Donle’s Daily Dispatches

Volume 1 Issue 155             Today’s News and Views         Thursday, June 1, 2006

Donle's Daily Dispatches RSS News Feeds

Latest news and opinion headlines from NPR, BBC, NY Times, etc.

See the cost in your community

Update of US Casualties in Iraq: 2471

Update of US Casualties in Afghanistan: 296

Figures provided by

the Iraq Coalition Causality website

For Immediate Release                                                                                                May 30, 2006

2500 American Deaths in Iraq are Near:

We say, “Not one more.” Call for Peace Now.

Press Contacts:

Harold P. Donle, Veterans for Peace, Inc. #49, hdonle@insightbb.com 317/698-2450.

Heather Allen-Garde, Hoosiers for Peace, heather@hoosiersforpeace.org, 317/202-9302.

Jim Wolfe, Indianapolis Peace and Justice Center, jwolfe@butler.edu, 317/255-3857.

Members of Veterans for Peace, Chapter 49, Hoosiers for Peace and the Indianapolis Peace and Justice Center are asking Indiana citizens to assemble on Monument Circle in downtown Indianapolis on the day that the 2500^th American is reported killed to mark this tragic occurrence. The target date at the current rate of KIAs is on or about Tuesday, June 13^th, thirteen (13) days from today.

This action is to honor the soldiers who have lost their lives in Iraq and their families, and to give our fellow Indiana citizens a visual representation of what 2500 looks like. We are against war because it kills our family members, wreaks havoc on our national treasury, makes the world a more dangerous place, and psychically damages our humanity.

Hundreds of Hoosiers have been invited to participate in this event that will combine an installation of 2500 flags to honor the dead and a memorial ceremony to call for an end to war. If the number is reached on a weekday (Mon.- Fri.) the group will gather at 6 P.M and if the number is reached on a weekend the group will gather at 4 P.M. at Veterans Memorial Plaza  in downtown Indianapolis. (The Plaza is bounded by Michigan to the south, Meridian to the west, North Street to the north, and Pennsylvania to the west.) At that time, the assembled will a field of flags on Veterans Memorial Plaza. The group will reserve 64 flags to represent the Hoosiers that have been lost in Iraq and they will plant those 64 flags around the base of the obelisk. There will be a period of brief remarks and a memorial ceremony in closing.

For more information contact Harold Donle at (317)698-2450.

Support Our Troops

IMPEACH Bush/Cheney

Hoosiers for Peace requests the honor of your presence…

What: Share Sunday Gravy with Local Progressives at Pasta for Peace. Good Food, Stimulating Conversation, Inspirational Music, Film, and Art and a Silent Auction. Did we mention the pasta was shaped like peace signs? To reserve your seat, call 202-9302 or e-mail heather@hoosiersforpeace.org. Seats are limited and going fast.

When: June 25, 2006 from 1 to 4 p.m. (with dinner at 2 p.m.)

Where: Indianapolis Peace and Learning Center (6040 DeLong Rd.) in Eagle Creek Park.

Why:  Now is the time to spread the word to mainstream America to unite and stand up for peace. Hoosiers for Peace is sponsoring a statewide advertising campaign, which is focused on uniting the community to call for peace. This campaign will cost $14,000. This money will be used to pay for a full-page ad in the Indianapolis Star to ask more than 700,000 Hoosiers to call for peace. To find out more visit www.hoosiersforpeace.org

Cost: Adults $20, Children 5-12 $7, Children under 5 eat free. All proceeds will go towards the advertising campaign. Seats are limited, contact Heather for tickets today: 202-9302 or e-mail heather@hoosiersforpeace.org.

Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which we arrive at that goal. 
-- Martin Luther King, Jr.

May 7, 2006

Dear Peacemakers,

Will you help to spread and encourage peace? With a record number of American soldiers dying in April 2006 and possible military action against Iran becoming daily news, now is the time to spread the word to mainstream America to unite and stand up for peace.

Hoosiers for Peace is sponsoring a statewide advertising campaign, which is focused on uniting the community to call for peace. This campaign will cost $14,000. This money will be used to pay for a full-page ad in the Indianapolis Star to ask more than 700,000 Hoosiers to call for peace. We are contacting dozens of organizations to make a proposal to form a coalition to raise funds and send a collaborative message to Hoosiers to Call for Peace. The message is: Call your friends, your family, and your representatives and ask them to support the Call for Peace.

Like most Americans, we oppose war based on the following, which will be reflected in the advertisement:

A.    War Kills. More than 2,400 American Soldiers have died and nearly 1,000 Hoosier soldiers are in harms way.

B.    War depletes our resources. Billions of dollars are going to sustain war efforts while ordinary citizens struggle for social services.

