weeks and came a day after President Bush
    bluntly warned Iran to quit meddling in Iraqi affairs.

    There was a tense standoff later in the day between the American
    soldiers and about 100 Kurdish troops, who surrounded the American
    armored vehicles for about two hours in this northern Iraqi city.

    The attack was denounced by senior Kurdish officials, who are
    normally America’s closest allies in Iraq but regarded the action
    as an affront to their sovereignty in this highly tribal swath of the
    country. Iran’s Foreign Ministry reacted in Tehran with a harsh
    denunciation that threatened to escalate tensions with the Bush
    administration.

    The American military said that it had been “conducting routine
    security operations in Erbil Jan. 11 and detained six individuals
    suspected of being closely tied to activities targeting Iraqi and
    coalition forces. One individual was released and five remain
    in custody.”

    American officials have long accused Iran of sending weapons
    and money into Iraq. In late December the American military
    detained a number of Iranians in Baghdad, including two
    diplomats and two who turned out to be senior Iranian military
    officials. The diplomats were released but the others were forced
    to leave Iraq under suspicion that they had been working with
    Shiite militias. The incident also comes at a time when tensions
    are high between the United States and Iran over its nuclear
    program.

    The incident was a major embarrassment for the Iraqi government,
    which has been trying to foster initiatives with its neighbor for
    improving regional security and trade, as well as other issues,
    and it calls into question the extent of Iraqi control over its
    own affairs.

    In Thursday’s raid, attack helicopters roared above the normally
    placid neighborhood here, as American troops backed by armored
    vehicles broke into the office at around 3:30 a.m., carrying away
    documents and computer equipment.

    American Black Hawk helicopters also swooped over the confrontation
    with the Kurdish troops, and at least two landed, said an American
    witness. But there were no reports of shots being fired, and the
    incident ended peacefully.

    Witnesses said the attack was directed at a building that an American
    official described as a liaison office that was properly accredited with
    Iraq as an Iranian government facility. It was unclear whether the
    Iranians who were arrested carried diplomatic passports and whether
    the office was supposed to share some of the immunities enjoyed
    by embassies and consulates.

    Local residents said the main function of the office was to process
    papers for people who want to go to Iran for visits or medical
    treatment.

    Muhammad Ahmad, who lives near the neighborhood, known as
    Old Korea, said that he was awakened by shooting and helicopters.
    “These kinds of actions are totally unacceptable and the Kurdish
    leadership is very angry,” said Fuad Hussein, the spokesman for
    the president of the semiautonomous territory, Massoud Barzani.
    Mr. Hussein called the raid an “abduction.”

    The Iranian government said the raid violated international law
    and demanded the detainees’ release.

    “This is a provocative action by the United States and is against
    all international laws and regulations,” said the Foreign Ministry
    spokesman, Mohammad Ali Hosseini, the state-run radio reported.

    “The Americans are following two aims,” he said. “They want to
    continue their pressure against Iran and, secondly, to create tension
    among Iraq’s neighbors.”

    He added: “The provocative and mischievous actions cannot damage
    the friendly relations with Iraq.”

    A senior State Department official said that the Iranian office in
    Erbil was not technically a consulate, but rather a liaison office
    which also provided some consular services.

    He said that American officials believed that the Iranians intended
    to turn the office into a consulate at some point, but that had
    not yet happened. Therefore, he said, the State Department
    does not consider the office to be Iranian territory.

    Thursday afternoon, the Kurdish interior minister, Karim Sinjari,
    appeared surprised when an American reporter asked him during
    a meeting with American businessmen to confirm the raid
    on the liaison.

    “Yes,” Mr. Sinjari said tightly. “It was American-led.” Asked for
    further details, he said: “We have no information. They did it
    by themselves.” He then cut off questions.

    The standoff began around 11 a.m. in Einkawa, a pleasant and
    predominantly Christian suburb of Erbil where many Western
    officials live and keep offices. Possibly angered by the earlier
    raid, the Kurdish forces refused to let several American Humvees
    through a checkpoint.

    “It was the Americans’ fault,” said a Kurdish guard from the
    checkpoint, who refused to give his name. “We asked them
    to stop but they did not stop. That is why we pointed our
    guns at each other.”

    The standoff, while tense, was carefully controlled by the
    Kurds. The American who witnessed it said that as the lines
    of traffic lengthened on the blocked road, the Kurds began
    waving cars through and they drove directly past the
    stopped Humvees.

    The Iranian Foreign Ministry summoned the Iraqi and Swiss
    ambassadors in Tehran in protest, and demanded the
    immediate release of what it called diplomats, the state-
    run television reported.

    The Swiss represent American interests in Tehran. The United
    States has had no embassy in Iran since 1979, when radical
    students attacked the American Embassy in Tehran and took
    44 diplomats hostage.

    Mr. Hosseini told state-run television on Thursday that the
    consulate in Erbil was set up after coordination with Iraqi
    officials and that “it was involved in consulate work.”

    A measured statement late in the day from Mr. Barzani’s
    office expressed “its sadness over these actions,” indicating
    that it believed the building had diplomatic immunity.
    “It is better to inform the Kurdistan government before
    taking actions against anybody,” the office said.

    The American military said in a statement that “the
    documents and equipment that were removed will be
    examined to determine the extent of the alleged illegal
    or terrorist activity. Based on the outcome of that investigation,
    appropriate action will be taken regarding the detainees.”

    Reporting was contributed by Yerevan Adham from Erbil, Iraq,
    Helene Cooper from Washington and Nazila Fathi from Tehran.

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    7) Military Eases Its Rules for Mobilizing Reserves
    By DAVID S. CLOUD
    January 12, 2007
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/12/washington/12guard.html

    WASHINGTON, Jan. 11 — The Pentagon announced steps Thursday
    to make more reservists available for duty in Iraq and Afghanistan
    by changing the policies that govern how often members of the
    Army National Guard and Reserve can be mobilized.

    The new rules mean that individual Guard members and entire units
    that have already been deployed in the last five years may be called
    up again for as long as 24 consecutive months, officials said. In
    practice, the Pentagon intends to try to limit future mobilizations
    to no more than a year, once every five years, Gen. Peter Pace, the
    chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters.

    The policy change was brought on by the prolonged American troop
    commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan, and military officials said
    it would have been necessary even if President Bush had not decided
    to send more than 20,000 additional troops to Iraq.

    The change, announced by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates at
    a White House news conference, will enable the Bush administration
    to call up tens of thousands of Guard members who were off limits
    under the previous rules, without having to issue another politically
    delicate mobilization order.

    The decision to send five active-duty combat brigades to Iraq in the
    next few months means the Army will need to call up National Guard
    combat brigades that have already done one-year tours in Iraq, and
    to do so sooner, officials said.

    A senior military official said that by "this time next year," the Pentagon
    "probably will be calling again on Guard units that have previously
    done combat tours."

    General Pace told reporters that some of the Guard units “that will
    be mobilized in the coming period will not have had five years since
    their last mobilization.” Some, he said, will have been home for
    four years and some for only three.

    Until now, the Defense Department’s policy on employing Guard
    and Reserve units was that soldiers’ time on active duty could not
    exceed a cumulative total of 24 months in any five-year period.
    Under the new rules, the cumulative limit is removed.

    The result, officials said, is that soldiers who have already done
    a tour in Iraq in the last five years can now be sent back to Iraq
    if their entire unit is remobilized. The goal of limiting deployments
    to a year is meant to offset the burden on Guard members, who
    must leave civilian jobs to serve.

