START A PETITION 27,000,000 members: the world's largest community for good
Apr 9, 2011
Rachel Maddow: "Three Mile Island not even close to being only US nuclear accident." 

So how many were there? How many do YOU know about? 

Visibility: Everyone
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted: Apr 9, 2011 6:49pm
Sep 11, 2007
Focus: Peace
Action Request: Phone Call
Location: United States

Remember when Colin Powell stood in front of the UN in 2003 to make his case for war? Remember how he lied about weapons of mass destruction?

Remember how the country was fooled into entering a disastrous war? Well, the Bush administration is pulling the same tricks again with the Petraeus report.

Examples of lies: Casualties are not being counted if shot in back of head, but are if shot in front of head, and those dying in car bombings are also not counted. Refugees are also not counted. All countries around Iraq have closed their borders due to being overwhelmed with refugees. Does this sound like 'success'?

Yesterday afternoon when General Petraeus presented to Congress what amounted to lies, exaggeration and p.r. spin about the "successes" of the so-called U.S. "troop surge" in Iraq, we were expected to sit in the room and quietly listen.

When polite political discourse in the halls of Congress countenances torture, murder, theft of resources, and ongoing occupation, we think that rudeness is the correct response. If it's embarrassing for women to shout out, "War criminal" at war criminals in expensive suits and military uniforms, then we are all for embarrassing ourselves.

Our CODEPINK heroes Medea, Liz, Desiree, Leslie and Mona made a distinctly unladylike scene in the Petaeus hearing. They stood up for truth in the face of official lies.

They stood up for the 2.2 million internally displaced Iraqis, the 2.5 million Iraqi refugees, and the 650,000 Iraqis and 3,700 U.S. soldiers -- more Americans than those killed in the horrific attacks on US soil six years ago today --who have died in this miserable war and occupation.

You can see the coverage we have received for our actions, from the New York Times to MSNBC, in our
;">press room. To find out how to join our feisty protests in DC and help us Whip Congress into Shape, ;">click here.

Thankfully some members of Congress are waking up. Today, Rep. Tom Lantos (D-CA) plainly said "I don't buy it" to General Petraeus. Please help us get more of our Reps to stop buying Bush's war by signing our pledge to "
;">Whip Congress into Shape."

When you pledge to do a simple action every week to end the war, you will get a personalized pledge page to pass around to your friends, invite them to sign on, and watch your impact spread across the country! The CODEPINK member who inspires the most pledges by the end of each month will win an unforgettable trip to the CODEPINK house in DC!

This week, we're asking everyone to
;">call your Senators ( ">">202.224.3121) and say "Petraeus can only betray us. Don't be duped again. End Bush's war."

As Bush memorably said, "fool me once, shame on - -shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again." He's right. We can't get fooled again. Let's make sure Congress can't, either.

Proud to be rude for peace,

Dana, Desiree, Farida, Gael, Gayle, Jodie, Karin, Liz, Medea, Nancy, Pamela, Patricia, Rae, Samantha, and Vanessa

Visibility: Everyone
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted: Sep 11, 2007 8:34am
Sep 6, 2007

I'm John Bruhns and I served in Baghdad as an army sergeant for the first year of the war. Within my first days there, I realized that so much of what I had been told—about weapons of mass destruction, connections to 9/11—was just White House spin to sell the war.

I'm seeing the same thing all over again now. Even with this being the bloodiest summer for US troops in Iraq, even with Iraqi casualties running at twice the pace of last year, and even with 15 of 18 of President Bush's own benchmarks unmet, the White House is at it again. They're telling us that black is white, up is down, and things in Iraq are going just great thanks to the troop "surge."

This month Congress is going to vote on war policy for the next year—and Bush is hoping all this "progress" talk will scare Congress away from voting for withdrawal. We can't let that happen. Almost 4,000 US troops have died. We've spent half a trillion dollars in Iraq. Every day you turn on the news and more people are killed. We need Congress to stand up and fight to bring our troops home this fall.

I need your help to make sure that happens. Can you sign this petition demanding that Congress begin a fully funded redeployment and start bringing our troops home from Iraq immediately? I'll deliver your comments to Congress myself next week. Clicking below will add your name:

I left Iraq on February 27, 2004 and from what I hear from my friends who are still there—many on their third or fourth deployments—it's worse now than ever before. The "surge" was a failure and it's time to draw down our troops.

This president can't be trusted, his policy is reckless and it's more and more dangerous every day.

Here's what's happened in Iraq since the escalation went into effect.

  • Violence has gone up in Iraq. This summer is on track to be one of the bloodiest summers for Iraqis and U.S. troops, with nearly twice as many U.S. troops killed this July than the previous July. 1
  • The surge has not created political stability. The central premise of the surge was that it would increase political stability. Two years after Sunnis were brought into the political transition, a Sunni bloc withdrew from the government. 2 This week's original Government Accountability Office report showed that 15 out of 18 of Bush's own political benchmarks remain unmet. 3
  • We've poured weapons into Iraq's civil war. Another Government Accountability Office report earlier this summer showed that the Pentagon lost track of nearly 200,000 weapons given to Iraqis. We distribute weapons and then they disappear and we don't know what happens to them. What we do know is that violence increases—both among Iraqi sectarian groups and against American troops. 4
  • Ethnic cleansing is happening in Baghdad. The once Sunni dominated city is now dominated by Shiites. Here is a quote from the most recent Newsweek: "When Gen. David Petraeus goes before Congress next week to report on the progress of the surge, he may cite a decline in insurgent attacks in Baghdad as one marker of success. In fact, part of the reason behind the decline is how far the Shiite militias' cleansing of Baghdad has progressed: they've essentially won." 5

As an Iraq war veteran I felt so much relief after the November of 2006 election—I felt like we would finally end this mess and start bringing our troops home from Iraq. I've been let down a lot over this last year and I want to do everything I can to make sure it doesn't happen again.