C.    War will not make us secure. Studies have shown that the U.S. is no more secure today than it was before 911.

Hoosiers for Peace, a website sponsored by Progressive Indiana, requests your support to make this advertisement a success. We will use the advertisement to call for peace. Each group in the coalition  working on this project will be listed in the ad. Each group will be asked to raise $1000 by October 1, 2006. Below are some suggestions for fundraising:

1.                Letter Writing Campaign: Contact your family and friends and ask them to support this call for peace. Tell them how many people we can reach and ask them to make a generous donation and spread the word. You may collect the money through your organization or you may refer them to Progressive Indiana. Donations may be sent through our secure online giving by going to www.progressiveindiana.org and click on donate now or log onto www.hoosiersforpeace and click on donate now. Checks may also be made payable to Progressive Indiana and mailed to:

                Progressive Indiana

                P.O. Box 55253

                Indianapolis, Indiana 46205-0253

2.                Host a house party. Go grassroots and organize a pasta dinner or backyard barbecue and ask for a donation from each guest. Play poker and donate half of each pot to the campaign for peace. Have a bake sale through your church or place of employment.

3.                Plan a small event.  Invite your community to an event and ask for donations for the ad. Small concerts, speakers, and socials are some ideas for these events. Get creative and network!

We need at least 14 groups to join the coalition and many more people to join the campaign to help fill in possible gaps. If we join together we can make this happen and we can bring Hoosiers together through this ad. As we Honor the Dead, Heal the Wounded, and call for an End to the War we can stand united for peace. We can make a difference by showing ordinary Hoosiers that there are many people like them working for peace. Please contact us as soon as possible if you would like to participate in this campaign. With a little work and collaboration we can make a large impact on our community.

In Peace,

Heather Allen-Garde

Director, Hoosiers For Peace

heather@hooisersforpeace.org

heatherreneeallen@yahoo.com

317/202-9302

It isn't enough to talk about peace. One must believe in it. And it isn't enough to believe in it. One must work at it – Eleanor Roosevelt

David Korten

Butler University

June 26, 2006

7pm

Reilley Room

Atherton Hall

Suggested Donation is $5.00

For more information

Click here

Listen to Air America Radio while reading today's news and views

Today's News and Views

But he claims he does not "expect to be a candidate" for president again, while refusing explicitly to rule out another run. Asked if any event could change his mind, he says: "Not that I can see."

Mr. Gore, who appeared at the Guardian Hay literary festival over the bank holiday weekend, is promoting An Inconvenient Truth, a documentary and book detailing the climate change crisis that he warns "could literally end civilisation".

The new levels of attention he is receiving have led some Democrats to call on him to run again for president, while others have responded with anger that Mr. Gore did not show the same level of passion in the 2000 campaign.

He has since acknowledged that he followed too closely the advice of his consultants during that campaign, and - before he started to scoff at the idea of running again - swore that if he ever did so, he would speak his mind.

In the years since, he has been a steady critic of specific Bush administration policies. He opposed the war on Iraq at a time when most prominent Democrats were supporting it, and more recently spoke out against what he called "a gross and excessive power grab" by the administration over phone tapping.

In the interview Mr. Gore also distances himself from Tony Blair on the subject of nuclear power, which the prime minister has insisted is "back on the agenda with a vengeance". Mr. Gore says he is "sceptical about it playing a much larger role," and that although it might have a part to play in Britain or China, it will not be "a silver bullet" in the fight against global warming.

In the US, Mr. Gore's environmental campaign has sparked a backlash from some on the right who accuse him of scaremongering. A series of television advertisements, launched by a think tank called the Competitive Enterprise Institute, argue that carbon dioxide emissions are a sign of American productivity and progress.

Mr. Gore's true attitude towards a potential return to the White House - or, at least, a potential battle with Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination - remains unknown.

At the weekend, Time magazine reported that he was telling key fundraisers they should feel free to sign on with other potential candidates. The magazine quoted unnamed Democratic sources as saying that the former vice-president had also been asking the fundraisers to "tell everybody I'm not running".

Mr. Gore would not find it difficult to raise millions of dollars, if he did decide to run. But while public denials might prove a wise campaign strategy - not least by prolonging the period of positive attention Mr. Gore is now receiving - actively turning away fundraisers does suggest a firmer resolve not to re-enter electoral politics.

It is significant, however, that Mr. Gore refuses to go beyond saying that he has no "plans" for such a campaign. "I haven't made a Shermanesque statement because it just seems odd to do so," he has said - a reference to the famous announcement by the civil war general William Sherman, who unequivocally refused to stand in the election of 1884. "If nominated, I will not run; if elected, I will not serve," General Sherman said.

Jonathan Freedland's interview with Al Gore will be aired on More4 on Saturday June 3 at 4.55pm.

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006

Insurgent attacks in Iraq at highest level in 2 years

Militants exploiting political uncertainty, Pentagon says

By Bryan Bender, Globe Staff  |  May 31, 2006

WASHINGTON -- The Pentagon reported yesterday that the frequency of insurgent attacks against troops and civilians is at its highest level since American commanders began tracking such figures two years ago, an ominous sign that, despite three years of combat, the US-led coalition forces haven't significantly weakened the Iraq insurgency.