    Until now, many members of the Army National Guard, which has
    an authorized total strength of 350,000 soldiers, have been deployed
    to Iraq or Afghanistan as individuals, sometimes for 18 months or longer.
    Mr. Gates said the Pentagon would now mobilize units, not individuals.
    Any soldiers who have already done tours will again be eligible,
    regardless of previous deployments, if their units are called into service.

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    8) Massachusetts Rescinds Deal on Policing Immigration
    By KATIE ZEZIMA
    January 12, 2007
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/12/us/12patrick.html

    BOSTON, Jan. 11 — Gov. Deval L. Patrick said Thursday that as expected,
    he had rescinded a new agreement between Massachusetts and federal
    officials that empowered the state police to arrest illegal immigrants
    on charges of violating immigration law.

    The agreement was announced last month by Mitt Romney, who was
    then governor and has since opened a campaign for the Republican
    presidential nomination in 2008. Within nine days of the
    announcement, Mr. Patrick, as the Democratic governor-elect,
    said he would void the accord on the ground that state troopers
    already had enough to do enforcing Massachusetts statutes and
    should not have the added responsibility of dealing with federal law.

    Mr. Patrick said at a news conference Thursday that he would
    negotiate a new agreement with Immigration and Customs Enforcement
    giving 12 Massachusetts corrections officers the power to search
    for illegal immigrants in the state prison system and report them
    to federal authorities for possible deportation.

    These officers will be stationed at prisons in Concord and Framingham
    that process all inmates in the system. The governor said he would
    consider broadening this accord to include county and local jails,
    depending on what happened at the state level.

    Mr. Patrick said doing away with the arrangement negotiated by
    Mr. Romney would allow state troopers to maintain a focus on gun,
    drug and gang-related crime.

    “The wisest and most practical course,” he said, “is for state troopers
    to focus on enforcing Massachusetts laws.”

    The governor was joined at the news conference by the Massachusetts
    secretary of public safety, Kevin M. Burke, who said state police
    officials had expressed concern that the increased responsibilities
    would overburden their officers.

    “It would definitely have affected, according to their analysis, their
    ability to deal with their core mission” of enforcing state law,
    Mr. Burke said.

    There were no arrests under the Romney agreement, since,
    Mr. Patrick said, the state troopers chosen to carry out the policy
    had not yet begun a required six-week training course.

    At least eight other jurisdictions have already partnered with
    the federal government in helping enforce immigration law.
    Arizona and five counties in California and North Carolina have
    agreements with Washington involving state corrections officers,
    while Alabama and Florida have arrangements involving the state police.

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    9) PENTAGON INTENSIFIES PRESSURE ON IRAN
    By Jay Solomon
    "Amid Push to Stabilize Iraq, U.S. Seeks to Curb Influence of Tehran
    Throughout Region"
    Wall Street Journal
    January 12, 2007 Page A4
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116856948010274729.html (subscribers only)

    WASHINGTON -- Even as President Bush seeks larger numbers of troops to
    stabilize Iraq, the Pentagon is intensifying operations there on another
    front: challenging Iran over its alleged role in destabilizing its Arab
    neighbor.

    Yesterday, multinational forces including U.S. troops detained six Iranian
    officials in Iraqi Kurdistan suspected of aiding Shiite Muslim militants in
    Iraq. It was the second detainment by U.S.-led forces of Iranian officials
    in Iraq in less than a month. The U.S. and its allies have also sought to
    seal off Iran's ability to penetrate Iraq and ship arms there, with British
    forces stepping up patrols along the Iran-Iraq border and U.S. warships and
    aircraft carriers increasing patrols in the Persian Gulf. Mr. Bush, in his
    speech to the nation Wednesday, announced the deployment of a second
    aircraft-carrier battle group to patrol the Gulf.

    And the Pentagon has significantly increased its intelligence activities
    targeting suspected Iranian agents and Shiite Muslim militants, U.S.
    intelligence officials said. Besides working with Iraqi security forces,
    the U.S. has intensified information-sharing with dissident Iranian groups
    such as Mujahedin-e Khalq, according to officials associated with the group.

    U.S. officials say the intensifying actions targeting Iran are central to
    the new White House push to underpin the shaky government of Iraqi Prime
    Minister Nouri al-Maliki. They come against a backdrop of growing, broader
    tensions between Washington and Tehran, over Iran's suspected pursuit of
    nuclear weapons, U.S. efforts to curb Iran's financial transactions and
    Tehran's moves to increase its influence throughout the Middle East.

    Nicholas Burns, undersecretary of state for political affairs, said the
    administration is seeking to counter Iranian provocations across the region
    as part of a broader strategy. "Iran needs to learn to respect us," he
    said. "And Iran certainly needs to respect American power in the Middle
    East."

    Some U.S. lawmakers and many Arab officials fear the U.S.'s latest tactics
    could stoke a broader regional conflict.

    A number of Democratic and Republican lawmakers yesterday drew analogies to
    the Vietnam War, when American military activities secretly moved into
    neighboring Cambodia and Laos from Vietnam. These lawmakers said U.S.
    efforts to target insurgents and alleged Iranian agents in Iraq could spill
    over into Iran and Syria, and potentially spark wider, sectarian conflicts
    between Sunni and Shiite Muslims around the region.

    "When you set in motion the kind of policy that the president is talking
    about here, it's very, very dangerous," said Sen. Chuck Hagel, a Republican
    from Nebraska and a Vietnam veteran.

    Mr. Bush Wednesday hinted at a significant hardening of policy toward Iran
    and Syria, saying the U.S. "will seek out and destroy the networks providing
    advanced training and weaponry to our enemies in Iraq." Mr. Bush and other
    U.S. officials have regularly accused Iran and Syria of arming and funding
    militants fighting in Iraq, charges both countries deny.

    Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice pushed an even-harder line toward Tehran
    yesterday. Washington "will continue to work with the Iraqis and use all
    our power to limit and counter activities of Iranian agents who are
    attacking our people and innocent civilians in Iraq," she said.

    The White House's emerging policy on Iran's role in Iraq directly counters
    recommendations made last month by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group. The
    congressionally funded group, headed by former U.S. Secretary of State James
    Baker and former Democratic Rep. Lee Hamilton, had recommended that the U.S.
    directly engage Tehran and Damascus to build a regional consensus on how to
    stabilize Iraq.

    Bush administration officials working on Middle East policy said the White
    House's moves to confront Tehran directly in Iraq predates the ISG study,
    having been in development for nearly six months. From the earliest days of
    the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, Pentagon officials have voiced fears that
    Iran was using the fall of Saddam Hussein to increase its influence among
    Iraqi Shiites, who constitute a majority in the country but had lived under
    Sunni Muslim rule for decades prior to Mr. Hussein's fall.

    And U.S. intelligence officials said that during the past year, they have
    noticed a significant increase of munitions and designs for the construction
    of improvised explosive devices, or IEDs, coming across the Iranian border.
    IEDs are the largest killers of U.S. soldiers in Iraq, according to the
    Pentagon.

    Of particular concern to Pentagon planners is the alleged role of Qods
    Force, the international arm of Tehran's Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps,
    in trafficking IEDs into Iraq, intelligence officials said. The guard corps
    is believed to have developed close ties to both the Mahdi Army, a Shiite
    militia headed by the Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, and the Badr Brigade,
    the militant arm of Iraq's largest Shiite political party, the Supreme
    Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq.

