rants are up

Rants are back up.

-2 to the asshole who used an ampersand in their rant subject.
-5 to the PLT schme library authors who think ampersand is an XML element.
-10 to phpwebhosting.com for changing their PHP CGI security policy
    without telling their customers.
+1 to David.

I'm all out of minuses.
/a

random rants and shit

I'm sending this to the heads as well as devel because i don't know who 
is still on the devel list right now.  if you are interested in joining 
us to help out with developing bh in any way, please let us know here at 
heads@... or devel@...

sign up for either at

http://your.ballistichelmet.org/mailman/listinfo/heads
http://your.ballistichelmet.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

so...

1) what's up with /rant/  ?  I restored the index.html, but it's all 
busted still.  i'm going to take it upon myself to rewrite the module to 
use php/mysql over the next few weeks.  RSS would be a good addition 
also (thanks for the mention aaron).

2) did we lose some/all of our subscribers when the list went down a few 
months ago?  Seems like the list has just died off.  has anyone even 
posted besides a,d,c,j ?  i can't remember the last one.

3) any interest in making the zine happen in any fashion?  one thought i 
had was to build some sort of easy open publishing module that would 
allow anyone to submit articles for consideration, as well as specific 
things (ie. links/images/rants).  this would take the work off of one 
specific person to find everything.

4) what are people's thoughts on creating some pamphlet to pass out that 
would just be like a bookmark type thing that people could have that had 
all URLs of alt-news sources, and that's it. ?  I think this would be a 

Headline: Vote theft rampant across country

_______________________________________________
heads mailing list
heads@...
http://your.ballistichelmet.org/mailman/listinfo/heads/
http://ballistichelmet.org/donate/

pictures from NYC

Heads,

I took two disposable cameras with me to the Aug. 29th protest. Some B&W, some
color, no close-ups, but a few of the shots are okay.  No thumbnail gallery,
sorry, so you'll have to click on each to view, or download and run through your
own slideshow program.

If you would like to use these images, please do so.  No notice is required.

http://your.ballistichelmet.org/~cpratt/NewYork/

-x

_______________________________________________
heads mailing list
heads@...
http://your.ballistichelmet.org/mailman/listinfo/heads/
http://ballistichelmet.org/donate/

Tucker Carlson is a Dick with a Bowtie.

In  case you don't watch crossfire, here's the clip mentioned below:
http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2652831

The best part about the whole thing, imho, is when the hosts try to 
bring the conversation back onto the book he is there to plug and he 
just won't let him.

http://www.everythingisnt.com/archives/00001965.htm

10/16/2004 Entry: "Is Jon Stewart turning into our generation's Neil 
Postman?"

Is Jon Stewart turning into our generation's Neil Postman? Sure seems 
that way. It looked like Jon had an attack of conscience. It looked 
like he wanted to either yell or cry. Maybe he was ready for the jokes, 
pimping the book, etc and remembered how this show was going to play 
out: one guy giving out the DNC talking points, the other guy giving 
the RNC talking points, and Stewart making silly jokes about both. Like 
he said, he didn't want to be their monkey so he went into Neil Postman 
mode and attacked them on their newstainment bullshit. Its well 
deserved, not only because he attacked the newstainment format but 
because that show is especially bad in regards to politics. Its not 
right v left or any of that, its Democrat v. Republican talking points.

  I mean, Carlson is the guy who said this about Edwards: "he (Edwards) 
was a personal-injury lawyer specializing in Jacuzzi cases." He knew 
full well Edwards did a class action for a pool pump which was used in 
both public and private pools which hurt little kids, but as a GOP 
operative that's what he had to say, especially when their managers are 
trying to out-sleeze shows like O'Reily and the other pathetic 
offerings from Fox News and MSNBC. It was all too fake for Stewart so 
he just spent this invaluable time attacking the system. Any sane 
person would have done the same. Perhaps. I think most people would 
have been good little boys and girls and pimped their books and played 
nice. Stewart knows he doesn't need CNN to sell his book or to get 
ratings for his show, so he took a very risky chance to take a moral 
stand. Don't expect him to be on any other shows for a long time, 
unless this is the straw which breaks the corporate media's back, which 
I doubt it is. If anything, this is more like a Lenny Bruce monologue 
which was groundbreaking at the time, but wasn't an agent of change in 
itself for a long time after.

