A Nod And A Wink

(Editorial cartoon by Mike Luckovich and published 11/27/12 by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.  Click on image to enlarge and then please come back.)

Most of the news concerning the lame-duck Congress these days has to do with the looming "fiscal cliff" and the apocalypse which will happen if something isn't done RIGHT NOW.  But some of the cannier Republicans, mindful of the solid trouncing they just took in the election, have finally decided their party needs to reach out to the Hispanic vote.  Of course, they are not proposing anything substantive right now, just making noises as if they were.

From the Los Angeles Times:

Three Republican senators introduced an alternative to the Dream Act on Tuesday that would give legal status to young immigrants brought to the U.S. unlawfully as children.

Later this week, the House is expected to vote on a bill that would increase the number of visas for technology jobs, while reducing other legal immigration.

But these efforts are unlikely to become law and amount to little more than political showboating. ...

Retiring Sens. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) and Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) introduced the Achieve Act on Tuesday. The bill, also sponsored by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), appeared to be an attempt to take some heat off Republicans on immigration.

In a news conference, Hutchison said she believed it would be better to tackle small pieces of immigration reform one at a time because agreement on a large package had proven too difficult.

Fewer young immigrants would qualify under her proposal than would have been eligible under the Dream Act. Unlike the Dream Act, the GOP bill would not guarantee a pathway to citizenship.

Under the Republican proposal, applicants who were brought to the U.S. before age 14 could apply for student visas if they are under 29 and enrolled in a college-degree program in the U.S. Applicants under 32 would qualify if they already held a degree from an American college.

After college graduation, immigrants could apply for work visas that would be renewable every four years for the rest of their lives. Unlike the Dream Act, the bill doesn't guarantee permanent residency. If an employer or a family member sponsored them, they could get in line for a green card and eventually apply for citizenship.   [Emphasis added]

How very serious a proposal.

Of course, it is made by two senators who are retiring and have nothing to lose and one senator who will still be on Sunday talk shows leaking at the mouth no matter what happens for the rest of his life.  But it is intended to show the public that the GOP cares, it really cares about Hispanics.

Yeah, right.  And my real name is Marie and I'm the Queen of Rumania.

To be fair, as the article points out, there has been some bipartisan conferencing about immigration reform, but it is clear that any such reform will come in the 113th Congress, not the 112th.  And the parties to that discussion are keeping the talks confidential, so it's hard to tell just how far the GOP will bend on the issue of what its members keep referring to as "amnesty" for the millions of undocumented Hispanics already here.  We will just have to wait to see what that involves.

We continue to live in interesting times.

Be Careful What You Wish For

Xenophobes must be deliriously unhappy with the news that there are more than a million new American citizens, nearly a third of them in California. After years of lamenting that illegal immigrants have been sucking the life blood from the nation, now they have to worry about the fact that many of those they demonized as blood suckers are now bona fide citizens who are willing and able to vote. From today's Los Angeles Times:

More than 1 million immigrants became U.S. citizens last year, the largest surge in history, hastening the ethnic transformation of California's political landscape with more Latinos and Asians now eligible to vote.

Leading the wave, California's 300,000 new citizens accounted for nearly one-third of the nation's total and represented a near-doubling over 2006, according to a recent report by the U.S. Office of Immigration Statistics. Florida recorded the second-largest group of new citizens, and Texas claimed the fastest growth.

Mexicans, who have traditionally registered low rates of naturalization, represented the largest group, with nearly one-fourth of the total. They were followed by Indians, Filipinos, Chinese, Cubans and Vietnamese.

The new citizens are reshaping California's electorate and are likely to reorder the state's policy priorities, some political analysts predict. Several polls show that Latinos and Asians are more supportive than whites of public investments and broad services, even if they require higher taxes.

In the 2008 election, most of these new voters went for Barack Obama. It is highly likely that many of them will vote Democrat in 2010 as well, thanks to the tantrums of such as Tom Tancredo, Pat Buchanan, and Lou Dobbs. The irony is that these Republican stalwarts used their platforms to complain that the immigrants, legal or not, didn't have any interest in America: they didn't come legally and they refused to participate in the national discourse. Legal entrance or not, these new citizens met the challenge and worked hard to enter that discourse in the best way possible. They earned the right to vote.

And the Republican shrillness won't likely be forgotten any time soon, as even some of that party's more moderate members have recognized:

Those demographic and political trends will continue to marginalize Republicans unless the party makes major changes in its tone and policies toward immigrants, said Allan Hoffenblum, a Republican political consultant in Los Angeles.

"The reason the Republican Party is in such dire straits is its inability to successfully reach out and change its image among Latinos and Asians," he said. "The image is too shrill on immigration. It's an image of an intolerant cult." [Emphasis added]

That image just happens to be an accurate reflection of what the GOP currently is, sadly. And the image will remain for as long as the Tancredos, Buchanans, and Dobbs continue to spout their racism from media platforms. In the meantime, our new citizens will take their rightful place and, hopefully, continue to exercise their new rights.

Welcome, neighbors!

Something You Should Read

This, I apologize, it's long but you should go ahead and read it. This is why the past eight years must never happen again. These are horrible crimes We are better than that.

Terry Holdbrooks, Jr. served as a military police officer with the rank of Specialist in the United States Army between 2002 and 2005, attached to the 252nd Military Police, and later assigned to the 463rd MP company, a mobile deploying unit, based at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. From 2003 to 2004, he was deployed to Guantanamo Bay, where he served as a prison guard. On March 5, 2009, I had the privilege of interviewing Mr. Holdbrooks by telephone. What follows are my interview notes, corrected as appropriate by Mr. Holdbrooks.

The Talking Dog: Where were you on September 11th?

Terry Holdbrooks: I woke up. My grandmother (who was then still alive) got me out of bed, and we watched the television accounts. At first, I thought it was an accident. By the second plane strike, I gathered it was a terrorist attack. After watching the accounts on CNN, Fox News and so forth with amazingly specific speculations, I got frustrated with the coverage, and went about my day. I went to my friend John's house, and we had a discussion about whether this was an act of war and the start of World War III. My goal for the rest of the day was to escape the coverage and the speculation and the endless discussion. At that time, I must say I reached the point where I didn't care to see or hear about it any longer, and eventually, I went to a bar, I recall playing pool and otherwise don't recall that being an all that consequential day for me, personally. I actually made it a great attempt all day long to escape the coverage and speculations that people had in regards to whether or not this was in fact a terrorist act, a threat, a mistake, the end of the world, and all the other crap that people thought it might be.

The Talking Dog: I understand you signed on to be a military police officer in the U.S. Army, and before deployment to Guantanamo (or "GTMO" as I will call it henceforth), were assigned to stateside bases. In the course of that, did you have any experience working in the detention context, either in stockades or short term facilities or anything of that nature? Before deploying to GTMO, regardless of "cultural or religious training" (for which, I understand the answer was "none") did you have any specific prison guard training (under any applicable Army Manual, Geneva Conventions, anything like that?) Can you describe any training and/or indoctrination (such as what you have described as "propaganda films") that you did receive? Can you comment on the overall "professionalism" of your fellow guards, and tell me why you come to this assessment? Were they generally from military police backgrounds?

Terry Holdbrooks: Well, we were given an introduction to detention tactics for a week or two in the course of training, but I did not find it particularly meaningful, or particularly realistic compared to what we eventually encountered. This was conducted at Fort Dix, New Jersey just before we left for GTMO. This was a crash course given to us by 5 random sergeants of the "31c mos", meaning, correctional officers. It was nothing like what we were going into, and in no way a real preparation for the experience ahead.

We also did see quite a number of what I would call propaganda films: films of towers falling, pictures of bin Laden, people crying and flags flying, and then random presumably Muslim individuals, all with heavy metal music playing, usually in three minute song length segments. Before going to Guantanamo (and even at Guantanamo) we saw a lot of these things, I just thought that this is how the Army stoked up people during training. Drowning Pool's Let the Bodies hit the Floor was a common song for this. It is simple to see how it is propaganda and programming. We also took a trip to "Ground Zero" just before the day we flew out, this was to really nail in the idea that "these people are bad" and to get us riled and ready for hatred. I remember reading a quote someone had left on the wall there, "this is the worst tragedy to happen to mankind". It really made me sad to think our educational system is so lacking, that this was the worst someone could think of to mankind. Never mind the Holocaust, Josef Stalin, the Crusades, the Armenian Genocide, they don’t count, they're not American-related, I suppose.