    The Pentagon moves in Iraq to arrest Iranian diplomats in both Irbil and
    Baghdad over the past month were directly aimed at trying to stanch the flow
    of IEDs and other armaments into Iraq, U.S. officials involved in the
    program said. The U.S. has alleged that the Revolutionary Guard corps has
    used front companies and religious foundations to move some of these
    armaments over the Iran-Iraq border. And U.S. officials said they have
    extensive intelligence showing many of the diplomats detained were senior
    members of the corps.

    The Iranian government immediately protested the U.S. moves, while Iraqi and
    Kurdish officials asked the U.S. to show restraint in confronting Iran.
    Baghdad views Tehran as an increasingly important economic partner and
    crucial to its internal stability. "Sometimes we pay the price for the
    tension in relations between Iran and the U.S. and Syria," said Iraqi
    government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh, according to the Associated Press.

    Aside from escalating strains between the U.S. and Iran, Middle East
    analysts said Mr. Bush's new Iraq strategy -- such as adding more than
    10,000 troops in Baghdad -- will inevitably increase tensions between
    American forces and the Mahdi Army, which controls much of the Iraqi
    capital, and that an escalation in fighting could turn Iraq's Shiite
    majority even further against the U.S.

    Of more concern to U.S. lawmakers is the potential that these U.S. actions
    against Iran could escalate. Under one possible scenario, U.S. forces could
    cross into Iran or Syria in pursuit of suspected insurgents or their allies,
    or use alleged Iranian activities inside Iraq as a pretext for a wider
    assault on Iran. The fear is that any such military activities could ignite
    a wider conflict.

    "The potential for sparking a wider conflict is great," said Trita Parsi, an
    Iran analyst and president of the National Iranian American Council in
    Washington. "I think that if we're going for a confrontation with Iran, the
    pretext will be Iraq."

    --Write to Jay Solomon at jay.solomon@wsj.com

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    10) Why we stand for immediate withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Iraq
    We call on the U.S. to get out of Iraq — not in six months, not in a year, but now.
    Sign the Petition at:
    http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/OutNow/

    THE U.S. occupation of Iraq has not liberated the Iraqi people, but
    has made life worse for most Iraqis.

    Tens of thousands of U.S. service people have been killed or maimed,
    and hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis have lost their lives as
    a result of the U.S. invasion in 2003, the ongoing occupation, and
    the violence unleashed by them.

    Iraq's infrastructure has been destroyed, and U.S. plans for
    reconstruction abandoned. There is less electricity, less clean
    drinking water, and more unemployment today than before
    the U.S. invasion.

    All of the justifications initially provided by the U.S. for waging
    war on Iraq have been exposed as lies; the real reasons for the
    invasion — to control Iraq's oil reserves and to increase U.S. strategic
    influence in the region — now stand revealed.

    The Bush administration has insisted again and again that stability,
    democracy, and prosperity are around the next bend in the road.
    But with each day that the U.S. stays, the violence and lack of
    security facing Iraqis worsen. The U.S. says that it cannot withdraw
    its military because Iraq will collapse into civil war if it does. But
    the U.S. has deliberately stoked sectarian divisions in its ongoing
    attempt to install a U.S.-friendly regime, thus driving Iraq towards
    civil war.

    The November elections in the United States sent a clear message
    that voters reject the Iraq war, and opinion polls show that seven
    in 10 Iraqis want the U.S. to leave sooner rather than later. Even
    most U.S. military and political leaders agree that staying the
    course in Iraq is a policy that is bound to fail.

    Yet all the various alternative plans for Iraq now being discussed
    in Washington, including those proposed by House and Senate
    Democrats, aren't about withdrawing the U.S. military from Iraq.
    Rather, these strategies are about continuing the pursuit of U.S.
    goals in Iraq and the larger Middle East using different means.

    Even the proposal to redeploy U.S. troops outside of Iraq, a plan
    favored by many Democratic Party leaders, envisions continued
    U.S. intervention inside Iraq.

    With former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger insisting that
    a military victory in Iraq is no longer possible and (Ret.) Lt. Gen.
    William Odom calling for "complete withdrawal" of all U.S. troops,
    the antiwar movement should demand no less than the immediate
    withdrawal of the U.S. military — as well as reparations to the
    Iraqi people, so they can rebuild their own society and genuinely
    determine their own future.

    Ali Abunimah
    ElectronicIraq.net
    Gilbert Achcar
    Author
    Clash of Barbarisms
    Michael Albert
    ZNet
    Tariq Ali
    Author
    Bush in Babylon
    Anthony Arnove
    Author
    Iraq: The Logic of Withdrawal
    Noam Chomsky
    Author
    Hegemony or Survival
    Kelly Dougherty
    Executive Director
    Iraq Veterans Against the War*
    Eve Ensler
    Playwright
    The Vagina Monologues
    Eduardo Galeano
    Author
    The Open Veins of Latin America
    Rashid Khalidi
    Edward Said Professor of Arab Studies
    Columbia University
    Camilo Mejía
    First Iraq War resister to refuse redeployment
    Arundhati Roy
    Author
    God of Small Things
    Cindy Sheehan
    Gold Star Families for Peace, mother of
    Army Spc. Casey Sheehan, killed in Iraq
    Howard Zinn
    Author
    A People's History of the United States

    * for identification purposes only

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    11) Statement by AFL-CIO President John Sweeney On the President's
    Proposal to Expand American Troops in Iraq
    January 11, 2007
    http://www.aflcio.org/mediacenter/prsptm/pr01112007.cfm

    No United States foreign policy can be sustained without the informed
    consent of the American people. Last November the American people
    spoke loudly and clearly that the President’s course in Iraq was flawed
    and that he should begin bringing our troops home rapidly.

    Rather than heed the will of American citizens, or listen to military
    leaders speaking out against the current policy in Iraq, the President
    is choosing to make one last attempt to salvage his own legacy
    by putting in harm’s way more young American soldiers.

    These soldiers – the men and women risking their lives in Iraq –
    come from America’s working families. They are our sons and
    daughters, our sisters and brothers, our husbands and wives.
    They always answer when called to duty. For that fundamental
    commitment to this nation, they deserve leaders who will call
    them only when the nation’s security is at risk and there is
    a clear plan for victory. This administration has failed and
    continues to fail that basic obligation.

    As our generals on the ground in Iraq have said, there is no
    military solution to the civil strife that now wracks that country.
    Only a political solution – effected by the Iraqis themselves –
    can resolve what has become an internal struggle among
    Iraqis themselves.

    What is needed in Iraq is an expansion of political and
    diplomatic efforts – not an increase in United States military
    performing police functions. Moreover, sustainable social and
    economic development and the guarantee of fundamental
    labor and trade union rights are absolutely essential. The
    President insists that we must succeed militarily in order
    to establish the conditions for a political settlement. In fact,
    the reverse is true. Unless there is first the political will
    to stop the violence, there can be no military solution
    involving American troops.

    American policy in Iraq has been based on false premises
    and wishful thinking since the beginning. And we have tried
    to increase American troop presence in the most violent
    and dangerous areas of Iraq before without success.

    We urge the Congress of the United States to perform its
    constitutional responsibilities and insist that the President,
    and his military leaders, clearly articulate the path for
    withdrawal of American troops from Iraq rapidly. The
    dedication and patriotism of those young men and women
    who answer the call to service deserve no less.