Its almost predictable. I think too many people see the Daily Show as a 
fake news comedy show. It actually is satire of the highest order. Jon 
and his writers are doing nothing but mocking every news show, every 
hackneyed local evening news anchor, every news magazine format, every 
soft news journalist, etc.

  I thought the most interesting part of this exchange was the comment 
about Carlson's bow-tie. Stewart wasn't mocking him for his lack of 
fashion sense, he was justifying what he calls "theater." Why would a 
young man wear such an old fashioned article of clothing like that, if 
not for attention? If not for a "distinctive look." If not for 
"personality branding." etc. Carlson was denying his show is theater 
while in a costume. It was very poignant observation by Stewart and 
showed the absurdity of the entire spectacle.

_______________________________________________
heads mailing list
heads@...
http://your.ballistichelmet.org/mailman/listinfo/heads/
http://ballistichelmet.org/donate/

Troops defy orders in Iraq (fwd)

The Jackson Mississippi Clarion-Ledger
October 15, 2004
Platoon defies orders in Iraq

Miss. soldier calls home, cites safety concerns

By Jeremy Hudson
jehudson@...

A 17-member Army Reserve platoon with troops from Jackson and around the
Southeast deployed to Iraq is under arrest for refusing a "suicide
mission" to deliver fuel, the troops' relatives said Thursday.

The soldiers refused an order on Wednesday to go to Taji, Iraq � north
of Baghdad � because their vehicles were considered "deadlined" or
extremely unsafe, said Patricia McCook of Jackson, wife of Sgt. Larry O.
McCook.

Sgt. McCook, a deputy at the Hinds County Detention Center, and the 16
other members of the 343rd Quartermaster Company from Rock Hill, S.C.,
were read their rights and moved from the military barracks into tents,
Patricia McCook said her husband told her during a panicked phone call
about 5 a.m. Thursday.

The platoon could be charged with the willful disobeying of orders,
punishable by dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of pay and up to five
years confinement, said military law expert Mark Stevens, an associate
professor of justice studies at Wesleyan College in Rocky Mount, N.C.

No military officials were able to confirm or deny the detainment of the
platoon Thursday.

U.S. Rep. Bennie Thompson said he plans to submit a congressional
inquiry today on behalf of the Mississippi soldiers to launch an
investigation into whether they are being treated improperly.

"I would not want any member of the military to be put in a dangerous
situation ill-equipped," said Thompson, who was contacted by families.
"I have had similar complaints from military families about vehicles
that weren't armor-plated, or bullet-proof vests that are outdated. It
concerns me because we made over $150 billion in funds available to
equip our forces in Iraq.

"President Bush takes the position that the troops are well-armed, but
if this situation is true, it calls into question how honest he has been
with the country," Thompson said.

The 343rd is a supply unit whose general mission is to deliver fuel and
water. The unit includes three women and 14 men and those with ranking
up to sergeant first class.

"I got a call from an officer in another unit early (Thursday) morning
who told me that my husband and his platoon had been arrested on a bogus
charge because they refused to go on a suicide mission," said Jackie
Butler of Jackson, wife of Sgt. Michael Butler, a 24-year reservist.
"When my husband refuses to follow an order, it has to be something major."

The platoon being held has troops from Alabama, Kentucky, North
Carolina, Mississippi and South Carolina, said Teresa Hill of Dothan,
Ala., whose daughter Amber McClenny is among those being detained.

McClenny, 21, pleaded for help in a message left on her mother's
answering machine early Thursday morning.

"They are holding us against our will," McClenny said. "We are now
prisoners."

McClenny told her mother her unit tried to deliver fuel to another base
in Iraq Wednesday, but was sent back because the fuel had been
contaminated with water. The platoon returned to its base, where it was
told to take the fuel to another base, McClenny told her mother.

The platoon is normally escorted by armed Humvees and helicopters, but
did not have that support Wednesday, McClenny told her mother.

The convoy trucks the platoon was driving had experienced problems in
the past and were not being properly maintained, Hill said her daughter
told her.

The situation mirrors other tales of troops being sent on missions
without proper equipment.

Aviation regiments have complained of being forced to fly dangerous
missions over Iraq with outdated night-vision goggles and old
missile-avoidance systems. Stories of troops' families purchasing body
armor because the military didn't provide them with adequate equipment
have been included in recent presidential debates.

Patricia McCook said her husband, a staff sergeant, understands well the
severity of disobeying orders. But he did not feel comfortable taking
his soldiers on another trip.