Also part of the training was an actual mock detention facility, which featured 2 or 3 cell blocks, and a larger area for recreation, a mess hall and so forth, we practiced guarding other guards... but frankly, the anger and animosity that we were supposed to encounter just wasn't there in this exercise (perhaps had we been trained in a real prison, like Leavenworth, it might have been more realistic).

As to "professionalism"... that was just not a word I would use to describe guards at Guantanamo, other than when VIPs such as my home state's esteemed Senior Senator John McCain or generals, diplomats or other dignitaries showed up, when suddenly, everything would appear to be in perfect order. Otherwise, most guards were just eager to leave, and new guards were disappointed to be there. (While the guards were less than professional, the medical staffs, usually Navy and Marine Corpsmen were quite professional... patient care was patient care, whether the patient was an American or an accused terrorist.)

As to the backgrounds of the guards, almost all were military police, and not many of them had corrections background. We had a week of corrections training in military police school, but that is not enough to certify you to work in a facility as far as I am concerned.

The Talking Dog: I understand that you have converted to Islam, after your own personal spiritual journey. My understanding is that this was, in part, based on an interest you developed in your youth, which was augmented by your experiences at Guantanamo (and you were at GTMO from 2003-2004). I take it that your conversion was not known to the official military at the time you converted? Did your paths cross with former GTMO Muslim chaplain Capt. James Yee? Were you aware of Capt. Yee's arrest, and (at least for a time around 2003) the arrest of virtually every Muslim (soldier or civilian employee alike) who left GTMO?

Terry Holdbrooks: I did convert to Islam, though I wouldn't describe it as much of a spiritual journey. I would just say it was about acquiring personal knowledge in order to have a greater understanding with and about other individuals. While it developed to some extent in my youth, my interest was largely about matters of Middle Eastern culture and history.

At GTMO, I did indeed keep my conversion quiet, though there were outward signs, such as my quitting smoking and drinking alcohol.

And I did meet Chaplain Yee; he game me a Koran. As to his case, I was aware of it, I believed the basis for his arrest was utter B.S., and indeed, he was ultimately cleared, so there you are. I was also aware of the arrests of the other Muslims who left the base. This was, of course, the work of the Bush Administration, who needed to drum up public support for their war, and they needed bad guys as part of this. There was little talk of him, his arrest or speculation as to why he was arrested while I was down there. It wasn’t until after I got back to the states that I came to understand how he had been caught up in B.S., just like everything else that General Miller was involved in. Detainees would ask of him, but they did not know what had happened, and the new Islamic chaplain they brought in had little to no privileges in comparison to what Chaplain Yee had.

The Talking Dog: Let me follow up on something most Westerners (especially non-Muslims) the restrictions associated with music (those on pork and alcohol are more widely known, for example)... can you briefly describe the restrictions associated with music imposed by Islam, in your own words, and how this impacted you as a trained audio engineer and audio-phile with a large recording collection? Also, I understand you observed loud noises-- including loud music-- played to detainees... I'll ask you about other acts of religious or cultural disrespect in a bit... but was it ever explained to you (by either detainees or other prison staff... or anyone) that the selection of playing loud music was meant to "get under the skin" of the prisoners because of the religious injunction as to music... or was it just to (literally) drive them crazy with the noise?

Terry Holdbrooks: This music issue is certainly something to struggle with as a Muslim. I will say that there is some debate within the Islamic community as to the scope of the injunction... is it all music in all forms? There is some accepted opinion that, if the music is spiritual in nature, or created with good intentions, there is no reason why a devout Muslim cannot appreciate it. Something like Marilyn Manson, for example, is not "created with good intentions" or likely to fit with this, but plenty of worthy music is. Music by Johnny Cash, System of a Down, any classical artist, soundtracks of a musical instrumental only nature, Broadway productions, etc., that, for example, relates to issues of the Armenian genocide, or other music with a cause, such as to advance knowledge, is certainly within this worthy category, and I certainly would hope that this kind of music can be duly appreciated. What I have always enjoyed of Islam is that the script is in perfect form in regards to the Quran, it has not been changed in the 1400 years it has been in existence, still the same as day one. Obviously there are some matters that were not predicted, or rather written of, such as music, and we are a community of many, with many great scholars who will interpret the meanings in the Quran and hadith, and help for us to live the straight path.

As for me personally, what the injunctions mean is that I have about $6,000 in audio equipment, over 500 CDs and 38 gigabytes of music that just don't get played! I have found the music injunction harder than the bans on alcohol, tobacco and pork! Something like music, when it has been your life, and you can remember years back and pivotal experiences in your life due to the album you were listening to that week, it is a great to be able to recall something so well like that, and with a few notes of a song I can be in a completely different place in my life.

As to the use of music to either physically irritate prisoners or to get under their skin in a religious sense, it was probably a little of both. A few interrogators would play endless, loud music just to irritate detainees. Even my favorite songs would start to drive the crazy, if played for hours on end. Certainly, it had its effect in dark, cold rooms with detainees chained in uncomfortable positions. There were a few interrogators who were aware of the religious injunctions, and were trying to use them in the course of their interrogations. The guards, however, had nothing to do with this... for the guards, like myself, the only involvement in these interrogations was to move the detainees to and from them. Some of the music that would be played would be what we call in the states heavy metal, hardcore, industrial, etc… very annoying to listen to at a loud volume for a long period of time.

The Talking Dog: You described a "hazing" towards yourself... some soldiers "took you out back"... can you expand on this, and tell us if you were beaten, threatened, or what? Did you report this incident to your superior officers... or WERE these your superiors? Were you given a specific
Reason-- because you expressed an interest in or converted to Islam... because you were "going native" and getting "too close" to the prisoners (or being "too nice" to "them") or for any other specific reason?

Terry Holdbrooks: It wasn't exactly my "superiors"... it was a group of squad leaders, which, in the structure of an army unit, was just above a team leader. The army is organized with a soldier in a team of 3 or 4 soldiers, 3 teams form a squad, 3 squads form a platoon, and 4 platoons form a company. Each company has got a master sergeant and a captain; each platoon has a lieutenant. All lieutenants report to a captain of the company, who is nominally the commander, but often, the master sergeant, despite being lower in rank, has more pull than the captain.

In my case, a few squad leaders decided that I had shown too much interest in the detainees... I was not appropriately abusive or angry enough... I didn't harbor "the right feeling". So I was taken behind my barracks, and some blows were issued, pushing and yelling, a lot of profanity. I was told to "get my head on straight"... and asked why I was not with the program... I responded that it was "not my prerogative."

At that point, my own squad leader separated me out from the others, suggested that they end this, lest they all get in trouble. I did not report this to my captain or sergeant... I felt that the pain was temporary, and that there was no reason to worry about this incident, so I let it go.

In social terms, I will say that I ended up effectively shunned or "excommunicated" from the others in the company, and we really did not talk much until we left Guantanamo and returned to Fort Leonard Wood. Things largely returned to "normal" at some point between when I left GTMO in 2004 and left the Army in 2005. Closer to 2004, when we returned, the platoons were redistributed again, and things were different, almost as if it was an opportunity to start over, and we were reunited with 1st platoon who had been gone in Qatar at that point we were gone in GTMO.

The Talking Dog: There are doubtless those who will very likely view you as "disloyal" in some way, if not in an outright "treasonous" sense to the country, perhaps to the perceived camaraderie of the uniformed service, or the like, by coming forward and speaking critically of your experiences at GTMO (and critically of the conduct of other soldiers). Have you experienced any such criticism (rebukes, disdain, etc.) since you have come forward? What was it that did bring you forward, and do you have any regrets about that?