    Contact: Steve Smith (202) 637-5018

    Copyright © 2007 AFL-CIO

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    12) Judge demands to know whereabouts of Colo. suspects in Swift raid
    By ROBERT WELLER, The Associated Press
    Jan 12, 2007 11:22 AM (23 hrs ago)
    http://www.examiner.com/a-505424~Judge_demands_to_know_whereabouts_of_Colo__suspects_in_Swift_raid.html

    DENVER - A federal judge demanded Friday that immigration officials
    disclose the whereabouts of 265 people arrested in a raid at
    a meatpacking plant in Greeley last month.

    U.S. District Judge John L. Kane gave Immigration and Customs
    Enforcement until Jan. 22 to submit a list accounting for all the
    detainees, including those who have been deported.

    "There are people in custody - there is an urgency to this,"
    Kane said.

    Kane told ICE officials to work on the list with union attorneys
    who are contesting the Greeley arrests.

    ICE agents raided Swift & Co. meatpacking plants in six
    states on Dec. 12, arresting a total of 1,282 people. ICE has
    said about 220 face identity theft or other criminal charges
    and the rest face immigration charges, which are considered
    administrative rather than criminal.

    The United Food and Commercial Workers Union filed
    a lawsuit in Denver federal court, alleging the arrests
    of the 265 Greeley workers violated their constitutional
    rights to due process.

    ICE has denied the charge.

    ICE also raided Swift plants in Grand Island, Neb.; Cactus, Texas;
    Hyrum, Utah; Marshalltown, Iowa; and Worthington, Minn.
    The Denver lawsuit did not include workers arrested at those plants.

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    13) DECLARATION OF THE INDIGENOUS WORLD URANIUM SUMMIT
    Window Rock, Navajo Nation, USA
    December 2, 2006
    [VIA Email...bw]

    We, the Peoples gathered at the Indigenous World
    Uranium Summit, at this critical time of
    intensifying nuclear threats to Mother Earth and
    all life, demand a worldwide ban on uranium
    mining, processing, enrichment, fuel use, and
    weapons testing and deployment, and nuclear waste
    dumping on Native Lands.

    Past, present and future generations of
    Indigenous Peoples have been disproportionately
    affected by the international nuclear weapons and
    power industry. The nuclear fuel chain poisons
    our people, land, air and waters and threatens
    our very existence and our future generations.
    Nuclear power is not a solution to global
    warming. Uranium mining, nuclear energy
    development and international agreements (e.g.,
    the recent U.S.-India nuclear cooperation treaty)
    that foster the nuclear fuel chain violate our
    basic human rights and fundamental natural laws
    of Mother Earth, endangering our traditional
    cultures and spiritual well-being.

    We reaffirm the Declaration of the World Uranium
    Hearing in Salzburg, Austria, in 1992, that
    "uranium and other radioactive minerals must
    remain in their natural location." Further, we
    stand in solidarity with the Navajo Nation for
    enacting the Diné Natural Resources Protection
    Act of 2005, which bans uranium mining and
    processing and is based on the Fundamental Laws
    of the Dine. And we dedicate ourselves to a
    nuclear-free future.

    Indigenous Peoples are connected spiritually and
    culturally to our Mother, the Earth. Accordingly,
    we endorse and encourage development of renewable
    energy sources that sustain - not destroy -
    Indigenous lands and the Earth's ecosystems.

    In tribute to our ancestors, we continue
    centuries of resistance against colonialism. We
    recognize the work, courage, dedication and
    sacrifice of those individuals from Indigenous
    Nations and from Australia, Brazil, Canada,
    China, Germany, India, Japan, the United States,
    and Vanuatu, who participated in the Summit. We
    further recognize the invaluable work of those
    who were honored at the Nuclear-Free Future
    Awards ceremony on December 1, 2006. And we will
    continue to support activists worldwide in their
    nonviolent efforts to stop uranium development.

    We are determined to share the knowledge we have
    gained at this Summit with the world. In the
    weeks and months ahead, we will summarize and
    disseminate the testimonies, traditional
    Indigenous knowledge, and medical and scientific
    evidence that justify a worldwide ban on uranium
    development. We will enunciate specific plans of
    action at the tribal, local, national and
    international levels to support Native resistance
    to the nuclear fuel chain. And we will pursue
    legal and political redress for all past, current
    and future impacts of the nuclear fuel chain on
    Indigenous Peoples and their resources.

    Jamie Kneen
    Communications & Outreach Coordinator ofc. (613) 569-3439
    MiningWatch Canada cell: (613) 761-2273
    250 City Centre Ave., Suite 508 fax: (613) 569-5138
    Ottawa, Ontario K1R 6K7 e-mail: jamie@miningwatch. ca
    Canada http://www.miningwa tch.ca
    Skype: jamiekneen

    join signing following petitions and forward, spread the word, thank you

    Tell the Department of Energy that we reject Nuclear Bombplex 2030! (US Citizens only)
    http://www.democrac yinaction. org/dia/organiza tionsORG/ Peaceact/ campaign. jsp?campaign_ KEY=6141

    One million signatures against nuclear power
    http://www.million- against-nuclear. net/#sign

    Britain is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and has
    made 'an unequivocal undertaking' to accomplish the total elimination
    of its nuclear arsenal. http://www.ipetitio ns.com/petition/ notrident/

    Sign Declaration against Nuclear Weapons
    http://abolition200 0europe.org/ index.php? op=ViewArticle&articleId=2&blogId=1

    We undersigned strongly urge the City Council, the Mayor and Citizens
    to take steady steps to join Mayors for Peace 2020 Vision and stating
    that the City and Citizens support the Program to Promote the
    Solidarity of Cities toward the Total Abolition of Nuclear Weapons.
    http://www.thepetit ionsite.com/ takeaction/ 621077558

    Campaign: International Petition to Ban Uranium Weapons
    http://web.bandeple teduranium. org/campaign/ person.php? id=1&id_topic=1

    Safer Energy Policy for EU, Russia and World
    http://www.thepetit ionsite.com/ takeaction/ 856918651

    The Failed Policies will Haunt Us and the World for Decades!

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    14) Pentagon Sees Move in Somalia as Blueprint
    By MARK MAZZETTI
    January 13, 2007
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/13/world/africa/13proxy.html?_r=1&ref=world&oref=slogin

    WASHINGTON, Jan. 12 — Military operations in Somalia by American
    commandos, and the use of the Ethiopian Army as a surrogate force
    to root out operatives for Al Qaeda in the country, are a blueprint
    that Pentagon strategists say they hope to use more frequently
    in counterterrorism missions around the globe.

    Military officials said the strike by an American gunship on terrorism
    suspects in southern Somalia on Sunday showed that even with the
    departure of Donald H. Rumsfeld from the Pentagon, Special
    Operations troops intended to take advantage of the directive
    given to them by Mr. Rumsfeld in the weeks after the
    Sept. 11 attacks.

    American officials said the recent military operations have been
    carried by the Pentagon’s Joint Special Operations Command,
    which directs the military’s most secretive and elite units, like
    the Army’s Delta Force.

    The Pentagon established a desolate outpost in the Horn of
    Africa nation of Djibouti in 2002 in part to serve as a hub for
    Special Operations missions to capture or kill senior Qaeda
    leaders in the region.

    Few such “high value” targets have materialized, and the
    Pentagon has gradually relocated members of the covert
    Special Operations units to more urgent missions in Iraq
    and Afghanistan.