"He told me that three of the vehicles they were to use were deadlines
... not safe to go in a hotbed like that," Patricia McCook said.

Hill said the trucks her daughter's unit was driving could not top 40 mph.

"They knew there was a 99 percent chance they were going to get ambushed
or fired at," Hill said her daughter told her. "They would have had no
way to fight back."

Kathy Harris of Vicksburg is the mother of Aaron Gordon, 20, who is
among those being detained. Her primary concern is that she has been
told the soldiers have not been provided access to a judge advocate general.

Stevens said if the soldiers are being confined, law requires them to
have a hearing before a magistrate within seven days.

Harris said conditions for the platoon have been difficult of late. Her
son e-mailed her earlier this week to ask what the penalty would be if
he became physical with a commanding officer, she said.

But Nadine Stratford of Rock Hill, S.C., said her godson Colin Durham,
20, has been happy with his time in Iraq. She has not heard from him
since the platoon was detained.

"When I talked to him about a month ago, he was fine," Stratford said.
"He said it was like being at home."
_______________________________________________
heads mailing list
heads@...
http://your.ballistichelmet.org/mailman/listinfo/heads/
http://ballistichelmet.org/donate/

On ABB `Left' Intellectuals

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: M. Junaid Alam <mjunaidalam@...>
To: marxism
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 19:44:13 -0400
Subject: re:[Marxism] Doug Henwood and Tariq Ali

I too am going to perk up my ears for this most 'exciting' interview [of
Tariq Ali by Doug Henwood on WBAI-NY].  Ali delivering another outrageous
sermon about how Kerry is better for the Palestinians and Iraqis can
probably be chalked up to his interpretation of his interview with Chavez,
where he obviously extrapolated the latter's practical-sounding comment
about methods of struggle into an endorsement for ABBism. Far too much
bullshit is pouring out of the mouths of rather smug ABBers who we all
thought were 'radicals'; now they are running around intoning, just like
their liberal counterparts, how voting Nader is like committing mass
murder against poor people worldwide and similar theatrics.

I haven't seen any Iraqi resistance group running around with their heads
cut off over the American elections like certain 'radicals' here.
Indeed, I've seen nothing at all in the way of commentary news or analysis
about them or the Palestinians giving a shit who wins the American
elections as it pertains to their daily lives. Nor is there any great hue
and cry among the American working class over who wins, either.

The people most exercised are the latte-liberals, who are horrified for
cultural and snobbish reasons that Bush is in power - it makes them look
bad and feel bad to have someone so 'unrefined' in power - someone whose
vocabulary is not as big as theirs and who wears cowboy boots instead of
Dockers. They need someone who better reflects their "sensibilities"
when it comes to handling the imperial machine. It's a vanity issue,
frankly. Too little has been said on this subject but there's definitely
something to it.

[start of thread:
<http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/marxism/2004w41/msg00099.htm>]
_______________________________________________
heads mailing list
heads@...
http://your.ballistichelmet.org/mailman/listinfo/heads/
http://ballistichelmet.org/donate/

Animal Implants

More on implants.  Applied Digital Solutions (ADS) are the big boys in the
implant.  The mistake is in thinking they're the only ones.

The USDA is poised to roll out a national cattle and swine tracking system
because of the BSE scare last year.  This is no small endeavor.  104 million
cattle are slaughtered in the US each year.  In Europe, the figures run about
100 million cattle, and 150 million swine.  South America?  Hundreds of millions
of animals.  Huge markets.  Big money for chip companies.  

In my mind, the real answer is not tracking every cow that is born, but to
improve the living conditions of animals, reduce chemical and antibiotic use,
and reform the ways slaughterhouses treat animals and workers.  This would give
us a safer food supply, but the meat industry (and the banking industry, who do
you think holds the huge loans and credit lines that build factory farms and
keep them afloat?) would be inconvenienced, so...<sarcasm> let's tag everything
that breathes, and let industry take care of itself.  Self-regulation works so
darn well. </sarcasm> 

I realize the best way to force industry change is not necessarily through
government regulation (unfunded mandates are a hardship, and there aren't enough
inspectors to enforce the current regulations).  Industry responds to consumer
demands.  Trouble is, nobody cares all that much about cattle, pigs, or unsafe
working conditions.