Terry Holdbrooks: Yes, I have no doubt that there is and will be a plethora of ignorant Americans who will have their own rather strong opinions, probably not grounded in reality, but that's their right. My short answers to most people like this is actually to ask them if they are in the service... and if not... then please don’t talk to me. If you've been there, of course, we can talk about it. Otherwise, the "criticism" to me is water off a duck's back.

As to coming forward, I made a decision to "cement" my links to Islam, and made this effort as part of trying to be a better Muslim. Certainly something needs to be done about Guantanamo... the world needs to be better informed. I have no regrets (other than perhaps to some extent, working with some American media outlets, as opposed to European and U.K. outlets, which have been uniformly great to work with, and indeed, I have been pleased with the reception I have received from the overseas audience).

The Talking Dog: Let me ask you about your own specific observations. While much discussion has been made of accusations of "torture at GTMO" and so forth, rather than labeling things or risking spilling into hyperbole, I'd just like to ask what your own specific observations were in some categories, and if it's only something you heard from someone else rather than observed yourself, please clarify that...

At GTMO... (1) Did you observe anything you would describe as "religiously disrespectful" such as mishandling of the Holy Koran, or serving prisoners pork, or whatever else you would so characterize? (2) Did you observe physical abuse of prisoners, such as beatings, or chaining them into uncomfortable prisoners? (3) Did you actually observe anyone being water-boarded? (4) Did you observe interrogations, at all, and if so, anything during them you would characterize as abuse or mistreatment? (5) Can you tell me your specific observations of the "Emergency Reaction Force" and "ERFing"... and how would you comment as to whether it may have been a legitimate (or at least understandable) fear on the part of camp guards (particularly after being told that the prisoners are "the worst of the worst" and "men would chew through hydraulic cables to bring down planes" and so forth) that led to a degree of apparent overkill? (6) Can you describe "overall confinement" conditions, such as noise, lighting, temperature, isolation and so forth? (7) Did you observe any prisoners being on "the frequent flier program"... i.e., being moved constantly to ensure sleep deprivation?

Terry Holdbrooks: I'll have to take those one at a time.

(1) As to "religiously disrespectful", I certainly did see a fair amount of mishandling of the Koran, such as handling it with the left hand, or without gloves (by a non-Muslim) or otherwise not handling it properly. This sort of thing upset the detainees greatly; I would describe this as mostly the fault of the Army rather than the individual guards by and large, because the Army failed to provide appropriate education and training on the environment that would be encountered, and the belief system of the prisoners. Other people went in with closed minds, took what they saw at face value, and came out very unhappy, or even ended up alcoholic as a result. Brandon Neely is a classic example of this... the situation made him just unhappy. This has come as a great pleasure to me to know that there are more out there in the armed forces that have a moral conscience, kudos to you Brandon!

Certainly, I did not observe any of the detainees being served pork. I certainly did observe the mocking (by guards and interrogators) of prayers, calls to prayer and the use of Arabic language.

(2) As to "beatings," certainly, there were blows thrown during "ERFings" by the Emergency Reaction Force; these were rapid, fluid reactive situations. I certainly did not observe any situations where a cell door would open and guards would just come in and beat up a detainee. As to chaining in uncomfortable positions... these were the essence of the interrogations. The detainees were invariably placed in uncomfortable situations, often on the floor; if there was a chair in the room, it would be used by the interrogators. The most humiliating part of this as an American who saw this occur, is that being a position like this for hours would cause a detainee to wet or soil themselves, and that is a humiliating experience. I may have mentioned this above, but either way, with acts like this, and the conditions down there as opposed to the rest of the correctional facilities our citizens are packed in, if detainees did not harbor feelings of ill will towards the US and were not in fact terrorists, we probably helped make them that way now! This is a huge blunder on our part, and will not be the end of it, as we have seen with the recent news of freed detainees turning to terrorism.

(3) As to water-boarding, no I didn't see it, and no, we didn't even hear about it. Once in a while you would see a detainee not scheduled for a shower who looked like he just had one, but they never complained of water-boarding to the guards, nor, I suspect, to the other detainees (as this could have the potential for causing riots). So no, in my time in Camp Delta, I didn't see or hear of any water-boarding. If water-boarding did ever occur, I am sure that it was not a detainee that is in general population, as in Camp Delta, and that detainee never would have returned to Camp Delta, for an act like that would be sure to enable a riot of unheard measures.

(4) As to interrogations, yes, I observed some a good number of times. What I would characterize as particularly "abuse" was one female interrogator with a blood capsule who would use it to pretend she had “menstrual blood" to get a reaction from the detainees. I certainly observed detainees in uncomfortable, painful positions, temperatures made very hot or very cold, loud music, and certainly, loud and abusive language. While there was no doubt that for most detainees, the interrogations and conditions of confinement were better than they would find in their own countries, one would have hoped that the United States employed relatively ethical facilities and respectful interrogation tactics... and we clearly did not do that.

(5) As to "ERFing," a fair number of soldier’s plain old got their rocks off by ERFing. They were literally excited-- they got off on tying a detainee up, smashing them into the wall. Indeed, excited to do it was a predominant attitude among guards who did it. Some guards volunteered for ERF duty, some teams were regularly assigned. Somehow, I never "ERFed" a single detainee... there were supposed to be two teams available for "ERFing" in each camp; somehow, when the ERF call came in, I took my time getting into the ERF riot gear, and "missed out” on the ERFing. I did not want to do it, to be sure.

Frankly, by my observation, in all the many times (and there were many) that ERF teams were called out, only one time did a detainee actually escalate the situation to the point where an ERF team was really justified... in that one case, during "flu shot day" (where the detainees had started rumors among themselves that something was more sinister than just flu shots) a detainee broke off a faucet handle and made it into a knife; this detainee managed to make a cut in a guard's neck... that guard, by the way, went on 100 - 200 more "ERFings" that shift!

(6) Confinement conditions varied depending on the Camp and the Camp’s population. In general, in Camp Delta, the camp was pretty much as depicted in the pictures that became public. Temperatures not too hot, not particularly clean or hygienic conditions, lights off by 9 pm, and not too much else happening; temperatures went down a bit at night, and detainees had blankets. While efforts were made to create an isolation situation, the detainees could talk through vents, or through the walls or the toilets if nothing else.

I was assigned to Camp 4, Camp Delta, and was aware and had friends who worked in Camp Echo and Camp Iguana. They were building Camp 5 and the Maximum Security Camp 6. You could see "Camp 7" (or "Operation Platinum" for the so-called "high value detainees"), but you couldn't get close to them. In training exercises at GTMO, we came across older holding facilities, made of wood, making one wonder just how long GTMO has been used for what we are using it for now.

(7) I did observe prisoners on "the frequent flier program", especially Detainee 590 (who introduced me to much of Islam) [Ahmed Errachidi], Detainee 239 (Shaker Aamer, known as "the Professor") was also often moved, as were a couple of Uighur detainees. A couple of British nationals-- the Tipton 3-- were also moved. Interestingly, David Hicks was usually not where I was in Delta... he was usually in Camp Echo, and I only saw him in Delta when he was moved for medical treatment. I will attempt to contact another guard who would have more knowledge on the status and life in Camp Echo.

The Talking Dog: Following up on that last one, from '03 to '04 which camps were you assigned to guard (Camp 6 probably wasn't finished yet, IIRC)? Can you describe the cells (one man per cell, more than one man, "furniture" or other objects in cells, etc.) and any exercise facility outside the cell? Am I correct that meals were shoved in to the cells, by guards, such as you? Also, can you tell me who the base commander(s) (or "JTF" commander(s) as applicable) was during your deployment to GTMO, and what your impressions were of him? Were you given orders in the way you were in other military assignments... or did you receive "power point" presentations?

Terry Holdbrooks: Camps 5 and 6 were not yet completed, as I said. In the camps I observed, there was one man per cell, and no objects of furniture, only a Koran, a work-out mat, called "the "bed padding", a tooth brush and toothpaste, soap, and maybe prayer beads, and that's it. A cell was perhaps 6' by 8', you would walk in and find a bed about 3' off the ground, about 2' off the wall. Next to that was a toilet-- a bidet style, in the ground, and then there was a combination sink and water dispenser with a multi-purpose faucet.