    But officials in Washington said this week that the joint command
    had quietly been returning troops and weaponry to the region
    in recent weeks in anticipation of a mission against members
    of a Qaeda cell believed to be hiding in Somalia.

    Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told
    members of Congress on Friday that the strike in Somalia was
    executed under the Pentagon’s authority to hunt and kill terrorism
    suspects around the globe, a power the White House gave
    it shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks.

    It was this authority that Mr. Rumsfeld used to order commanders
    to develop plans for using American Special Operations troops
    for missions within countries that had not been declared war
    zones.

    But since the retreat of the Taliban in 2001, when American Special
    Forces worked with Afghan militias, Mr. Rumsfeld’s ambitious
    agenda for Special Operations troops has been slow to materialize.

    The problem has partly been a shortage of valuable intelligence
    on the whereabouts of top terrorism suspects. Mr. Rumsfeld also
    dispatched teams of Special Operations forces to work in American
    embassies to collect intelligence and to develop war plans
    for future operations.

    Pentagon officials said it is still not known whether any senior
    Qaeda suspects or their allies were killed in the airstrike on Sunday,
    carried out by an AC-130 gunship. A small team of American
    Special Operations troops has been to the scene of the airstrike,
    in a remote stretch near the Kenya border, to collect forensic
    evidence in the effort to identify the victims.

    Some critics of the Pentagon’s aggressive use of Special Operations
    troops, including some Democratic members of Congress,
    have argued that using American forces outside of declared
    combat zones gives the Pentagon too much authority in
    sovereign nations and blurs the lines between soldiers and
    spies.

    The State Department and Pentagon took control of Somalia
    policy in the summer, after a failed effort by the Central Intelligence
    Agency to use Somali warlords as proxies to hunt down
    the Qaeda suspects.

    The trail of the terrorism suspects in Somalia, blamed for the
    1998 embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, had long
    gone cold. But American military and intelligence officials
    said that the Ethiopian offensive against the Islamist forces
    who ruled Mogadishu and much of Somalia until last month
    flushed the Qaeda suspects from their hide-outs and gave
    American intelligence operatives fresh information about
    their whereabouts.

    The Bush administration has all but officially endorsed the
    Ethiopian offensive, and Washington officials have said that
    Ethiopia’s move into Somalia was a response to “aggression”
    by the Islamists in Mogadishu.

    In the weeks before the military campaign began, State Department
    and Pentagon officials said that they had some concerns about the
    impending Ethiopian government’s offensive in Somalia.

    But as the Ethiopian’s march toward war looked more likely,
    Americans began providing Ethiopian troops with up-to-date
    intelligence on the military positions of the Islamist fighters
    in Somalia, Pentagon and counterterrorism officials said.

    According to a Pentagon consultant with knowledge about Special
    Operations, small teams of American advisers crossed the border
    into Somalia with the advancing Ethiopian army.

    “You’re not talking lots of guys,” the Pentagon consultant said,
    speaking on condition of anonymity. “You’re talking onesies
    and twosies.”

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    15) Iraq's Death Squads
    [A bit of history to remember...bw]
    Sunday, December 4, 2005; B06
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/03/AR2005120300881.html

    OF ALL THE bloodshed in Iraq, none may be more disturbing than the
    campaign of torture and murder being conducted by U.S.-trained
    government police forces. Reports last week in the Los Angeles
    Times and New York Times chronicled how Iraqi Interior Ministry
    commando and police units have been infiltrated by two Shiite
    militias, which have been conducting ethnic cleansing and
    rounding up Sunnis suspected of supporting the insurgency.
    Hundreds of bodies have been appearing along roadsides and
    in garbage dumps, some with acid burns or with holes drilled
    in them. According to the searing account by Solomon Moore
    of the Los Angeles Times, "the Baghdad morgue reports that
    dozens of bodies arrive at the same time on a weekly basis,
    including scores of corpses with wrists bound by police handcuffs."
    The reports followed a raid two weeks ago by U.S. troops on
    a clandestine Baghdad prison run by the Interior Ministry,
    where some 170 men, most of them Sunni and most of them
    starved or tortured, were found.

    The danger this development poses to Iraq, and to the prospects
    of a successful end to the U.S. mission there, ought to be obvious.
    A dirty war conducted by the Iraqi government against one ethnic
    group will make civil war inevitable. It will render impossible
    a political accord among Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds, while
    increasing the likelihood that Iraq will splinter. U.S. commanders
    will be unable to hand responsibility off to Iraqi forces without
    inviting a bloodbath, and the training mission that President
    Bush described at length in his speech on Wednesday will be
    utterly discredited. If there is to be any chance of achieving
    Mr. Bush's goals of a united and democratic Iraq that protects
    the rights of its minorities, the state-sponsored death squads
    and torture chambers must be dismantled.

    Once again, however, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld
    is ignoring a critical threat. Just as he dismissed the insurgency

    in its formative months as a few "deadenders" and minimized
    the systematic breakdown of U.S. discipline in the handling
    of foreign prisoners as isolated freelancing, Mr. Rumsfeld
    now pretends not even to know about the government death
    squads. In a press conference last week, he called the reports
    "unverified comments." This despite the facts that U.S. troops
    uncovered the clandestine prison and that officials from the
    Army, FBI, Justice Department and U.S. Embassy are
    participating in an investigation.

    Worse, Mr. Rumsfeld maintained that "the United States
    does not have a responsibility" to do anything about the
    crimes of the police forces it established and trained, other
    than "report it." Even the man he selected to be chairman
    of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine Corps Gen. Peter Pace,
    could not support such an irresponsible position. Standing
    alongside Mr. Rumsfeld, he asserted that "it is absolutely
    the responsibility of every U.S. service member, if they see
    inhumane treatment being conducted, to intervene to stop it."

    If Mr. Rumsfeld's view prevails, Mr. Bush's latest "strategy
    for victory" in Iraq will be fatally undermined. Many of the
    death squads are run by the Badr Organization, which is
    the military wing of the leading party in Iraq's Shiite-led
    government, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution
    in Iraq. Its leader, Abdul Aziz Hakim, not only refused to
    acknowledge any wrongdoing in an interview last month
    with the Post's Ellen Knickmeyer, but asserted that U.S.
    forces were tying Iraqi hands and should get out of the
    way so that even tougher tactics could be adopted.
    Should that happen, any hope for peace in Iraq will be lost.

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    16) Military Expands Domestic Surveillance
    By ERIC LICHTBLAU and MARK MAZZETTI
    January 14, 2007
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/14/washington/14spy.html?hp&ex=1168750800&en=203bd3d1f0cd9644&ei=5094&partner=homepage

    WASHINGTON, Jan. 13 — The Pentagon has been using a little-known
    power to obtain banking and credit records of hundreds of Americans
    and others suspected of terrorism or espionage inside the United
    States, part of an aggressive expansion by the military into domestic
    intelligence gathering.

    The C.I.A. has also been issuing what are known as national security
    letters to gain access to financial records from American companies,
    though it has done so only rarely, intelligence officials say.

    Banks, credit card companies and other financial institutions
    receiving the letters usually have turned over documents voluntarily,
    allowing investigators to examine the financial assets and transactions
    of American military personnel and civilians, officials say.

    The F.B.I., the lead agency on domestic counterterrorism and espionage,
    has issued thousands of national security letters since the attacks of
    Sept. 11, 2001, provoking criticism and court challenges from civil
    liberties advocates who see them as unjustified intrusions into
    Americans’ private lives.