Here's an excerpt from a conference call made on August 19,2004 between
executives of the Digital Angel corporation (pet and farm animal tracking,
division of ADS) and reporters.

full:
http://www.vcall.com/GenTranscript.asp?ID=89109

<Q – David Talbot>: All sorts of questions to around this.  What about tracking
swine?  What about private sector initiatives?  Private-sector spending? Big
packing houses?  Or whatever that are not going to wait for the government and
might jump ahead?  And then lastly, if that isn't enough, you alluded to markets
in Europe opening up.  Could you elaborate on that?

<A – Kevin McGrath>: Okay.  Let me first talk about the US government.  The
projects – this set of pilot projects included both beef and swine.  It turns
out that the projects for swine and beef were very different because of the
nature of the way the animals live, but several of the projects are swine
projects and several of the projects are beef projects.  Now, with regard to
large food producers – we actually have pilots now and have had pilots for
probably more than a year with several of the large producers, and unfortunately
we're not able unilaterally to publicize who those are, but I think at some
point down the road they will be publicized and, you know, at least from our
perspective our interaction with them is very positive, and they seemed very
pleased with what's going on.

The third question was?

<Q – David Talbot>: Europe.

<A – Kevin McGrath>: That was the fourth question, I thought, but with regard to
Europe, we are actively looking for ways to participate in the European market.
 We do have livestock participation and companion pet participation now.  We
participate in Europe in the companion pet side with Merial, which is a joint
venture of Merck and Aventis.  And we do participate in a livestock market.  The
livestock market actually in Europe is a larger market than the United States,
and there was already a mandatory requirement for tagging.  By 2007/2008, it is
expected that virtually all of that tagging with migrate from visual tags to
electronic tags.  There are 100,000,000 cattle in Europe.  In every year, there
are approximately 150,000,000 pigs slaughtered, and there are approximately 200
million sheep and goats.  So, it's a very, very large market.  We also have a
multi-hundred million dollar market – or multi-hundred million animal market in
South America, between Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay, and Chile.  So,
again, big markets, that actually are larger than in the United States.  I know
that the last thing that I was going to mention to you.  The Department of
Agriculture has also come out, in the last few weeks, out of the Denver office
of AFIS, with an RFI, you know, Request for Information, regarding an animal ID
tracking system for sheeps and goats.  So, I – the – I think, David, you focused
on one of the critical issues.  We tend to talk about the national ID program as
being merely for cattle, and it is not.  It is a livestock system in the United
States, which really will include cattle, swine, sheep, goats and poultry.  Now,
I think the implementation of the tagging systems will be significantly
different for each of those markets, but each of the markets themselves could be
very large.
_______________________________________________
heads mailing list
heads@...
http://your.ballistichelmet.org/mailman/listinfo/heads/
http://ballistichelmet.org/donate/

FDA approves chip implants

I was joking with Aaron the other day that he and I, by not keeping up with the
most recent news, were simply reinforcing each other's uninformed paranoia.  So
tonight I had the opportunity to read the dailies, and damn, being informed
hasn't dispelled my paranoia one. tiny. bit.

previous thread:
http://your.ballistichelmet.org/pipermail/heads/2004-March/002619.html

full:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29954-2004Oct13.html
Implantable Medical ID Approved By FDA

By Rob Stein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, October 14, 2004; Page A01

A microchip that can be implanted under the skin to give doctors instant access
to a patient's records yesterday won government approval, a step that could
transform medical care but is raising alarm among privacy advocates.

The tiny electronic capsule, the first such device to receive Food and Drug
Administration approval, transmits a unique code to a scanner that allows
doctors to confirm a patient's identity and obtain detailed medical information
from an accompanying database.

Applied Digital Solutions Inc. of Delray Beach, Fla., plans to market the
VeriChip systems -- the chips, scanners and computerized database -- to
hospitals, doctors and patients as a way to improve care and avoid errors by
ensuring that doctors know whom they are treating and the patient's personal
health details.

Doctors would scan patients like cans of soup at a grocery store. Instead of the
price, the patient's medical record would pop up on a computer screen. Emergency
room doctors could scan unconscious car accident victims to check their blood
type and medications and make sure they have no drug allergies. Surgeons could
scan patients in the operating room to guard against cutting into the wrong
person. Chips could be implanted in Alzheimer's patients in case they get lost.

"In hospitals today, many deaths occur because people aren't able to communicate
timely enough their medical information or because of wrong information," said
Scott Silverman, the company's chief executive. "With VeriChip, you'll be able
to have accurate information even if a patient can't talk. It's a way to
modernize our antiquated system of medical records."