Outside the cells were a 20 X 20 cage for exercise, which, if detainees were lucky, 2 could go in with a ball and play soccer, though usually they went in alone. This was not to common uness they were on an incentive block, which was usually the Afghanis, who were taking part in an educational system to help them learn new languages and skills.

Meals were served through a beanhole....shoving was usually not required (sometimes I would just leave a meal if detainees were praying).

The camp commander was Gen. Geoffrey Miller. I'll just say I didn't like him. He was an outstanding liar; very good at his job, which was to be a front-man and publicist for the entire show. I don't know if he ever made a real decision on his own, other than to follow his standing orders and do what he was told.

I didn't receive so many written orders or even power points; GTMO was just thrown together, absolutely disorganized and generally poorly run.

The Talking Dog: I understand that you observed hunger strikes at GTMO, and I understand that the regime of force-feeding had not yet commenced (or in any event, you didn't observe force-feeding). What, if you recall, instigated the hunger strike, or hunger strikes?

Terry Holdbrooks: I did see a few hunger strikers. There was no force feeding when I was there.

What triggered hunger strikes were generally acts of religious disrespect, such as a Koran put in the toilet in an interrogation or cell cleaning and search, or abuse/wrongdoing during an interrogation.

Some hunger strikes would last a few days or a week or two; some would go on longer. There were only a few hunger strikes left by the time I left, and my understanding is that there is not that many down there. Makes you wonder, if these are the worst of the worst, why have we sent so many home, over 2/3rds of the population that was down there have been sent home now… we must be crazy to send these bomb making, suicide driven people home, back to the Taliban and Al Qaeda, or was this just a huge gimmick to keep a crap administration in office?

The Talking Dog: I take it that you left your deployment at GTMO before the Supreme Court's decision in Rasul v. Bush and the arrival of lawyers for the detainees (correct me if I'm incorrect). Can you tell me who, besides military personnel, you observed at the base, such as other government personnel, members of Congress, the Red Cross, journalists, and officials from the detainees own countries, etc. ? Did any of these people have unrestricted access to the entire detention facility, permitted to speak to detainees, etc., by your observation?

Terry Holdbrooks: I did not see lawyers down there (other than possibly for David Hicks). I did see Red Cross personnel there, and delegations from other countries would come down and get a tour, though they could not just go wherever they wanted. There were enough visitors.

By and large, Guantanamo was just a make-shift holding facility for the 700 or so men held there. There was an occasional dog and pony show put on for members of Congress or high ranking military brass or foreign delegations which was, of course, nor representative of actual conditions. Such delegations would have access to detainees only in passing, at most.

I do recall one time when I went on a so-called "air bridge" flight with about 50 detainees being released; we dropped them off in Iraq, then continued on to Turkey, Germany then to Virginia and back to GTMO. During the flight, detainees were as publicly depicted: hooded, shackled, black out goggles, chained to their seats... that's how they went home. Guards were lightly armed (batons only; only Air Force specialists trained in this could carry firearms on airplanes). There were 4 port-a-johns for detainees on the plane... no food or water, really an awful flight... I only hope it got better for them after they were released. Of the few that I have been able to speak with, or articles that have surfaced, it seems as if that has been the case, although we still haven’t heard anything of the Afghanis, Pakistanis, or Iraqis that have gone home…

The Talking Dog: Which people (prisoners, fellow guards, interrogators or whomever) made an impression on you at Guantanamo, how so, and why? To what extent did you find language barriers to be an issue... I understand you spoke to detainees (such as Hicks, the Tipton Three and Aamer) that spoke English... were you able to communicate with any of the non-English speakers?

Terry Holdbrooks: A number of the prisoners made a big impression on me. Many saw me as "the nice guard" and were quite civil to me. I didn't have to handcuff them when moving them to the shower; they were respectful to me and vice versa-- which was different from most guards. Hopefully, some day, they will get out, and I will be able to say I have friends in places like England and Morocco. This is an abstract and hard to digest idea for most Americans I would be willing to assume. To clarify, it was an amazing and horrific, surreal experience to have been down there. Every guard that has been down there will have a different story to tell, but it made an impact on all their lives. GTMO for me was an awakening of my own lack of knowledge of the world and history, and an encouragement to continue my studies and development as an individual and human being, not an American, or any other nation, simply a human. For the detainees who were innocent and down there, I would love to be able to one day sit and talk with them, have a cup of coffee and reflect upon how that experienced changed, and perhaps gave us both a greater appreciation for life each day.

As to my fellow guards, I have to say that I didn't like them that much. Our educational system, our culture, our ideology... is something disillusioning. My experience in the military has not given me a particularly "warm and fuzzy" feeling toward this country and its values... I end up with great respect for the military and the service, but less for the nation itself, which has the tools and the people to be the best in the world, but we are just too damned lazy to do it...too many decisions at too many levels are based on pure expedience, and at the end of the day, as a country, we are just not in good shape.

As to interrogators, some would carefully explain what they were doing and try to keep us informed, and some were just plain jerks. Besides prisoners, guards and interrogators, there wasn't anyone else down there that I encountered!

Language was not an issue. If a detainee didn't speak English, another detainee would often translate. I learned some Arabic-- enough for words like prayer, food, clothes and so forth, so that between it all, we could usually figure out what we were talking about. If all else failed, we could just act things out, and figure out what we were talking about, or I could draw illustrations.

I did spend two days with David Hicks, and I rather enjoyed his company. It struck me that he got caught up and played; he ended up coerced into things that got him in trouble. I also spoke to the Tipton Three; I especially remember Shafiq Rasul who often swore; when I noted that profanity was against the tenets of Islam, he said "I'm a Muslim; I'm just not a good Muslim!"

I actually found that inspirational... I have found it trying at times on my own to give up alcohol and smoking; I have given them up and come back to them before... but the key is the effort and discipline to keep trying.

I especially remember an old man and a kid in Camp 4. The kid probably did not know that there was a world outside of Afghanistan... probably just an innocent somehow caught up in something; we talked a lot, said hi and so forth, and the detainees would often express feelings of hope. And I thought, man, I'm only here for a year, they have no idea how long there going to be here, and yet they're hopeful... there's no reason for me not to be...

The Talking Dog: Based on your observations and experiences, is there anything that you believe that (my college classmate) President Obama needs to know as to how to best implement his stated goal of "closing Guantanamo," and what he should know and what he should do in order to expedite that stated goal?

Terry Holdbrooks: Certainly, the tribunals and commissions and whatever else they are calling the trials, other than perhaps the 5 detainees for whom they have some kind of competent evidence, should be halted immediately. Bush put this handful of bad guys amidst all of these others just to plant the perception in Americans that he was holding a bunch of bad guys to keep everyone safe.

So that said, the only answer is to let everyone but that handful go... and, although they were certainly not terrorists when they came in, we're going to have to hope that after years of unjust imprisonment by our country, that they aren't terrorists NOW. We have to let them go, and send them home, or if sending them home will just end up getting them killed or tortured or imprisoned, then we have to find a place to take them as agreeable as possible, period.

And then, we should close Guantanamo altogether... sell or give the property to Cuba, forget about it and move on. Better thought, we should destroy GTMO, and GIVE it back to Cuba, along with our other not so famous secret facilities that we have world wide. Visit Cageprisoners.com for more information on these places. I am sure that there are countless facilities like GTMO world wide, and sure they are full of 95% innocent people, and 5% guilty, with that being said, I am more than sure we are making “friends” world wide.

Every Middle Easterner I speak to has virtually the same response: they say that the prisoners are far better off in Guantanamo then would be in Syria or Morocco or Egypt where they would really be abused and tortured, if not killed. So, as I said, we need to be very sure of where we are sending these men so that releasing them isn't even worse than holding them.

To summarize, President Obama should set aside the tribunals and commissions (beyond the 5 or so who can be tried, and those trials should proceed); the rest should just be released, and sent somewhere not worse, so that hopefully, we can give them the ability to get back to their loved ones. We can't make up 7 plus years of their lives that we've just taken away, but hopefully we can give them safe passage somewhere.