    But it was not previously known, even to some senior counterterrorism
    officials, that the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency
    have been using their own “noncompulsory” versions of the letters.
    Congress has rejected several attempts by the two agencies since
    2001 for authority to issue mandatory letters, in part because of
    concerns about the dangers of expanding their role in domestic
    spying.

    The military and the C.I.A. have long been restricted in their domestic
    intelligence operations, and both are barred from conducting
    traditional domestic law enforcement work. The C.I.A.’s role
    within the United States has been largely limited to recruiting
    people to spy on foreign countries.

    Carl Kropf, a spokesman for the director of national intelligence,
    said intelligence agencies like the C.I.A. used the letters
    on only a “limited basis.”

    Pentagon officials defended the letters as valuable tools and
    said they were part of a broader strategy since the Sept. 11
    attacks to use more aggressive intelligence-gathering tactics —
    a priority of former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. The
    letters “provide tremendous leads to follow and often with which
    to corroborate other evidence in the context of counterespionage
    and counterterrorism,” said Maj. Patrick Ryder, a Pentagon
    spokesman.

    Government lawyers say the legal authority for the Pentagon
    and the C.I.A. to use national security letters in gathering
    domestic records dates back nearly three decades and, by their
    reading, was strengthened by the antiterrorism law known
    as the USA Patriot Act.

    Pentagon officials said they used the letters to follow up on a variety
    of intelligence tips or leads. While they would not provide details
    about specific cases, military intelligence officials with knowledge
    of them said the military had issued the letters to collect financial
    records regarding a government contractor with unexplained
    wealth, for example, and a chaplain at Guantánamo Bay
    erroneously suspected of aiding prisoners at the facility.

    Usually, the financial documents collected through the letters
    do not establish any links to espionage or terrorism and have
    seldom led to criminal charges, military officials say. Instead,
    the letters often help eliminate suspects.

    “We may find out this person has unexplained wealth for reasons
    that have nothing to do with being a spy, in which case we’re
    out of it,” said Thomas A. Gandy, a senior Army
    counterintelligence official.

    But even when the initial suspicions are unproven, the documents
    have intelligence value, military officials say. In the next year, they
    plan to incorporate the records into a database at the
    Counterintelligence Field Activity office at the Pentagon to
    track possible threats against the military, Pentagon officials
    said. Like others interviewed, they would speak only on the
    condition of anonymity.

    Military intelligence officers have sent letters in up to 500
    investigations over the last five years, two officials estimated.
    The number of letters is likely to be well into the thousands,
    the officials said, because a single case often generates letters
    to multiple financial institutions. For its part, the C.I.A. issues
    a handful of national security letters each year, agency officials
    said. Congressional officials said members of the House and
    Senate Intelligence Committees had been briefed on the use
    of the letters by the military and the C.I.A.

    Some national security experts and civil liberties advocates are
    troubled by the C.I.A. and military taking on domestic intelligence
    activities, particularly in light of recent disclosures that the
    Counterintelligence Field Activity office had maintained files
    on Iraq war protesters in the United States in violation of the
    military’s own guidelines. Some experts say the Pentagon has
    adopted an overly expansive view of its domestic role under
    the guise of “force protection,” or efforts to guard military
    installations.

    “There’s a strong tradition of not using our military for domestic
    law enforcement,” said Elizabeth Rindskopf Parker, a former
    general counsel at both the National Security Agency and the
    C.I.A. who is the dean at the McGeorge School of Law at the
    University of the Pacific. “They’re moving into territory where
    historically they have not been authorized or presumed
    to be operating.”

    Similarly, John Radsan, an assistant general counsel at the C.I.A.
    from 2002 to 2004 and now a law professor at William Mitchell
    College of Law in St. Paul, said, “The C.I.A. is not supposed
    to have any law enforcement powers, or internal security functions,
    so if they’ve been issuing their own national security letters, they
    better be able to explain how they don’t cross the line.”

    The Pentagon’s expanded intelligence-gathering role, in particular,
    has created occasional conflicts with other federal agencies. Pentagon
    efforts to post American military officers at embassies overseas
    to gather intelligence for counterterrorism operations or future war
    plans has rankled some State Department and C.I.A. officials, who
    see the military teams as duplicating and potentially interfering
    with the intelligence agency.

    In the United States, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has complained
    about military officials dealing directly with local police — rather than
    through the bureau — for assistance in responding to possible
    terrorist threats against a military base. F.B.I. officials say the
    threats have often turned out to be uncorroborated and, at times,
    have stirred needless anxiety.

    The military’s frequent use of national security letters has sometimes
    caused concerns from the businesses receiving them, a counterterrorism
    official said. Lawyers at financial institutions, which routinely provide
    records to the F.B.I. in law enforcement investigations, have contacted
    bureau officials to say they were confused by the scope of the military’s
    requests and whether they were obligated to turn the records over,
    the official said.

    Companies are not eager to turn over sensitive financial data about
    customers to the government, the official said, “so the more this
    is done, and the more poorly it’s done, the more pushback there
    is for the F.B.I.”

    The bureau has frequently relied on the letters in recent years
    to gather telephone and Internet logs, financial information and
    other records in terrorism investigations, serving more than
    9,000 letters in 2005, according to a Justice Department tally.
    As an investigative tool, the letters present relatively few hurdles;
    they can be authorized by supervisors rather than a court.
    Passage of the Patriot Act in October 2001 lowered the standard
    for issuing the letters, requiring only that the documents sought
    be “relevant” to an investigation and allowing records requests
    for more peripheral figures, not just targets of an inquiry.

    Some Democrats have accused the F.B.I. of using the letters
    for fishing expeditions, and the American Civil Liberties Union
    won court challenges in two cases, one for library records in
    Connecticut and the other for Internet records in Manhattan.
    Concerned about possible abuses, Congress imposed new
    safeguards in extending the Patriot Act last year, in part by
    making clear that recipients of national security letters could
    contact a lawyer and seek court review. Congress also directed
    the Justice Department inspector general to study the F.B.I.’s
    use of the letters, a review that is continuing.

    Unlike the F.B.I., the military and the C.I.A. do not have wide-
    ranging authority to seek records on Americans in intelligence
    investigations. But the expanded use of national security letters
    has allowed the Pentagon and the intelligence agency to collect
    records on their own. Sometimes, military or C.I.A. officials work
    with the F.B.I. to seek records, as occurred with an American
    translator who had worked for the military in Iraq and was
    suspected of having ties to insurgents.

    After the Sept. 11 attacks, Mr. Rumsfeld directed military lawyers
    and intelligence officials to examine their legal authorities
    to collect intelligence both inside the United States and abroad.
    They concluded that the Pentagon had “way more” legal tools
    than it had been using, a senior Defense Department official said.

    Military officials say the Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978,
    which establishes procedures for government access to sensitive
    banking data, first authorized them to issue national security
    letters. The military had used the letters sporadically for years,
    officials say, but the pace accelerated in late 2001, when lawyers
    and intelligence officials concluded that the Patriot Act
    strengthened their ability to use the letters to seek financial
    records on a voluntary basis and to issue mandatory letters
    to obtain credit ratings, the officials said.

    The Patriot Act does not specifically mention military intelligence
    or C.I.A. officials in connection with the national security letters.