In its quarterly update to Congress, the Pentagon reported that from Feb. 11 to May 12, as the new Iraqi unity government was being established, insurgents staged an average of more than 600 attacks per week nationwide. From August 2005 to early February, when Iraqis elected a parliament, insurgent attacks averaged about 550 per week; at its lowest point, before the United States handed over sovereignty in the spring of 2004, the attacks averaged about 400 per week.

The vast majority of the attacks -- from crude bombing attempts and shootings to more sophisticated, military-style assaults and suicide attacks -- were targeted at US-led coalition military forces, but the majority of deaths have been of civilians, who are far more vulnerable to insurgent tactics.

``Overall, average weekly attacks during this `Government Transition' period were higher than any of the previous periods," the report states. ``Reasons for the high level of attacks may include terrorist and insurgent attempts to exploit a perceived inability of the Iraqi government to constitute itself effectively, the rise of ethno sectarian attacks . . . and enemy efforts to derail the political process leading to a new government."

As if to underscore the grim report, a spate of violence swept Iraq yesterday. Bombs and other attacks killed 54 people, including an American soldier, according to wire reports. The deadliest bombing, in a popular market in a town about 20 miles north of Baghdad, killed at least 25 people and wounded 65.

On Monday, 40 other people were killed in various attacks, including two CBS journalists who died in a bombing that critically wounded a network correspondent. To date, 2,468 US soldiers have died since the March 2003 invasion, while more than 4,000 Iraqi civilians have died in war-related violence since the beginning of the year, according to government figures and media reports.

The Pentagon report, made public yesterday, contained some positive news, including an opinion poll that indicates most Iraqis don't like the insurgents' use of violence as a political tool. In addition, according to the report, a growing number of Iraqi security forces can operate without US military support, more ethnic groups are represented in the security forces, oil production has remained steady, and more than 10,000 new business registrations have been issued.

But the overall picture of progress in Iraq is grim, dominated by the seemingly ceaseless violence.

Despite military crackdowns on insurgents and the installation of the new Iraq government, the Pentagon wasn't optimistic about quelling the violence in the near future. Officials who briefed reporters on the Iraq assessment cautioned that violence against troops and Iraqi civilians probably won't slow until at least 2007 -- if the unity government exerts more of its own authority and, according to the report, ``addresses key sectarian and political concerns" that fuel the bloodshed.

The 65-page report, compiled by Multi-National Forces Iraq in Baghdad, identified a disturbing trend: New signs that former members of Saddam Hussein's regime who are fighting the American-led coalition and other Iraqis who don't like the new government are collaborating with Al Qaeda operatives and other foreign terrorists who are responsible for some of the deadliest attacks in the country.

The progress report also concluded that militias loyal to Iraq's various ethnic groups are to blame for a steady number of ethnic reprisals touched off by the Feb. 22 bombing of a revered Shi'ite Muslim shrine. The militiamen apparently have also infiltrated the Iraqi Security Forces.

``Individual militia members have been incorporated into the ISF, but the loyalties of some probably still lie, to some extent, with their ethno sectarian leaders," according to the report. ``Shi'ite militias, in particular, seek to place members into Army and police units as a way to serve their interests and gain influence."

Though the sectarian violence has subsided a bit in recent weeks -- and fears of a full-blown civil war have not been realized -- conflict among sects is still far higher than before the February mosque attack, according to the report. More than 1,000 casualties from sectarian violence were reported in February, compared with more than 1,500 in March, and about 1,200 in April, according to the Pentagon report. Before the mosque bombing, which has been blamed on foreign terrorists loyal to Al Qaeda, there were a few hundred sectarian-based attacks per month.

On the positive side, Pentagon officials pointed out that newly-trained Iraqi Security Forces have become more capable, and a growing number of units are leading or playing significant roles in anti-insurgent missions.

``Increasingly, Iraqi Security Forces are taking the lead in operations and primary responsibility for the security of their nation," the report said. ``As of May 15, there were two Iraqi divisions, 16 brigades, and 63 Army and National Police battalions with security lead in their areas of responsibility."

Meanwhile, as of May 6, the Iraqi Ministry of Defense, Ministry of Interior, and Ministry of Finance have assumed control of 34 bases from US-led forces, according to the assessment. Though the Pentagon has acknowledged that Sunni Muslims in particular are not fully represented, the Iraqi security forces are becoming more representative of the country's ethnic breakdown -- Shi'ite, Sunni, Kurd, and other minorities.

The report also outlined growth trends in the Iraq economy and steady political progress, culminating with the establishment of a unity government in Baghdad earlier this month.

For example, the number of independent mass media outlets has steadily grown; new business registrations are up by nearly 10,000 from the more than 20,000 in early 2005; and weekly oil production has remained at more than 2 million barrels per week.

At the same time, polling data has indicated that most Iraqis do not support violence as a political tool -- a sign that support for the insurgency may be falling, officials said. For example, after the Feb. 22 attack on a revered Shi'ite Muslim shrine in Samarra, 96 percent of Iraqis said such attacks were not acceptable. Another poll cited in the Pentagon report showed that 78 percent of Iraqis believed violence was never acceptable.