The Talking Dog: is there anything else I should have asked you but didn't, or anything else that the public needs to know about these subjects?

Terry Holdbrooks: I have been asked this question before, and I never have an answer! I suppose one can review my Newsweek and Cage Prisoners interviews, and this, and see whatever holes are in the puzzle. I hope, as this recounting experience and others develop, to be able to put together a book on these experiences, both what transpired at GTMO and what transpired from 2004, 2005 through now, as, hopefully, something of value for others, both as to what happened, and why I haven't been able to put it together until now.

The Talking DogI join all my readers in thanking Mr. Holdbrooks for that fascinating interview.


Readers interested in legal issues and related matters associated with the "war on terror" may also find talking dog blog interviews with former Guantanamo military commissions prosecutor Darrel Vandeveld, with attorneys Buz Eisenberg, Steven Wax, Wells Dixon, Rebecca Dick, Wesley Powell, Martha Rayner, Angela Campbell, Stephen Truitt and Charles Carpenter, Gaillard Hunt, Robert Rachlin, Tina Foster, Brent Mickum, Marc Falkoff H. Candace Gorman, Eric Freedman, Michael Ratner, Thomas Wilner, Jonathan Hafetz, Joshua Denbeaux, Rick Wilson,
Neal Katyal, Joshua Colangelo Bryan, Baher Azmy, and Joshua Dratel (representing Guantanamo detainees and others held in "the war on terror"), with attorneys Donna Newman and Andrew Patel (representing "unlawful combatant" Jose Padilila), with Dr. David Nicholl, who spearheaded an effort among international physicians protesting force-feeding of detainees at Guantanamo Bay, with physician and bioethicist Dr. Steven Miles on medical complicity in torture, with law professor and former Clinton Administration Ambassador-at-large for war crimes matters David Scheffer, with former Guantanamo detainees Moazzam Begg and Shafiq Rasul , with former Guantanamo Bay Chaplain James Yee, with former Guantanamo Army Arabic linguist Erik Saar, with law professor and former Army J.A.G. officer Jeffrey Addicott, with law professor and Coast Guard officer Glenn Sulmasy, with author and geographer Trevor Paglen and with author and journalist Stephen Grey on the subject of the CIA's extraordinary rendition program, with journalist and author David Rose on Guantanamo, with journalist Michael Otterman on the subject of American torture and related issues, with author and historian Andy Worthington detailing the capture and provenance of all of the Guantanamo detainees, with Joanne Mariner of Human Rights Watch, and with Almerindo Ojeda of the Guantanamo Testimonials Project to be of interest.

****************************************************

If you haven't signed on yet, I suggest that you consider giving President Obama some help.


Ruth --

The next few weeks will be some of the most important our movement for change has encountered yet.

Mitch wrote to you earlier this week about Organizing for America's Pledge Project -- an effort to identify and mobilize support across the country for the economic vision President Obama has outlined in his budget.

If you haven't yet done so, pledge your support now and ask your friends, family, and neighbors to do the same.

The budget that passes Congress has the potential to take our country in a truly new direction -- the kind of change we all worked so hard for. We didn't fight to shy away from the tough long-term decisions Washington has ducked for far too long.

President Obama knows, as you do, that our future strength and prosperity depends on Washington finally taking the hard and smart steps in energy, health care, and education that will make sure America and its families are strong for decades to come.

And while his budget reflects those important values and priorities, the President also understands the government has to cut spending like so many families and businesses are being forced to do now. He invests where we need to and cuts where we must.

http://my.barackobama.com/pledgeproject

We know this fight won't be easy. But important battles never are. Together, we have the opportunity to shape our country's future. We believed in the power of people to win an improbable election victory. And we believe in the power of people to drown out the cynics and entrenched interests in Washington to bring lasting, meaningful change we can all be proud we played a role in.

Thanks,

David Plouffe
(Emphasis added.)

Some Tools

I've been going on and on, here and elsewhere, about how we as citizens can't just expect that after the votes have been counted our jobs are done. NTodd keeps reminding us that this is when the real work starts, and he is absolutely right.

The problem as I see it is that we don't actually know just what it is our Congress critters are up to at any point, and we certainly can't depend on the mainstream press to keep us informed. Fortunately, the internet is filled with all sorts of resources, including emails from groups that have the resources to keep track of things, to blogs which deal with progressive issues, to web sites which carefully analyze each congressional vote.

Some wag at Eschaton yesterday linked to this site over at Congressional Quarterly. It's a dandy. It summarizes how each Congress critter in the 110th Congress voted in terms of acceding to the Unitard's will, party unity, and just showing up to vote. The charts are easy to navigate (the whole page is) and is very informative. Here are the explanatories:

The three principal studies involve:

The frequency with which lawmakers vote with the president when he clearly indicates his preferences (Presidential Support).

The frequency with which they vote with their party, on occasions when a majority of Republicans oppose a majority of Democrats (Party Unity).

And the frequency with which they show up and cast "yea" or "nay" votes (Voting Participation).

OK. I started off by asking for the chart for the Senate, and then I checked out my two Senators:

Barbara Boxer: Presidential Support-30% Party Unity-99% Participation-99%

Dianne Feinstein: Presidential Support-39% Party Unity-91% Participation-99%

No surprises there.

Now for some other Democratic senators:

Daniel Inouye: Presidential Support:46% Party Unity-83% Participation-88%

(No surprise, but certainly disappointing.)

Claire McCaskill: Presidential Support-45% Party Unity-81% Participation-94%

(WTF? I contributed to her campaign!)

Here, however, is the biggie:

Harry Reid: Presidential Support-43% Party Unity-85% Participation-99%

For crying out loud, Harry Reid is the freakin' Senate Majority Leader and he only voted 85% of the time for the Democratic position? And voted 43% to give the GOP President what he wanted? There is something dreadfully wrong with this picture.

Now if you really want to get steamed, check out Joe Lieberman's record. He's listed as an Independent, but because he caucuses with the Democrats, his Party Unity score is configured that way. And the Democratic leadership let him keep his prestigious committee chairmanship. Sweet, eh?

OK, I've done some deep breathing.

Here's what I suggest. Check out your reps, regardless of party, and start targeting them if you are unhappy. Let them know how unhappy you are with their records and advise them you will be shopping elsewhere in the next two to six years if they don't shape up. Then keep at it with every important bill that comes up.

In the coming months, I'll try to locate and post other resources to keep us up to speed. I will, of course, be very grateful for any suggestions, either via comments or an email.

Oh, and Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays. May the New Year be better for all of us.

It May Not Look Like You Succeeded

Since I'm not out there at the shops getting the freebie's for showing up before a decent hour - to shop for a couple of dollars off - I saw a really nice item. Having myself been at events that seemed sparsely attended, when it should have drawn a crowd, especially candidate meeting parties, sometimes a body gets discouraged.

Sometimes there's an effect you didn't expect, it seems.

Despite the possibilities created by the Web, calling people to action still depends on people putting their bodies -- not just their mouse-clicks -- on the line, says Hale, the Seton Hall professor.

"All of the stuff you can do online ultimately has to show up in the real world," Hale says. "I don't see the Internet as a substitute [for social activism] but as a complement to it."

Paul Loeb, author of "The Soul of a Citizen,'' a book that examines the psychology of social activism, also says online activism can be powerful but limited. He tells a story from his book to make his point.

He says a friend took her kids to a protest against nuclear testing in front of the White House during the early 1960s. But she became dejected because only a few people joined her demonstration and then it rained.

Years later, the same woman attended a major march against nuclear testing. Benjamin Spock, the best-selling author and pediatrician who opposed the Vietnam War, was a featured speaker. He told marchers that he was inspired to join the march after seeing a small group of women huddled with their kids in the rain while marching in front of the White House years earlier.

"I thought that if those women were out there," Spock said, "their cause must be really important.

I remember the embarrassment of having a long list of folks who said they'd show up, and trying to stall while waiting for them to get there. I remember finding out those loyal supporters who said they'd bring lots of friends along never invited anybody at all, and then they ducked out, themselves. I remember the hosts who asked for donations from the candidate to cover their measly refreshments.