The approval was immediately denounced by privacy advocates, who fear it could
endanger patient privacy and mark a dangerous step toward a Big Brother future
in which people will be tracked by the implants or required to have them
inserted for surveillance, identification and other purposes.

"Once the technology is out there and is available, it raises the very real
possibility that people in a position to require or demand it will begin to do
that," said Katherine Albrecht, who has campaigned against such devices. "It
would obviously be possible to inject one of these into everyone. In the
post-9/11 world, we are already racing down the path to total surveillance. The
only thing missing to clinch the deal has been the technology. This may fill
that gap."

The VeriChip technology was developed to track livestock and has been implanted
in about 1 million cats and dogs to identify lost or stolen house pets. But the
technology has a variety of other potential uses, and the company has already
sold about 7,000 chips for human use, about 1,000 of which have been implanted.

Mexico's attorney general announced in July that he had one of the devices
injected into his arm, as had about 160 of his lieutenants, to control access to
high-security offices. In bars in Amsterdam and Barcelona, patrons can have the
chips implanted to allow them to enter exclusive areas and keep track of their tabs.

The company is investigating other applications, including using the chips as
"electronic dog tags" for soldiers, creating "smart guns" with built-in scanners
that ensure they can be fired only by someone with a corresponding implant, and
enabling stores to verify a customer's identity before accepting a credit card.

_______________________________________________
heads mailing list
heads@...
http://your.ballistichelmet.org/mailman/listinfo/heads/
http://ballistichelmet.org/donate/

Reproaching Ralph

I know a lot of heads have strong feelings about this election and 
Ralph's influence on mainstream politics, so here's David Corn's 
opinion. I don't agree with all of it, but some points are interesting. 
Ralph is not on the Nov ballet here in California as some may not know, 
but there is a concerted effort to write him in. I am currently leaning 
that way, as I will not support a pro-war president.. I had wished his 
campaign would've gathered more positive press, however with the state 
of media in this country I didn't expect it. More than anything else 
this election I hoped that voter reform would gather strength. This does 
not seem to be the fact, and even with the (non)debates over with, no 
real new views having come about. Is this country so apathetic that it 
has completely given up on any reforms. Do people believe reform must 
come from within Washington? Seriously? Is the status quo really ok for 
most today? I would spit the usual ... corporations / debt have pacified 
the nation..blah blah blah, but really. Where has the action of the 70s 
gone? Have we finally realized again, as the weather underground did in 
the 70's that peaceful marches and grassroots action really don't 
matter? Millions marching across the globe, millions in our own country. 
What did we gain? The polarization has not stopped. The attacks from 
both sides have not quelled anything. All this talk about 
division/inclusion... are we really going to see anything get better 
with either of these parties? I'll cast my vote for Nader and say no. A 
wasted vote? I don't believe in such a thing. A wasted election? Now 
there's something I agree with.

-J

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1013-33.htm

Published on Wednesday, October 13, 2004 by TomPaine.com
Reproaching Ralph
Nader's Bid for President has Failed Utterly to Achieve Any of Its 
Stated Goals
by David Corn

I have not written about Ralph Nader’s campaign for the presidency—until 
now—for three reasons. First, I worked for Ralph (who has reached 
first-name stature) 24 years ago. Not even out of college yet, I spent a 
year as a writer for various publications and books produced by Ralph 
and his public interest groups. In this position, I gathered the 
connections and learned what I needed to start a career in independent 
journalism. Ralph gave me my start, and I am forever grateful for that 
and, more importantly, for the fine public interest work he has done for 
decades. It is a cliché—because it is true—that Ralph has achieved more 
for Americans than most members of Congress. It has saddened me to watch 
him destroy his legacy (which is shared by the many who have toiled with 
him) by mounting a fool’s errand of a campaign. Thus, I have avoided 
this painful topic. There is, after all, much else to write and think about.