Meanwhile coalition forces have received more than 4,500 tips per month from average Iraqis about potential insurgent operations, up dramatically from about 400 in March 2005.

Bender can be reached at bender@globe.com

Iraq PM impatient with US troops killing civilians

Tue 30 May 2006 11:50 AM ET

By Mariam Karouny

BAGHDAD, May 30 (Reuters) - Iraq's prime minister said on Tuesday his patience was wearing thin with excuses from U.S. troops that they kill civilians by "mistake" and said he would launch an investigation into killings at Haditha last year.

"There is a limit to the acceptable excuses. Yes a mistake may happen but there is an acceptable limit to mistakes," Nuri al-Maliki told Reuters when asked about a U.S. investigation into the deaths of 24 Iraqis in the western town last November.

"We are worried about the increase in 'mistakes'. I am not saying that they are intentional. But it is worrying for us," he said in an interview in his offices in Baghdad.

Newly confirmed as leader of Iraq's first full-term government since U.S. forces overthrew Saddam Hussein, Maliki has talked up the prospect of foreign troops leaving Iraq.

He said a timetable of 18 months he mentioned last week for Iraqi forces having overall control of the whole country could even be shorter if U.S.-led forces were serious about giving support and training to the new Iraqi army.

Their U.N. mandate expires in December and the government will have to negotiate the terms on which they stay. Maliki, a Shi'ite, seems keen to speak up for the concerns felt especially among minority Sunnis over U.S. tactics in their areas.

U.S. defence officials have said charges including murder may be brought against Marines following the investigation of the 24 civilian deaths in Haditha, a stronghold of the Sunni Arab insurgency. The case emerged when local people passed film of the bodies to the international media.

American lawmakers briefed by officials on the investigation concur with local witnesses who say Marines shot the civilians. The military initially said they were killed by a roadside bomb.

INVESTIGATIONS

Many Iraqis believe unjustified killings by U.S. troops are common, though few have been confirmed by investigations. The most common complaint is that troops open fire too hastily at checkpoints or when Iraqis approach their convoys too closely.

Maliki said his own government would probe not just Haditha but other cases: "We will ask for answers not only about Haditha but about any operation ... in which killing happened by mistake and we will hold those who did it responsible."

Noting a probe into the deaths of people in a U.S.-Iraqi raid on a Baghdad mosque in March, he added: "We will use our authority since we are responsible for protecting the Iraqi people, and we are elected by people ... Those who kill intentionally or through negligence should be tried."

Maliki said last week he believed Iraqi forces could be in overall control of its entire territory within 18 months, although U.S. and other troops are expected to remain to provide emergency firepower for some considerable time beyond that.

Maliki said on Tuesday that the 18-month timeframe could be even shorter, however: "We may not need it ... because the structure is there. But what we need is seriousness is supporting the building of forces," he said.

"If the multinational forces made an effort to support and develop our forces, I think the timetable will be shorter."

(Additional reporting by Alastair Macdonald)

© Reuters 2006.

Republicans have made a target of Ms. Pelosi — who has become ubiquitous on campaign podiums, in interviews and in Republican talking points — because the notion of Democrats' winning a Congressional majority is hardly the pipe dream it was 18 months ago.

As President Bush's approval ratings languish with those of Republican lawmakers, polls suggest that Democrats could be on course to lead the House for the first time in 12 years.

As a result, Ms. Pelosi teeters on a fine line: between the need to say what Democrats plan to do if they win control of the House and the danger of speaking too soon. She begins some sentences with "when we win" and others with "if we win." Sometimes she will tack on a qualifier ("no matter who wins this election") or caveat ("that's if the election were held today").

"I don't want to appear overconfident," she said.

She is sitting in an office that, she often notes, belonged to Thomas P. O'Neill Jr. when he was speaker. After November, she hopes — or expects — to assume that mantle, depending on what conjunction she happens to be using.

Republicans hope to block her ascent by preventing Democrats from picking up the 15 seats they need to take control of the House. Republican strategists say they are eager to conduct a direct assault on Ms. Pelosi, focusing on what they believe are her vulnerabilities.

Ms. Pelosi can struggle at times to give the air of the gravitas that powerful women like Hillary Rodham Clinton and Condoleezza Rice do, both friends and adversaries say. She can appear tentative and overscripted in interviews, with a tight smile and large, expressive eyes than can leave an impression of nervousness.

"Her public speaking style is not good," said Representative Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts.

She is more animated and assured in private meetings, said Mr. Frank, who counts himself a big admirer.

The view of Ms. Pelosi as a deficient spokeswoman for her party was buttressed during an appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press" earlier this month, which centered largely on what Democrats would do if they won the House. Political insiders of both parties judged her performance as shaky, uncommanding and defensive.