Then there are the passersby at the demos who make the "Get a job" remarks. I even have a tape of The Kid demonstrating on Key Bridge when Reagan closed down the government, and car passengers yelling at him that he's a bum. A newsperson came out for the fun of it, which is why it's on tape.

Don't stay home, though. You'll be glad you did something, even when what you did may not show up when you'd like it to. That snoop on the other end of the tapped line might just get a kick from his/her own conscience.

**********************

A commenter at Eschaton this a.m. told me this is a message of hope everyone could use.

More Changes In The Immigration System

People once again rushed to file citizenship papers this summer, this time to get into the system before the new "citizenship test" takes effect, according to this article in today's Los Angeles Times. The old test drew from 96 questions, all of which required answers that could be memorized, such as "Who said, 'give me liberty or give death?'" The new test is a bit more "open-ended," and applicants are very wary, even scared that they will be unable to pass the test.

The Naturalization Service, however, maintains that the applicants shouldn't worry, no, not at all.

The exam is not harder, only more meaningful, said Alfonso Aguilar, chief of the Office of Citizenship at the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, citing scores on a pilot program that showed 92% of applicants passed the new test on the first try compared with 84% under the old one.

Those who don't pass the first time get a second chance.

"Instead of asking what are the colors of the flag, now we're asking why does the flag have 50 stars or 13 stripes" he said. "It's more concept-oriented rather than just memorizing random facts. If people study, they should pass. From our perspective, we wouldn't gain anything by having a harder exam."

Immigrant rights groups aren't as sure as Mr. Aguilar.

... the new exam has its potential flaws too, including questions and answers that are open to interpretation. ...

Applicants will be given 10 of the 100 questions and must answer six correctly to pass. They are also required to read and write basic English sentences that focus on civics and undergo an interview to complete the process, which ends in a naturalization ceremony. [Emphasis added]

It sounds like the immigrants might have good cause to worry, especially given the subjective or ambiguous casting of the questions. The English-only requirement looks to be a problem as well, especially in a country where bilingualism is rare among those who have been here a generation or two.

But, hey! We're an exceptional nation. We only want exceptional citizens, and this is one way to get them, right?

Perhaps they could administer that test to American citizens over the age of, say, 40. I'd really be interested in those results.

Our Ms. Brooks: Revolutionaries

Earlier today, I posted the full text of the Declaration of Independence, which I try to remember to do each July 4th. I consider it one of the most amazing documents in the history of humankind, and with good reason. There it was, drafted by a bunch of DFHs in the face of a far superior power, but those brave men didn't care. It was what they believed, believed so much that they were willing to die for the principles it espoused. A few years later many of those same people would produce another remarkable and historically significant document, the Constitution of the United States of America, and the world was forever changed. With those two documents, the goal and the marching orders for those of the species were put in place by those who believed it was time for the next step in evolution.

It's pretty hard to imagine the kind of courage those founders had these days. We're told that the rights that those men fought for are really only contingent. If a few sociopaths with box cutters attack the nation, all the rights enumerated in these two documents can be ignored. Our telephones can be tapped, we can be detained forever without a remedy, we can be forced to pay for wars we've been lied into, and we can be shut out of jobs if we don't vote or worship a particular way.

In yesterday's Los Angeles Times, columnist Rosa Brooks did a brilliant job in pointing out the incongruity of the two historical periods, so brilliant that I'm going to go beyond what is probably fair use in quoting.

...the Constitution also doesn't contain any footnotes that say, "Note to our descendants: This Constitution is intended for easy times only. At the first sign of trouble, feed this document to your dog. We won't mind. We only fought a war for it."

This Fourth of July, celebrate by rereading the Declaration of Independence, created by more or less the same crowd who brought us the Constitution, 11 years and one war later. Remember it? "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

Wild stuff! To the founders, "all men" have "unalienable rights" -- not just U.S. citizens in the continental United States. (If the founding fathers were around today, Rush Limbaugh and Rudy Giuliani would pillory them as limp-wristed, latte-drinking, soft-on-terror liberals.)

It was treasonous stuff too. When the Declaration of Independence was drafted, there were no U.S. citizens: Instead, there were about 2.5 million scrappy Colonists who legally owed allegiance to the king of England, George III. But they went to war -- over the little matter of freedom, law and unalienable, God-given rights.

Among their grievances against King George, the rebellious Colonists complained that he ignored the will of their representative bodies, refused "his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers" and "affected to render the military independent of and superior to the civil power." The Colonists also objected to the denial of "the benefit of trial by jury" and the king's practice of avoiding the inconveniences of due process by transporting prisoners "beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses." (George III would have loved Guantanamo.)

The founders had a word for governments that respected rights only arbitrarily and selectively: tyranny. The signers of the declaration took rights seriously. They wrote, "For the support of this declaration, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor." That wasn't mere rhetoric. Technically, the signers were all traitors, liable to be executed for treason. And they accepted that standing up for rights means taking some real risks. ...

The Constitution is no "suicide pact," but the people who founded this nation risked war, prison and death for the sake of unalienable human rights. Their values guided us through good times and bad, through the Civil War, two world wars and the Cold War. But today, some Americans seem happy to discard those same precious values in the name of "security."

Sometimes I wonder: If the founders could have foreseen this, would they have bothered to fight the Revolutionary War?

Yes, Rosa, I believe they would have. The ideas and ideals were that important. We just have to find a way engender that passion in our own breasts.

Good Works

Occasionally a business does something very fine, that deserves positive attention because it is earned. This morning I found out that Minyards, a grocery chain in the North Texas area, is giving away prenatal vitamins to expectant mothers. Free, yes, no charge, to help babies into life healthy.

For all the times it makes us wince to see the abusive attitude toward the consumer that industries like oil show, it's even more noteworthy when a business shows a caring attitude toward its customers.

Minyard and its sibling supermarkets, Carnival and Sack'n Save, today will begin offering free prescription vitamins for expectant mothers, saving them at least $16 every month.

The women can receive the free vitamins for up to a year -- starting nine months before birth and ending three months after delivery. No insurance plan is required, and prescriptions can be phoned in, faxed or prescribed online.

"We're the first to offer this kind of program, and we're proud to take the lead," said Mike Byars, chief executive of Coppell-based Minyard Food Stores, the largest locally based supermarket chain. There are 33 pharmacies in Minyard, Carnival and Sack'n Save stores across North Texas.

Minyard, owned by the Fort Worth investment firm Renegade Swish, intends to build relationships with customers living near its stores and address the region's infant-mortality problem, particularly in parts of Tarrant County, said Ron Peters, the chain's vice president for pharmacy services.

Toward that end, the chain has sent letters about the free vitamin program to 600 North Texas physicians and 200 area church leaders, Peters said.
(snip)
All are made by Ethex Corp., a manufacturer of generic items, which is supplying a similar free prenatal vitamin program launched by Indianapolis-based Marsh Supermarkets.

All right, the giveaway will get people into the store, and inspire good will that pays off. It could have been free candy, though, and probably gotten more people through the door.

There was some discussion this morning in comments at Eschaton about charities that don't really give away donated clothes, but resell them in poor areas. It's sad when good instincts are misused, and donations aren't used for the purpose we expect. As usual, our reaction is to avoid a disreputable organization, and go to one that does a real good deed instead, such as the Red Cross. To check on any charity you're considering you can consult Charity Navigator, where most are rated for their level of actual giving.

Oxfam was mentioned as being particularly good, as well, by ql if I remember correctly. Incidentally, at Charity Navigator, I found highly recommended for your donations to the Burmese victims of that disaster was this one, ActionAid International.

In an instance like this, good will that brings us to go out of our way to patronize a store that does the right thing is not misplaced.

More like this, please.

****************************************************

While celebrating a good work, let me pass on this warning I saw on BBC.

Almost 500,000 people have been caught out by a booby-trapped media file, says security firm McAfee.

The fake file poses as a music track, short video or movie and has been widely seeded on file-sharing networks to snare victims.

McAfee said the fake media file outbreak was the largest it had seen for about three years.

Those running the fake file get bombarded with pop-up ads and risk compromising the safety of their PC.

Be careful what you wish for!