    Some F.B.I. officials said they were surprised by the Pentagon’s
    interpretation of the law when military officials first informed
    them of it. “It was a very broad reading of the law,” a former
    counterterrorism official said.

    While the letters typically have been used to trace the financial
    transactions of military personnel, they also have been used to
    investigate civilian contractors and people with no military ties
    who may pose a threat to the military, officials said. Military
    officials say they regard the letters as one of the least intrusive
    means to gather evidence. When a full investigation is opened,
    one official said, it has now become “standard practice” to issue
    such letters.

    One prominent case in which letters were used to obtain financial
    records, according to two military officials, was that of a Muslim
    chaplain at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, who was suspected in 2003
    of aiding terror suspects imprisoned at the facility. The espionage
    case against the chaplain, James J. Yee, soon collapsed, and he was
    eventually convicted on lesser charges of adultery and downloading
    pornography.

    Eugene Fidell, a defense lawyer for the former chaplain and
    a military law expert, said he was unaware that military investigators
    may have used national security letters to obtain financial information
    about Mr. Yee, nor was he aware that the military had ever claimed
    the authority to issue the letters.

    Mr. Fidell said he found the practice “disturbing,” in part because
    the military does not have the same checks and balances when
    it comes to Americans’ civil rights as does the F.B.I. “Where is the
    accountability?” he asked. “That’s the evil of it — it doesn’t leave
    fingerprints.”

    Even when a case is closed, military officials said they generally
    maintain the records for years because they may be relevant to
    future intelligence inquiries. Officials at the Pentagon’s
    counterintelligence unit say they plan to incorporate those
    records into a database, called Portico, on intelligence leads.
    The financial documents will not be widely disseminated, but
    limited to investigators, an intelligence official said.

    “You don’t want to destroy something only to find out that the
    same guy comes up in another report and you don’t know that
    he was investigated before,” the official said.

    The Counterintelligence Field Activity office, created in 2002 to
    better coordinate the military’s efforts to combat foreign
    intelligence services, has drawn criticism for some domestic
    intelligence activities.

    The agency houses an antiterrorist database of intelligence tips
    and threat reports, known as Talon, which had been collecting
    information on antiwar planning meetings at churches, libraries
    and other locations. The Defense Department has since tightened
    its procedures for what kind of information is allowed into the
    Talon database, and the counterintelligence office also purged
    more than 250 incident reports from the database that officials
    determined should never have been included because they centered
    on lawful political protests by people opposed to the war in Iraq.

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    LINKS AND VERY SHORT STORIES
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    Pentagon Intensifies Pressure on Iran
    http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/011307A.shtml

    Israeli forces confiscating hundreds of dunams of Hebron
    land for settlement industry
    "Official sources at the Hebron offices of the Land Defense Committee
    in the West Bank are reporting that Israeli forces intend to confiscate
    much of the town of Dahariya for settlement industry. More than
    300 fertile dunams of Palestinian land is slated to be taken from
    the southwestern area of the town."
    http://english. pnn.ps/index. php?option= com_content&task=view&id=1414

    Hackensack: Lawsuit in Police Shooting
    By KAREEM FAHIM
    The family of a 45-year-old man who was fatally shot last year by
    a New Jersey Park Police officer filed a wrongful-death suit yesterday
    in State Superior Court. The suit names the officer and several
    colleagues, the State of New Jersey and the Park Police. The man,
    Emil Mann, a member of the Ramapough Mountain Indians, had
    been at a barbecue in the woods of Mahwah on April 1 when the
    officer, Chad Walder, shot him twice without justification, the
    suit alleges. Officer Walder, who has said he fired in self-defense,
    and two other officers also delayed getting medical help to Mr. Mann,
    the suit says. A lawyer for Officer Walder, Robert Galantucci, said
    the shooting was justified. No criminal charges have been filed
    in the case, and the Bergen County prosecutor’s office has said
    the investigation is still open. Mr. Mann, who grew up on the
    mountain where he was shot, lived in Monroe, N.Y., and had
    three children.
    January 12, 2007
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/12/nyregion/12mbrfs-emil.html

    Texas: Judge Blocks Ordinance on Immigrants
    By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
    A judge blocked an ordinance requiring landlords to verify the
    citizenship of potential tenants, a day before it was to go into
    effect in a Dallas suburb. The judge granted a temporary
    restraining order after a claim that state open-meetings laws
    had been violated when the ordinance was approved and
    adopted by the City Council of Farmers Branch in November.
    January 12, 2007
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/12/us/12brfs-LANDLORDS.html

    U.S. Preparing for Trials of Top Qaeda Detainees
    By DAVID JOHNSTON and NEIL A. LEWIS
    WASHINGTON, Jan. 11 — The Bush administration has set up a secret
    war room in a Virginia suburb where it is assembling evidence
    to prosecute high-ranking detainees from Al Qaeda including
    the man accused of being the mastermind of the September 2001
    attacks, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, government officials said this week.
    January 12, 2007
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/12/washington/12terror.html?ref=us

    Bush's tough tactics are a 'declaration of war' on Iran
    By Anne Penketh, Diplomatic Editor
    Published: 12 January 2007
    http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/article2145136.ece

    Democrats Risk Antiwar Wrath if They Waver on Iraq Exit
    http://www.commondreams.org/headlines07/0110-08.htm

    Soldiers Doubt an Influx of American Troops Will Benefit Iraqi Army
    http://www.commondreams.org/headlines07/0110-04.htm

    Bush to Face Street Protests over Iraq Escalation Plan
    http://www.commondreams.org/headlines07/0110-07.htm

    YouTube User Spurs Iraq War Dialogue
    http://www.commondreams.org/headlines07/0110-01.htm

    Robert Fisk: Bush's new strategy - the march of folly
    So into the graveyard of Iraq, George Bush, commander-in-chief,
    is to send another 21,000 of his soldiers. The march of folly
    is to continue...
    Published: 11 January 2007
    http://news.independent.co.uk/world/fisk/article2144057.ece

    Rights of Unions and Nonmembers Vie at Court
    By LINDA GREENHOUSE
    January 11, 2007
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/11/washington/11scotus.html?ref=us

    If you can stomach it:
    Transcript of President Bush’s Address to Nation on U.S. Policy in Iraq
    as recorded by The New York Times:
    January 11, 2007
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/11/us/11ptext.html

    Israel’s Purging of Palestinian Christians
    by Jonathan Cook in Nazareth
    www.dissidentvoice.org
    January 9, 2007
    http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Jan07/Cook09.htm

    Democrats Beef Police State With 9/11 Commission Bill
    Political "opposition" also helping Bush gain traction for Iran military strike
    Paul Joseph Watson
    Prison Planet
    Wednesday, January 10, 2007
    http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2007/100107democratsbeef.htm

    Wage Increase Could Hinge on Tax Cuts
    By STEVEN GREENHOUSE
    January 10, 2007
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/10/washington/10wage.html?hp&ex=1168491600&en=91d9820f1ef98a84&ei=5094&partner=homepage