"A lot of Republicans were saying, 'We need her on TV more,' " said Ed Kutler, a Republican lobbyist. "Maybe we should buy ad time for her."

Asked why she makes such a popular Democratic bogyman, or bogywoman, Ms. Pelosi shrugged, smirked and, finally, smiled.

"I am an Italian-American Catholic grandmother," she said, "very traditional in terms of values."

She repeated this three times, as if to emphasize that her self-image was at odds with more common descriptors, like "San Francisco liberal."

Representative Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland, the House Democratic whip, said, "They will try to demonize our members in leadership because it's all they have left."

Mr. Hoyer, who is seen as more moderate than Ms. Pelosi, has made no secret over the years of his interest in moving up the leadership ranks. But he said he would not run against Ms. Pelosi for speaker, and he dismissed speculation on Capitol Hill that he might do so as "the right trying to create a fight."

Ms. Pelosi has said that she intends to become speaker if her party wins control of the House and that she would expect to run unopposed.

As the prospect of a Democratic majority gains credibility and Ms. Pelosi is more visible, she is also subjected to the speculation and analysis about her hair, makeup and clothes that any woman positioned for such a big job often must endure.

"I hear them say on TV that I've had face-lifts," said Ms. Pelosi, 66, who added that she had never had one. "I heard one woman say I've had a face-lift, but it looks terrible."

She shook her head and said, "Did you ever think that those two things cancel themselves out?"

Ms. Pelosi said she slept little, stole exercise by dashing through airports and subsisted many days on Ghirardelli chocolates ("less than 10" a day) and pistachio nuts (which she shells with her teeth).

"I had a hamburger last night and it was my breakfast, lunch and dinner," she said last week. "And I had these strange things. I realized they were French fries." She made quick spiraling gestures with her fingers to show what they looked like.

It was apparent that she was not familiar with curly fries.

In the course of two interviews, Ms. Pelosi repeated herself frequently, even by the hyper-repetitious standards of politicians:

¶About how the Republican House leadership was presiding over a "culture of corruption."

¶About how Democrats were committed to fiscal responsibility.

¶About how Democrats would restore civility to the House.

¶About how "when Democrats win," President Bush will be a "lame duck," upon which she switches poultry metaphors and drops in the cautionary cliché about not counting chickens before they are hatched.

She repeated Jesse Jackson-like alliterative sound bites in halting un-Jackson-like cadences. Republicans, she said, "are engaging in deluge and desperation," while her Democratic caucus "is a great collection of idealism, intellect and" — she paused while trying to summon the third "i" — "integrity."

Whatever Ms. Pelosi lacks as a communicator, her political gifts are abundant, colleagues say. She is known as a shrewd inside player with instincts honed in the political hothouse of her youth. She grew up in the Little Italy section of Baltimore, one of six children and the only daughter of a legendary Democratic machine boss, congressman and mayor, Tommy D'Alesandro.

She attended Trinity College in Washington, where she met her future husband, Paul Pelosi, who was attending Georgetown. They eventually moved to his hometown, San Francisco, where she remained active in Democratic politics and was first elected to Congress in 1987. The heavily Democratic district has easily re-elected her ever since.

In Congress, Ms. Pelosi has been particularly interested in intelligence issues and has strongly supported abortion rights. She has also shown sharp-elbowed partisanship and old-school pragmatism and collegiality.

Ms. Pelosi nodded vigorously when asked if she was friends with Representative Tom DeLay, whom she had just seconds earlier described as "corrupt." She went on to catalog the work the two had done together in Congress. And then Ms. Pelosi affirmed, once again, how "corrupt" her friend Mr. DeLay was.

Ms. Pelosi, who succeeded Representative Richard A. Gephardt as minority leader in 2002, has been credited in that role with keeping her racially, ideologically and stylistically diverse caucus unified. Congressional Quarterly magazine examined 669 roll-call votes in 2005 and found that Democrats voted with the majority of their party 88 percent of the time, the highest total since it started doing such analyses in 1956.

"She understands her members, where they are on issues and what they need," said the Democratic lobbyist Steve Elmendorf, a former aide to Mr. Gephardt.

Mr. Elmendorf described Ms. Pelosi as "an extremely attentive leader" who would deservedly receive much credit if Democrats won in November.

Democratic solidarity is also forged of the party's fierce opposition to President Bush's policies. As Mr. Frank said, "The Republicans' extremism is the sine qua non of our unity."

Indeed, throughout the Bush presidency, Democrats have been criticized as being only against Mr. Bush and not standing for any ideals or agenda of their own. This creates something of a dilemma for them.

In recent years, Republicans have charged that Democrats had no ideas, Ms. Pelosi said. Now, whenever Democrats talk about their ideas, she said, "they say we're measuring the curtains on the speaker's office."

Ms. Pelosi disagrees with the notion — proffered by some Democrats — that party leaders should say nothing and let the Republicans founder on their own.

"We've done our job for 18 months saying why they shouldn't vote for Republicans," she said. "Enough of the Republicans. Now it's about us."