Reason No. 2: Nothing I could write would change anything. That is, it 
would not persuade Ralph to abandon his bid. Earlier in the year, I 
watched—and kibitzed—as his closest and most loyal friends and 
colleagues attempted to convince Ralph it would be a huge mistake to 
launch another presidential campaign. None thought that whatever 
benefits might be derived from such a campaign would be worth the 
potential cost: being a factor in a Bush victory. None found Ralph’s 
logic…well, logical. He insisted that he could help John Kerry by making 
a strong case against Bush, that he would draw conservative voters from 
Bush, that he would place important issues neglected by the two main 
candidates in the spotlight, that he would help break the 
corporate-funded duopoly that controls power in Washington. But it was 
fanciful for Ralph to believe that he could cause Bush voters to jump 
the GOP ship because he provided an alternative other than Kerry. Or 
that he could coax the media to focus on his issues rather than his role 
as a possible spoiler. Or that another 3 percent or less finish would do 
much to improve the prospects of multi-party democracy in America. He 
hasn’t even been running this year to boost the Green Party.

Yet run, he thought, he must. Imagine a scenario in which practically 
all of your pals and supporters tell you an idea you have is absolutely 
foolish and self-destructive and still you pursue it. No, there was 
nothing I could do to stop this one-man runaway train. It even seemed 
that the more opposition he received from his own crowd, the more 
defiant he became. (And I don’t relish the phone call from Ralph this 
column might spur.)

My third reason: I thought the odds were low that Ralph could affect the 
2004 outcome. There are lefty voters out there totally alienated from 
the Democratic Party. These people sincerely—if wrongly—believe there is 
little difference between the Ds and the Rs. They will vote for Ralph, 
and no one can count their votes as votes swiped from Kerry. But after 
the fiasco of 2000, it seemed fair to assume that not many of those few 
swing-state voters who do find themselves on the Kerry-Nader fence would 
opt for Ralph. I’ve been traveling to college campuses for speaking gigs 
this fall, however, and I have encountered students who say they have 
friends—I suspect they mean themselves—who are considering voting for 
Ralph over Kerry. And Ralph has been drawing enthusiastic crowds while 
stumping (though nothing like his super-rallies, MCed by Michael Moore 
in 2000). In a tight contest in a key state or two, maybe, just maybe, 
Ralph might make an unfortunate difference. Political observers in 
Minnesota—where Ralph bagged 5.2 percent of the vote in 2000—wonder if 
he might tilt the balance there this year.

What to say now? It is absolutely pointless to urge Ralph to change 
course. Stubbornness was one of the assets that helped him survive—and 
surmount—the difficult times of his life. Tragically, it has become his 
downfall. So why write about Ralph’s errant campaign? Just to register 
profound disappointment. Not just with his continued obstinacy but also 
with how he has campaigned. He has accepted more than $100,000 in 
campaign contributions from Republican funders and consultants, 
including people who have financed the political action committee run by 
the anti-Kerry Swift Vets. This places Ralph in the same bed with 
supporters of the policies he despises and with the big-money fat cats 
who have underwritten one of the sleaziest political smears in years. 
And he has been willfully blind to the ugliness of this alliance. His 
spokesperson Kevin Zeese dismissed the news of the Swift Vet-linked 
contributions: “It proves nothing….These are individuals, these are not 
contributions from the Swift Boat PAC.” Ralph is understandably pissed 
off at the Democratic Party apparatus that has tried to keep him of 
ballots and has aired ads attacking him. But what did he expect? 
Pointing to the bare-knuckled tactics of a foe does not excuse Ralph for 
his own strategic miscalculations and for forging momentarily useful 
relationships with the forces he has opposed his whole career. Does 
Ralph, who argues his campaign does not pose more of a threat to Kerry 
than to Bush, really believe that he knows better than his GOP partners 
who obviously believe the Nader campaign is mainly a problem for Kerry?

And Ralph has not played it straight. When he entered the race, he 
maintained that his presence could help Kerry. Yet he now actively seeks 
to undermine Kerry. He has been campaigning in swing states. He recently 
proclaimed “a vote for John Kerry is a vote for war.” And how many 
important issues has he been able to raise? This month, he took his 
campaign to the headquarters of Skull and Bones at Yale University to 
protest that secret society. Much of his campaign seems to be about his 
right to have a campaign. When challenged by pro-Kerry voters on the 
stump, Ralph says he is expressing his right to free speech by running: 
“We should never say to each other not to run because that means do not 
speak, do not petition, do not assemble.” He is dead wrong. Telling 
someone not to run for office because his or her candidacy might be 
tactically unwise is not denying that person his or her political 
rights. Ralph could have spent the year speaking out—as a 
non-candidate—and have reached larger audiences more effectively. In 
fact, when some of his colleagues and supporters were desperately trying 
to dissuade Ralph from entering the race, they floated the idea of 
establishing an outfit or road show that would enable Ralph to travel 
the country and assail Bush. But he was not interested. A presidential 
campaign was hardly the only avenue for Ralph to express his views.