    Britain: An Increase in Profit at the London Stock Exchange
    By BLOOMBERG NEWS
    The London Stock Exchange, seeking to fend off a hostile takeover
    by the Nasdaq Stock Market, reported a 9.9 percent increase in
    third-quarter profit and forecast a “strong performance” in fiscal
    2008. Net income rose to £31 million ($59.8 million) in the three
    months ended Dec. 31, up from £28.2 million a year earlier, the
    exchange said. Revenue increased 11 percent, to £89.9 million
    ($173.5 million). The third-quarter results “support the board’s
    rejection of Nasdaq’s offer, which significantly undervalues the
    business and the exchange’s unique strategic position,” the
    exchange’s chief executive, Clara Furse, said. “Our strong growth
    prospects will continue to enhance the quality of our markets.”
    The exchange, Europe’s biggest equity market, released its
    earnings about three weeks ahead of schedule and two days
    before Nasdaq’s offer to pay £12.43 a share expires.
    January 10, 2007
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/10/business/worldbusiness/10fobriefs-ANINCREASEIN_BRF.html

    Venezuelan Plan Shakes Investors
    By SIMON ROMERO and CLIFFORD KRAUSS
    January 10, 2007
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/10/business/worldbusiness/10venezuela.html?ref=business

    Mayor Finds Friendly Ears on Senate Homeland Security Panel
    By SEWELL CHAN and ERIC LIPTON
    WASHINGTON, Jan. 9 — Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg took his perennial
    pitch for more security money to Congress on Tuesday, but this year,
    for a change, lawmakers seemed poised to listen.
    January 10, 2007
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/10/nyregion/10bloomberg.html?ref=nyregion

    3 Relatives of Plotter Are Held by Officials
    By WILLIAM K. RASHBAUM
    January 10, 2007
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/10/nyregion/10plot.html?ref=nyregion

    Gas-Like Odor Permeates Parts of New York City
    By CHRISTINE HAUSER and SEWELL CHAN
    January 8, 2007
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/08/nyregion/08cnd-odor.html?hp&ex=1168318800&en=b688635a7be2e78d&ei=5094&partner=homepage

    The Second Declaration of Havana
    Walter Lippmann, CubaNews Los Angeles, California
    This is one of the great political documents of all time. It was
    presented to the Cuban people on February 4, 1962, following Cuba's
    expulsion from the Organization of American States. It is printed
    here in its entirety. [editorial note from Fidel Castro Speaks,
    edited by James Petras and Martin Kenner, Grove Press, 1969.]
    It is now web-posted in English here:
    http://www.walterlippmann.com/fc-02-04-1962.html
    Original Spanish:
    http://www.cuba.cu/gobierno/discursos/1962/esp/f040262e.html


    The universe gives up its deepest secret
    It is the invisible material that makes up most of the cosmos.
    Now, scientists have created the first image of dark matter
    By Steve Connor, Science Editor
    Published: 08 January 2007
    http://news.independent.co.uk/world/science_technology/article2134891.ece

    Blood and oil: How the West will profit from Iraq's
    most precious commodity
    The Independent (UK)
    January 7, 2007
    http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2132574.ece

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    SCROLL DOWN TO READ:
    EVENT ANNOUNCEMENTS (IN FULL DETAIL)
    GENERAL ANNOUNCEMENTS

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    EVENT ANNOUNCEMENTS
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    BARRIO UNIDO FOR GENERAL AND UNCONDITIONAL
    AMNESTY FOR ALL!
    EMERGENCY PICKET LINE
    FRIDAY, JANUARY 12, 2007, 4:00 - 7:00 P.M.
    FEDERAL BUILDING
    450 GOLDEN GATE AVE.
    BETWEEN POLK AND LARKIN STREETS, S.F.

    STOP THE ICE RAIDS! FREE THE WORKERS!
    STOP THE DEPORTATIONS!
    THE WORKERS SHOULD GET THEIR JOBS BACK!
    WE DEMAND IMMEDIATE, GENERAL AND UNCONDITIONAL
    AMNESTY FOR ALL! DEFEND THE RIGHT OF
    ALL WORKERS TO ORGANIZE UNIONS IN THEIR OWN DEFENSE!

    All human beings have basic, inalienable human rights to life, liberty
    and the pursuit of happiness. If your family is starving and you
    can not find work, you have the right to find someplace where you can
    feed, clothe and house your family.

    If capital can go all over the world exploiting workers, then workers
    have the right to move to find work for their family's basic survival.

    IMMIGRANT WORKERS ARE GUILTY OF NOTHING
    BUT WORKING HARD TO SUPPORT THEMSELVES
    AND THEIR FAMILIES.

    From South America, Latin America, China, Africa, India--in countries
    all over the world, not to speak of the war in Iraq--a war of blood
    for oil--U.S. businesses are raking in huge profits off the backs of workers
    who earn slave wages and work under the most dangerous working conditions
    at best, and under a state of war at worse.

    Meanwhile, here at home, they are laying off workers, closing factories,
    doing
    away with benefits and working conditions won by worker's struggles
    in the past--installing two, three, many-tiered pay scales--driving down
    wages to below the scale parents are earning--leaving our children
    with the heritage of a guaranteed life of poverty without union
    representation.

    WORKERS HAVE THE RIGHT TO ORGANIZE UNIONS!

    And now they launch an all-out war against the most vulnerable workers
    --who are driven to work in these meatpacking plants. Whether
    documented or not, this is brutal, dangerous and difficult work.

    And not so coincidentally, these same workers just happen
    to be in the midst of a fight to win union recognition!

    THESE ARRESTS ARE A THREAT TO ALL WORKERS
    AND ALL UNIONS!

    These mass arrests are terrorist tactics designed as a warning
    to all workers that if they struggle for a better life and better
    working conditions, they will be persecuted in every way
    imaginable.

    This is an all-out assault on every worker and it is being
    executed by a terrorist government--the U.S. Government--
    who uses pre-emptive war based upon outright lies to further
    their oil profits; who will stop at nothing to increase their
    rate of profit.

    The ultimate goal of the U.S. Government is for American big
    business to continue to accumulate unimaginable wealth
    at the expense of the hardworking majority all over the
    world--nothing is off-limits to them in this, their fundamental
    pursuit!

    STOP THE ICE RAIDS! FREE THE WORKERS!
    STOP THE DEPORTATIONS!
    THE WORKERS SHOULD GET THEIR JOBS BACK!
    WE DEMAND IMMEDIATE, GENERAL AND UNCONDITIONAL
    AMNESTY FOR ALL! DEFEND THE RIGHT OF
    ALL WORKERS TO ORGANIZE UNIONS IN THEIR OWN DEFENSE!

    An injury to one is an injury to all! We are only as strong as our
    weakest link. If we allow these terrorists from ICE to continue
    to carry out these assaults against the basic human rights
    of any of us--no matter what our immigration status--they
    will not hesitate one second to use these same tactics of mass
    firings, arrest, etc. against all of us who dare to struggle
    in our own defense and in our own, basic human interests and
    for our own basic rights as workers and human beings!

    It's up to us to organize and fight back! If we are united, we cannot loose!

    WE ENCOURAGE ALL WORKERS AND ALL LABOR AND COMMUNITY
    ORGANIZATIONS TO ENDORSE THIS ACTION AND COME OUT TO
    PICKET THE FEDERAL BUILDING TO PROTEST THESE RAIDS!
    BRING YOUR OWN BANNERS AND SIGNS!

    For more information contact:

    Barrio Unido por una Amnistia
    General e Incondicional
    Cristina Gutierrez,
    415-431-9925
    companeros98@hotmail.com

    Bonnie Weinstein, www.bauaw.org
    415-824-8730
    bonnieweinstein@yahoo.com

    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*
    *---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

    REPORT BACK ON VENEZUELA
    7:00 PM Saturday, January 13
    522 Valencia Street , 3rd Floor Auditorium
    Hear about:
    -Fact