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

THE WARS IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN: THE FALLEN

ONE MOTHER'S SON

More than two years after the crash that killed John Sullivan, his mother still struggles to make sense of his death in Iraq

By Elizabeth Irene Sullivan

May 28, 2006

In the early evening of Nov. 15, 2003, Army Spec. John Robert Sullivan, 26, of Countryside, was killed along with 17 other members of the 101st Airborne Division when two Black Hawk helicopters went down over Mosul, Iraq.

He died eight months after the invasion of Iraq had begun and six months after President Bush had declared "Mission accomplished" on the deck of an aircraft carrier.

John was the third of my six sons.

That day should have been forgettable, a day spent doing what couples do when it's cold outside and the kids are grown or on their own. I had planned to spend a couple of hours at work, go to the market, putz around the house and then finish plans for Thanksgiving.

At work, I heard a radio report that said two helicopters from the Army's 101st Airborne Division had crashed. John was a wheeled-vehicle mechanic in the 101st in Mosul, so I wasn't terribly worried about him being on a helicopter. Still, the news flash sent a chill through me.

I hurried home and began searching the Internet and flipping through news channels for updates on what every account said was the largest number of casualties in a single incident.

I stayed up late that evening, a Saturday, and awoke early on Sunday, debating whether to call John's wife, Trina, who had moved to Seattle to be near her parents while he was in Iraq. I watched footage of the charred wreckage being towed away and listened to reports on the rising casualty counts. On the computer in my family room, I read online accounts from other families about what it's like to wait for the two men in uniform to knock on your door.

Then my cell phone rang.

I remember leaning on the kitchen wall and sliding to my knees as Trina told me about the visit from the Army chaplain and another officer and how she thought that, maybe, if she didn't let in the two uniforms, it wouldn't be true.

I saw my sons Andy, who was 22, and 24-year-old David, and my partner, Ivan, their bewildered eyes staring at me, first sleepy, then weepy. Did my son Joey wake them? Did I scream?

I told Trina that I saw the wreckage being lifted and towed, and how it was so burned and broken up that you couldn't even tell it was a helicopter, and that John's death had to have been quick, almost instant. So I was sure--I hoped--that he didn't have time to be scared.

We were sobbing together, and she said that she hoped she had made John happy. I told her she did. I thought about their twin sons, Aiden and Gavin, who were born Sept. 10, 2003, two months after their father was deployed. He never got to hold them.

I took a deep breath, then sobbed. Tried again. And again. There were so many things to do, and I thought about them from oldest to youngest: tell my sons' father in Romeoville, then their brother Jimmy, who was 32, in Woodridge, and finally call their brother Michael, 29, in Springfield.

First, though, I took a shower. I wanted to cry without anybody watching. I certainly didn't want them to see that I was crazy mad and numb. But there was something else: I also didn't want anyone to know I thought that, when I felt a chill after hearing about the helicopter crash, it was the moment his soul left his body.

Then I went to my ex-husband's house. While I was there, the uniformed officer arrived. He seemed nervous. But we solemnly and proudly received the official notification, with condolences on behalf of a grateful nation.

We thanked him.

Then I was on autopilot. I went to the Jewel and grabbed enough comfort food and snacks for our family and everyone else who would be stopping by.

I woke up Jimmy, who wailed, swore in whispers and tears, and pounded his apartment wall until he made a hole in it. I hugged him for a long time and brought him home with us. And then I called Michael and had my heart ripped out again because I had to tell him over the phone and wasn't there to hug him when he sobbed and choked. God, it was an awful sound.

More thoughts: I wondered whether I should throw a frozen lasagna in the oven. John loved lasagna, even Stouffer's, but he wasn't there. Michael loves it, too, but he wasn't there either. Jimmy eats it after he scrapes off the ricotta filling. Ivan will eat it if there's nothing else. So maybe I should make something else. They would need energy for grieving.

A fine mother I turned out to be. My family was hurt, and I could not do anything to make it better.

I thought, damn Bush.

The days passed. On Tuesday, Trina told me she had decided to bury John near Seattle so when the kids are older they can visit him any time they want. She explained it in a way that made me wonder if she thought I would get mad.

Of course it's OK, I told her; if he wanted me to make a decision like that, he wouldn't have married you.

A day or two later, Trina called to tell me that the Army thought the helicopters hadn't crashed, as was initially reported, but that they had been shot down by hostile forces with rocket-propelled grenades. Hostile forces? At that point, I still thought that the Iraqi people liked us.

For the first time in 30 years, I opened the Bible. I looked up John 2:17 (his birthday): "Zeal for your house shall consume me," and John 11:15 (the date of his death): "For your sake I am glad I was not there so that you may believe," to see if I could find any comfort in those verses. Nothing.

Exactly where is my son? I want my son here. Now. I asked myself, Am I nuts or something? Not yet.

Later still, I received a letter from John. There were photos of John's cot inside the airplane hangar that also served as their shop--they slept with the trucks they repaired--and a brief line: "Thought the guys would like these pictures. Love, John."