Has he been able to have an impact on the national discourse? No. That 
has been predictable. It’s not Ralph’s fault that the mainstream media 
are not eager to devote much attention to the policy pronouncements of 
an independent candidates who draws 1 to 3 percent support in the polls. 
But Ralph had to know this would be the reality he would encounter. Any 
responsible political actor has an obligation to recognize what 
opportunities truly exist. In some years, paying no attention to reality 
in order to challenge the dominant paradigm might make sense. (I wrote 
neither in favor nor in opposition to his run in 2000.) But in a 
non-parliamentarian, winner-takes-all system, one cannot ignore the 
oppressive rules that render it so difficult for an independent or 
third-party candidate to have a positive impact on the campaign and the 
final outcome.

At first, I thought that the Dems overreacted in their response to 
Ralph, and I told people that perhaps it would be best to ignore him. 
But like many other past admirers of Ralph—whom he now bitterly 
derides—I worry that the election might be close enough for Ralph to end 
up in the same place as 2000: either as the actual spoiler or as the 
widely accused spoiler. In either case, Ralph will be remembered more 
for this misguided campaign than the decades of his public do-gooding. I 
wish he saw it this way—for both his own sake and for the sake of the 
country he has cared so much about.

David Corn writes the Loyal Opposition twice a month for TomPaine.com. 
Corn is also the Washington editor of The Nation and is the author of 
The Lies of George W. Bush: Mastering the Politics of Deception (Crown 
Publishers).
_______________________________________________
heads mailing list
heads@...
http://your.ballistichelmet.org/mailman/listinfo/heads/
http://ballistichelmet.org/donate/

US Probing Whether Troops in Iraq Refused Mission

http://www.reuters.com/printerFriendlyPopup.jhtml?type=domesticNews&storyID=6517561

US Probing Whether Troops in Iraq Refused Mission
Fri Oct 15, 2004 04:40 PM ET

By Charles Aldinger

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The military is investigating reports that some 
U.S. troops this week refused to take part in a supply convoy in Iraq, 
where explosive devices have killed dozens of soldiers, defense 
officials said on Friday.

A statement issued by the U.S. military press center in Baghdad called 
it an "isolated incident." Family members of some of the 17 troops told 
a U.S. newspaper that security for the fuel trucks was inadequate.

The brief military statement said some members of the 343rd 
Quartermaster Company, a unit that moves water and other supplies for 
American troops, reportedly refused to participate in their assigned 
convoy mission on Wednesday.

Refusal to obey orders, especially in a combat zone, is a serious 
offense in the military. But the statement stressed that "it is far too 
early in the investigation to speculate as to what happened, why it 
happened or any action that might be taken."

The Clarion-Ledger newspaper in Jackson, Mississippi, reported on Friday 
that interviews with some family members indicated that soldiers from 
the unit based in Tallil refused to go on the mission because they did 
not have an adequate armed escort and the vehicles were not in good shape.

The newspaper said the convoy was going to Taji, north of Baghdad.

FREQUENT ATTACK TARGETS

Civilian and military convoys in Iraq, where more than 1,000 U.S. troops 
have been killed since the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003, are 
frequently targets for roadside bombings and other ambushes.

"I got a call from an officer in another unit early (Thursday) morning 
who told me that my husband and his platoon had been arrested on a bogus 
charge because they refused to go on a suicide mission," the newspaper 
quoted Jackie Butler of Jackson as saying.

"When my husband refuses to follow an order, it has to be something 
major," said Butler, identified as the wife of Sgt. Michael Butler, a 
24-year reservist.

One soldier left a message on his mother's telephone answering machine 
saying that the soldiers were under arrest while the investigation was 
going on, according to the newspaper.

The military said the commanding general of the 13th Corps support 
command had appointed the deputy commander to lead an investigation of 
the allegations.

"It is important to note that the mission in question was carried out 
using other soldiers from the unit," the statement said.

"The investigating team is currently in Tallil taking statements and 
interviewing those involved," it added.

The brief statement did not provide other details or confirm comments by 
relatives to the Jackson newspaper.
_______________________________________________
heads mailing list
heads@...
http://your.ballistichelmet.org/mailman/listinfo/heads/
http://ballistichelmet.org/donate/