They Finally Get It, Sorta-Kinda

The editorial boards of the major news outlets appear to be waking from their long slumber. Some are even beginning to notice that not all is right with the federal government after seven years of Bush mismanagement. Today the NY Times took a look at the agency charged with processing citizenship applications and found it, well, lacking.

The director of the federal Citizenship and Immigration Services agency, Emilio Gonzalez, is stepping down next month, leaving behind a gummed-up bureaucracy and perhaps a million empty promises. That’s about how many people are stuck waiting to have their citizenship petitions approved by the agency, which was swamped last summer by a flood of applications that it failed to predict or prepare for.

The disaster erupted when the agency jacked up the price of its services by an average of 66 percent, a nasty bite for the immigrant families whose fees provide nearly all the money that keeps the rickety system going. Mr. Gonzalez justified the increases by promising that they would lead to better service and shorter waits.

To be fair, the Times' own news staff has been writing about the problems at this agency since the announcement of the unconscionable hike, but the usual editorial follow-up just didn't happen, at least until today. Apparently the light bulb just switched on, probably because it suddenly occurred to folks that, ZOMG!!1!!, the election is less than nine months away and a million people won't be able to vote!

But wait, it gets better:

Maybe it’s a stretch to call this intentional disenfranchisement after hundreds of thousands of Latinos demonstrated in the spring of 2006, chanting: “Today we march. Tomorrow we vote.” Still, the absence of so many would-be Latino voters could benefit the Republicans, who have worked so hard to stoke a rancid anti-immigrant mood in this country.

The processing delays mock America’s respect for those who “play by the rules” and “get in line.” For millions who want to work but have no one to sponsor them and no specialized skills, there is no line to get into: no realistic hope of a visa and no functioning guest-worker program. As for the others who have gone the route of patience and paperwork, they are the ones whose expectations Mr. Gonzalez raised and crushed. [Emphasis added]

A stretch? Oh, I don't think so, and I am reasonably certain neither does the editorialist, but he or she didn't have the spine to go beyond the hint. But at least the hint was there, punchless or not.

I'm certain that will be some comfort to the million people who will be frozen out of the November elections.

Not.

Ford Tough

Well, now. After being trounced by Asian auto makers in the US market, Ford has decided to get active. Unfortunately, that activity is not going to take place in the United States, according to this Reuters article.

Ford Motor Co. said on Tuesday it plans to invest $500 million in India to double manufacturing capacity by 2010 and make a small car and engines, making the fast-growing market a key production hub in Asia-Pacific region.

The investment, which takes Ford's commitments in India to more than $875 million, comes on the heels of similar moves in Thailand and China, the other markets the U.S. car maker has identified as key to its regional growth strategy.

"We see China, India and ASEAN as three important markets for increasing our Asia-Pacific footprint," said John Parker, executive vice president for Asia-Pacific and Africa, referring to the south east Asian region.

Apparently Ford believes they can sell cars in these growing markets, so I guess it makes sense in terms of the corporate bottom line to invest there. What is so puzzling to me, however, is the following:

India will become a strategic production hub for small cars at Ford, which joins a growing list of carmakers focusing on small cars as oil topped $100 a barrel and the move to fuel-efficient "green" cars gains momentum.

Demand for the Prius and other smaller, more efficient vehicles is high in the US, so high that there are waiting times for the actual delivery of those vehicles. Does Ford pay attention to things like this? If so, why aren't those "fuel-efficient 'green' cars" being built and sold here? Why isn't Ford willing to make that kind of financial commitment to the people of this country?

I know, that's a pretty naive question. Production costs are higher because auto workers are unionized and therefore high-paid and because Ford would have to provide health insurance and pensions. The Asian market doesn't require any of that, at least not yet.

I guess good citizenship isn't required of corporations. I'm just waiting for the time when we can make it a requirement before we bail another industry out, or extend another bit of corporate welfare. Maybe even in my life time.

What You Can Do To End The War Criminals' Career

It's a growing, burning anger that the left has been developing about the crimes inflicted on our country. All the protections our Constitution had instituted have been trampled on, our regulators are all against public protection, our Congress is stalemated by opposition to the once-ruling American public.

There is a campaign already underway to overturn the banana republic. We're all concentrated on Presidential candidates. Without your individual representatives, though, the president will be hamstrung. Have you looked into what's going on at your own local level?

As I posted earlier this week, our local House representative is threatening to make more wars for oil if the U.S.develops new energy sources that don't support his contributors, the big oil companies.

I worked to elect a terrific progressive to the House seat that is occupied at present by this warmonger, and in case you haven't heard my previous posts, I want to introduce you to Dr. Glenn Melancon, who will seek that seat again in the coming campaign. He has a regular post at the Daily Kos, and uses that post to promote rational public interest positions that we so badly need in the Congress.

While I'm lucky enough to have a knowledgeable proponent of constitutional government, and a professor of government who is seeking to represent my area in Congress, you may have some one in your area who could do a good job for you, too. Without turning out the existing proponents of corporate welfare, we're condemning our coming generations to the kinds of outrage we've been experiencing in the past seven years.

It's our job to do the nitty gritty stuff of seeking out the good candidates, of getting involved in their campaigns, in letting our friends know there are choices for them, and, yes, making the calls, contacting your local news reporters and licking the envelopes. If you want to give a Christmas present worth having, you might want to fill a stocking or two for those same candidates. It's going to beat those Wii's for the kids by a long shot if they're spared the wars and criminal misfeasance of the dysfunctional 'public servants' we've let steal high offices to the great harm to our nation that's gone on in the past few years.

It's up to us to get the country back in good hands, and our hands are going to have to get to work.

Assistance for California

A site for assistance to the firefighters and victims.

The California Fire Foundation

A non-profit public benefit organization

“Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point.”
-- C.S. Lewis

The California Fire Foundation was created as a way to recognize the courage of firefighters, and the perseverance and sacrifice of fire victims. Formed in 1987 by California Professional Firefighters, the California Fire Foundation’s mandate includes an array of public education and victim assistance projects:



California Firefighters Memorial. Design, build and maintain a memorial to fallen firefighters at the State Capitol in Sacramento. The Foundation is the official recipient organization for proceeds from state license plate and tax check-off funds earmarked for the Memorial.

Firefighter Families. Organize special funds to provide emergency assistance to families of firefighters killed in the line of duty.

Victim Assistance. Provide a resource center to assist victims and families devastated by fire and other major disasters, and organize a special fund to provide emergency assistance to fire victims.

Public Education. Provide information about fire safety and the toxic effect of fires and conduct public outreach and education about fires and fire safety.

The California Fire Foundation is a 501 (c) (3) non-profit charitable organization, operated by California Professional Firefighters, and headquartered in Sacramento, California.

CALIFORNIA FIRE FOUNDATION

1780 CREEKSIDE OAKS -- SUITE 200

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95833

(800) 890-3213

at http://www.cpf.org/default/about_cpf/california_firefighters_memorial/the_california_fire_foundation/index.cfm

Unintended Consequences

I found myself chuckling delightedly at this article in today's NY Times. After the extra hurdles thrown at immigrants when it comes to citizenship (dramatically higher application fees, totally revised English and history tests) and the ugliness of the debate on immigration reform, it turns out that legal immigrants are streaming to the Naturalization offices to file for citizenship in unprecedented numbers.

The number of legal immigrants seeking to become United States citizens is surging, officials say, prompted by imminent increases in fees to process naturalization applications, citizenship drives across the country and new feelings of insecurity among immigrants.

The citizenship campaigns have tapped into the uneasiness that legal immigrants, especially Hispanics, say is a result of months of debate over an immigration bill that failed last week in the Senate. Although illegal immigrants were the center of attention in the debate, it prompted many legal immigrants who have put down roots here to seek the security of citizenship, as well as its voting power, immigrants’ advocates said. [Emphasis added]

What Mr. Tancredo and his supporters forgot is that there are also a lot of legal immigrants in this country, many from Mexico, and like all new citizens, they tend to vote more regularly than the native born citizens have in this country. Many are moving towards citizenship now to avoid the higher fees and to finally have a chance for their voices to be heard.