What would he have written if he had known that it would be his last letter home?

John's body did not arrive in Seattle until Nov. 24, more than one week after he was killed. We got there the next day. I met the twins for the first time.

Seeing John's flag-draped casket, I realized I was not prepared. Everyone else was just as overwhelmed. My boys: God, I couldn't look at them, couldn't even bear to see them in this much pain, it hurt so much.

Everyone alternated sitting and staring at the casket, and standing and staring at the casket. There were no funny stories about John that night, like there had been when we first arrived, just a dead quiet punctuated by deep sobs. This can't be, I thought.

That night, I didn't want John to be alone. I thought of asking whether I could stay with him, but I didn't.

The funeral was on Nov. 26, 11 days after John died. I tried to utter the words "Thy will be done" during the Lord's Prayer. I couldn't.

Whose will was this?

On the first anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, someone apparently thought it would be good public relations if the president visited the 101st Airborne Division at Ft. Campbell, Ky., then the home of the most casualties.

Three days before the event, Trina called to tell me the families of the fallen soldiers of the 101st were invited and that Bush would meetprivately with us afterward. I told her that we couldn't afford the trip or to take any more time off work.

"No," Trina told me. "The Army is paying. For everything."

Flickers of anger turned into flames. They wouldn't pay for me to attend John's funeral--Trina had asked if they would--but they would pay for some pre-election photo op? No way.

Then I thought, maybe I should go. What if Bush were to give me an opening line like, "I share your pain," and I got to reply, "You want to share my pain? Send your daughters there. See how they like sleeping in sand and getting bitten by sand fleas and asking you to stand in line at the post office with boxes of itch cream and hand wipes and Gatorade for the 106-degree heat? And have them tell you they can't do their job properly because, besides itching all the time, they have to share socket wrenches, but that's OK because they'll order a Craftsman set online from Sears the next time they get to a computer? And then have them come back home draped in a flag." But I can't sully John's name.

I stayed home.

One of John's legs didn't arrive back in the States until a few months after the funeral. Trina had to have a separate burial for it.

No one told me until last year. They were afraid I would go off the deep end. Now, as far as I know, the leg is on top of the rest of John--though I'm not sure whether it's in its own little casket or they opened John's casket and put it in. I can't bring myself to ask.

Something else.

As a Mother's Day gift, Trina is sending me this weekend to Good Grief Camp in Washington, D.C. It's sponsored by the Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors, or TAPS, a non-profit group for military survivors. Ostensibly, we're going to help Jade, Trina's 13-year-old daughter from an earlier marriage. But Trina thinks grief camp might also help me.

Grief camp children visit war monuments and, according to the TAPS Web site, "learn how we, as a nation, honor those who have served and sacrificed, and they also learn coping skills for handling their own grief."

Adults attend workshops and support groups. I'd rather hang out with the kids. I'd like to learn the same coping skills they're taught; the ones I've learned so far from adult support groups aren't working.

I've been encouraged by several mothers whose children have been killed in the war to get a prescription for Zoloft or Prozac or Paxil to help me cope, but I haven't, and I won't. I want people to see how hard it is to control my emotions when I talk about John. I want to wholeheartedly laugh at Bush's silly speeches and his plots to deflect attention from Iraq. I crave the insomnia that allows me to write the speeches I have given about John and to record our family's memories of him. I don't want to be numbed. I want to feel every minute of this.

But I have to do something with this grief and anger that will make John's death meaningful. Not to a grateful nation. To me. I have spoken about John, and now, with this piece, I have written about him.

----------

Elizabeth Irene Sullivan lives in Bolingbrook and works as a gas station manager. She is a member of Military Families Speak Out, an organization of people opposed to the war in Iraq who have (or had) relatives or loved ones in the military.

Copyright © 2006, Chicago Tribune

Deadly record for Iraq bombings
WORST MONTH FOR BLASTS KILLING 3 OR MORE
By Nelson Hernandez and Saad al-Izzi
Washington Post

BAGHDAD, Iraq - A series of car bombings and other attacks killed more than 50 Iraqis and one U.S. soldier Tuesday, illustrating a new intensity in the violence in Iraq and underlining the security problems facing the country's 10-day-old government.

In an indicator of rising violence, more ``multiple fatality'' bombings -- involving at least three fatalities -- occurred this month than in any other since the war began in 2003, according to the Brookings Institution, which issues a twice-weekly report of security and reconstruction statistics. The report this week listed 44 such bombings as of May 25; since then, that number has risen above 50. The next-worst month was September 2005, which had 46.

Statistics indicate violence has been steadily escalating for months, particularly since the bombing of a Shiite shrine in Samarra north of Baghdad on Feb. 22 kicked off a wave of sectarian killing. According to Brookings, there were 21 multiple-fatality bombings in December, when national elections were held for the new government. In January, there were 30; in February, 39; in March, 37; and in April, 40.

The number of people killed in these bombings has gradually climbed as well, from 174 in December to 293 in April. This month's death toll is well over 300.

The violence has not spared American troops. U.S. military authorities reported that a soldier in the 172nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team was killed by gunfire Monday in the northern city of Mosul, and another soldier was killed on Tuesday by a roadside bomb while on patrol southeast of Baghdad.

In Tuesday's deadliest incident, at least 25 people were killed and more than 50 injured when a car bomb exploded near a bus stop in Husseiniyah, about 20 miles north of Baghdad, Maj. Gen. Hussein Kamal, a deputy interior minister, said in a televised statement.

Tuesday's attacks came a day after another string of bombings, one of which killed a U.S. soldier, two CBS News staff members and an Iraqi interpreter and wounded CBS News correspondent Kimberly Dozier and six U.S. soldiers.

Dozier, now at the Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany, is in critical but stable condition, CBS reported Tuesday. She was responsive, opening her eyes to commands, a U.S. military official said in the CBS report.

Tuesday's violence overshadowed an unusual day in the trial of Saddam Hussein, in which the former Iraqi president's defense team mounted its most serious challenge yet to the prosecution's case.

Two of the three defense witnesses who testified in the trial -- which involved charges that 148 Iraqi Shiites were executed in retaliation for an attempt on Saddam's life in the town of Dujail in 1982 -- testified that at least 23 of the people allegedly slaughtered were still alive.

© 2006 MercuryNews.com and wire service sources.
http://www.mercurynews.com

May 29, 2006

Remember Vote Fraud: A Review - Part 1

It’s Election Time, Don’t Let Your Guard Down

by Mark S. Tucker

On January 15, 2006, in OpEdNews, which has not been loathe to cover the issue, I wrote “Vote Fraud: Our #1 Concern - Exposing Lies Kills ‘The Fruit of the Poison Tree’ “, which can be read here:

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_mark_s___060115_vote_fraud_3a_our__231_c.htm

As June 6 draws near, however, the absolute silence in mainstream media on this issue should be causing extreme anxiety in most everyone. Not only is it the most important subject in our country, bar none (because nothing can proceed properly without a clean vote...nothing), but the indications of past prolificities of the debacle and the drop-dead likelihood of it occurring once again, when the conservative boat is in so precarious a position, is nearly 100%. The matter left to address, then, is: how widespread will it be?

This we cannot know until after all is said and done. Though I’m hoping for some scandalous exposés of fell activities caught amidships the very day of the elections, brought forth by zealous election watchers, with Republicans hip to the fact their scam is known, how much more sophisticated can we imagine the new wave of attack will be?

Here in my district, Congressional candidate Marcy Winograd is leaving nothing to chance. She’s organizing observation teams to monitor polling places throughout the day, from the moment they open until the second they close. Her plan is well thought out, disciplined, all inclusive, and with good reason: her opponent is Jane Harman, a self-confessed “Republican Democrat” and a woman fighting for her political life in every possible way (Nancy Pelosi recently came out squarely against Harman). Many of us here in the 36th have no doubt that there may very easily be an attempt to pull more of the Vote Fraud of the past and we’re preparing for it, with Winograd as the focus point. After all, Harman has been a key Intel affiliate and the Intel community has been extraordinarily cowardly about the VOTE FRAUD issue, consummately so, remaining stolidly silent, refusing to comment or investigate something they have cardinal knowledge about and which should shock them to the depths of their carnivorous souls.

John Perkins’ unbelievable exposé, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, directly and by implication leaves no doubt that Vote Fraud would be a hit man activity, a crucial one. We’re presently under attack through it. The evidence is abundant once one stops being programmed by Rupert Murdoch & Co. (Hillary’s new bestest bud). What all that really means, I’ll leave for another time, that it’s even present should be more than alarming. That it needs to be expunged is paramount.

There’s still time to look after your own district and I cannot recommend highly enough that you do. Just follow the Winograd Method: 1) any campaign can send reps to monitor and check against its rolls who has and has not voted, 2) it can check voter rolls and call those who haven't voted, and 3) it can also just poll watch. This last may be the most important.

Toward addressing this, what can be done pre-emptively is to remind everyone of many of the details uncovered to this point in Vote Fraud. Herewith, then, a decent, but perhaps occasionally somewhat duplicative, selection of overviews (credited where I could):

----------

In “Kerry Won”, by Greg Palast (Nov. 4, 2004 - TomPaine.com), we read that:

* Kerry won...Tuesday, in Ohio and New Mexico, it was John Kerry...CNN's exit poll showed Kerry beating Bush among Ohio women by 53 percent to 47 percent. Kerry also defeated Bush among Ohio's male voters 51 percent to 49 percent. Unless a third gender voted in Ohio, Kerry took the state...Although the exit polls show that most voters in Ohio punched cards for Kerry-Edwards, thousands of these votes were simply not recorded.

* ...in Florida in 2000. Exit polls showed Gore with a plurality of at least 50,000, but it didn't match the official count. That's because the