Mr. Álvarez, a real estate agent from Whittier, Calif., took down information from El Piolín’s show and registered in a citizenship workshop.

“I realized that I want to be able to vote and speak up for my people, because they are not getting enough support,” Mr. Álvarez said yesterday in a telephone interview. “I want everybody to be able to come out of the shadows.”

That ought to put Mr. Tancredo's knickers in a twist, eh?

Amber Waves of Grain

Okay, that does bring to mind a good, rich brew, which is also something to celebrate on the Fourth of July. To come back to the subject, I just drove from North Texas to Kansas to Granby, Colorado, throwing in the Rocky Mountain National Park, to Garden of the Gods in Colorado Springs, to Albuquerque, NM, and back to N. Texas. I saw a lot of this country, most of it considered flyover land. What I didn't see that I expected to, was lots of crops. I saw some, but overwhelmingly the land I was driving through was not full of growing stuff that will be coming to your table or into your gas tank. Much of what I saw was cleared land, nothing planted on it, sometimes with a few cows or horses, some goats, once some llama, and the occasional thrill of antelope, mule deer, a coyote and my favorites, the birds.

Why aren't more fields of grain, corn, even cotton, being cultivated? I honestly don't know. Some was for sale, once a sign advertized 'Scenic Ranch, 64,000 Acres", and I suspect this rancher, like my nearby friend who farms over 100 acres with a cropper, (I don't like to say sharecropper, because people don't like to be called that), can't pay the taxes when it's a bad year.

I saw a few signs saying "Free Land", too. If you're in the market I recommend you drive Route 70 through Colorado, and keep your eyes open near the border with Kansas, where the sign says there's land and water, looking for people to live there. Something tells me you probably want to speak English. But what gives? No one's farming. It makes my plough hand itch. No, actually I don't think I have a plow hand, but it makes something itch to grow those amber waves of grain.

If anyone thinks that there's not enough growing stuff to make the biofuels, I suggest you take a ride. About 2,000 miles of riding, and you're going to change your mind.

What I didn'tsee would keep a lot of cars going for a lot of miles. I didn't see switch grass, I didn't see much corn, and I didn't see windfarms either. I did see signs in several places that warned about high winds. No one was cropping them at all. Fields of grass do wave, wheat makes a swelling abundant and rolling sea in beige, milo a chocolate brown, and the whispering sound of amazing beauty. I expected to see more of it.

We're not doing what it takes to make ourselves energy independent, I can tell you plainly. (Pun intended.)

I also saw a field that went on forever, as they do in the flat, huge, West, full of purple blooming chollo cactus, and in among the blooms a herd of antelope. If I could have stopped safely in time to take a picture, I would share it with you, but that wasn't possible. I'll be developing pictures to show you, but that one I'll just have to tell you about.

I also took Woody Guthrie's Guitar to see "Sicko" in return for his hospitality, and he tells you about it at http://thewell-armedlamb.blogspot.com/ .

Law Prevails Over Anti-Immigrant Statute

Thank you, Judge Lindsay. In a ruling that keeps the Dallas suburb of Farmers Branch from imposing a law on landlords to make them liable for enforcing the laws, Judge Lindsay has acted in a responsible and legally correct manner.

A day before the city planned to start enforcing an ordinance banning apartment rentals to most illegal immigrants, a federal judge put a temporary stop to the plan, ruling that it "conflicts with federal law."

Legal experts said the ruling Monday by U.S. District Judge Sam Lindsay signals that the ordinance may face trouble in federal court despite Farmers Branch voters' overwhelming approval of it May 12. Federal courts have issued rulings stopping other cities from implementing similar laws.

Judge Lindsay, in a 20-page ruling granting a temporary restraining order, said Farmers Branch had wrongly used federal laws governing who receives housing subsidies to write its ordinance and had created its own classification system for determining which noncitizens may rent an apartment in the city.

"The court recognizes that illegal immigration is a major problem in this country, and one who asserts otherwise ignores reality," Judge Lindsay wrote. "The court also fully understands the frustration of cities attempting to address a national problem that the federal government should handle; however, such frustration, no matter how great, cannot serve as a basis to pass an ordinance that conflicts with federal law."

The voters of Farmers Branch acted under the leadership of town council members who claim that their property values are lowered by the community of immigrants, despite evidence given to them that immigrant communities discernably upgrade the places that they live. Claims that crime is rampants in immigrant communities has also been proved untrue. It's sad that there are feelings against the later arrivals to this country among those whose ancestors came here earlier.

It's good indeed that the Judge has exercised sound judgment and I hope that the responsible members of Farmers Branch will show their appreciation to him.

When Citizenship Isn't Enough

This administration swears it's not profiling Arabs and Middle Easterners who cross American borders, but at least one Arab American finds that hard to believe. From today's NY Times:

Abe Dabdoub calls the day he was sworn in as an American citizen last year the proudest moment of his life, little suspecting that his new identity would set off a bureaucratic nightmare at the hands of the Department of Homeland Security.

Most of his family members live in Canada, and on each of Mr. Dabdoub’s 14 trips to visit them since last August, on his way back across the Ambassador Bridge into Michigan, the Customs and Border Patrol agents have sent him through a security gantlet, he says.

He has been fingerprinted 14 times, his body searched 9 times, been handcuffed 4 times and isolated in a separate detention room 13 times. On the fourth trip, the border patrol agents started subjecting his wife to similar scrutiny.

...the problem continues unabated and, typical of such cases, no one in the federal government nor his elected representatives will tell him why he is being singled out. [Emphasis added]

Mr. Dabdoub was born in Saudi Arabia of Palestinian parents and moved to Canada at age five. His work took him to Michigan where he currently lives. He's an American citizen now, yet he has gotten stopped at the border each and every time since he's gotten his citizenship, and no one will tell him why, presumably because that is some kind of state secret.

This fellow citizen has made it onto one of the many government "lists" and the chances are he won't be able to get off that list.

A Government Accountability Office report issued last September said that just 31 individuals whose names were mistakenly on the watch list had them taken off in 2005. Thousands of such redress queries have been submitted, most of them from people who are misidentified. But their names cannot be removed because they are not the person on the list, the report said. [Emphasis added]

How's that for a Catch-22?

September 11 should be remembered, but only as the date our civil liberties were stripped from us.

My New Hero: Cathy Wright

She's 61, a grandmother, and she just started a 60 day jail sentence for trespassing. Cathy Webster is my new hero. Her story was reported in yesterday's Sacramento Bee.

Cathy Webster, a Chico grandmother of four, says she will not be silent. It says so on the black T-shirt she wore Wednesday as she reported to jail to begin a two-month federal sentence for trespassing at a military training facility in Fort Benning, Ga.

In November, Webster, a member of Grandmothers for Peace International in Elk Grove, slipped through a hole in the chain-link fence encircling the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation. It's the site of yearly vigils protesting what Webster, 61, and other critics allege is a training center for Latin American military squads.

Outside the Rio Cosumnes Correctional Center south of Elk Grove, she urged Congress to close the federal facility in Fort Benning, which occupies the same site as the now-defunct School of the Americas -- a training center accused of teaching military techniques to Latin American soldiers and law enforcement personnel who, protesters charge, then use the training against their own people.

The U.S. Army, which runs the facility, has denied the allegations. But in 1966, the Pentagon admitted that torture manuals had been used in the School of the Americas. The school was shut down in 2000, reopening a month later with its new name. Defense Department officials said the curriculum's focus would be on human rights.

The very idea that there is an organization named "Grandmothers For Peace" should give hope to those of us who are sickened by the current state of this country, with its approval of torture, its constant sabre rattling, its trashing of the Constitution. It should also give us a good kick in the backside. When the federal government has taken away everything that was good and decent about this country, civil disobedience is the last best hope for righting things.

Recent world history has shown the power that such people as Cathy Wright can generate. In Eastern Europe and in Lebanon, power mad and corrupt dictators have been turned out of power by the massive assembly of citizens protesting the wrongs those governments have perpetuated. It may now be our turn.

Thanks for the reminder, Ms. Wright, of our duties as citizens. Thanks for being such a good example.