Congress has the power to force redeployment and they have to use that power this fall. Nothing is more important to me than making sure we start bringing all our troops home—and I need your help to make sure that's what happens.

Please sign the petition today.

Thanks for all you do.

–John Bruhns, former US Army Infantry Sergeant.
  Wednesday, September 5th, 2007


1. "Diplomatic Surge for Iraq, But New Steps Require Credible Redeployment Plan for U.S. Forces," Center for American Progress, August 9, 2007

2. Ibid

3. "Report Finds Little Progress On Iraq Goals," Washington Post, August 30, 2007

4. "Stabilizing Iraq," United States Goverment Accountability Office, July 2007

5. "Baghdad's New Owners," Newsweek, September 10, 2007

Support our member-driven organization: Political Action is entirely funded by our 3.2 million members. We have no corporate contributors, no foundation grants, no money from unions. Our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way. If you'd like to support our work, you can give now at:

Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

Visibility: Everyone
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted: Sep 6, 2007 8:54am
Jun 25, 2007
Explaining How Depleted Uranium Is Killing Civilians, Soldiers, Land
Nano-particles pinpointed

Global Research, June 17, 2007

Depleted uranium weapons, and the untold misery they wreak on mankind, are taboo subjects in the mainstream media. This exclusive report should break the media embargo imposed on the American people. Despite being a grossly under-reported subject in the mainstream, there is intense public interest in depleted uranium (DU) and the damage it inflicts on humankind and the environment. While American Free Press is actively investigating DU weapons and how they contribute to Gulf War Syndrome, the corporate-controlled press ignores the illegal use of DU and its long-lasting effects on the health of veterans and the public.In August 2004 American Free Press published a ground-breaking four-part series on DU weapons and the long-term health risks they pose to soldiers and civilians alike. Information provided to AFP by experts and scientists, some of it published for the first time in this paper, has increased public awareness of how exposure to small particles of DU can severely affect human health. Leuren Moret, a Berkeley-based geo-scientist with expertise in atmospheric dust, corresponds with AFP on DU issues. Recently Moret provided a copy of her letters to a British radiation biologist, Dr. Chris Busby, about how nanometer size particles—less than one-tenth of a micron and smaller—of DU once inhaled or absorbed into the body, can cause long-term damage to one’s health. Busby is one of the founders of Green Audit, a British organization that monitors companies “whose activities might threaten the environment and health of citizens.”Moret’s writings were meant to assist Busby in a legal case being heard in the High Court in London where a former defense worker, Richard David, 49, is suing Normal Air Garrett, Ltd., an aircraft parts company now owned by Honeywell Aerospace, claiming exposure to DU on the job has made his life a “living hell.” David worked as a component fitter on fighter planes and bombers but had to quit due to health problems. He says he developed a cough within weeks of starting work.Today, David suffers from a variety of symptoms like those known as Gulf War Syndrome, including respiratory and kidney problems, bowel conditions and painful joints. Medical tests reveal mutations to his DNA and damage to his chromosomes, which, he says, could only have been caused by ionizing radiation. He has also been diagnosed with a terminal lung condition.Honeywell denies DU was ever used at the plant in Yeovil, Somerset, where David worked for 10 years until 1995. David claims that DU’s existence at the plant was denied because it is an official secret. David has asked the High Court for more time to gather evidence. The hearing is due to resume in April. “I don’t have any legal representation,” David said, “so I am representing myself. It is a real David versus Goliath case.“I am confident I will win. I hope to set a precedent for other cases of people who have suffered from the effects of depleted uranium,” he said.Moret’s letters on the particle effect of DU is based on research done by Marion Fulk, a nuclear physical chemist and former scientist with the Manhattan Project and the National Laboratory at Livermore, Calif. Fulk, who has developed a &ldquoarticle theory” about how DU nano-particles affect human DNA, donates his time and expertise to help bring information about DU to the public.Asked about Fulk’s particle theory, Busby said it is “quite sound.” “DU is much more dangerous than they say,” Busby added. “I’ve always said that it contributes significantly to Gulf War Syndrome.”When Moret’s correspondence to Dr. Busby was posted on the Internet over the New Year’s holiday under the title “How Depleted Uranium Weapons Are Killing Our Troops,” some 6,000 people read the letter in the first two days. The following Monday, a producer from BBC’s Panorama program contacted Moret to arrange an interview. If the BBC follows up with an investigation on the health effects of DU, it may be hard for the U.S. media to maintain their cover-up. More than 500,000 “Gulf War Era” vets currently receive disability compensation, many of them for a variety of symptoms generally referred to as Gulf War Syndrome. Experts blame DU for many of these symptoms.“The numbers are overwhelming, but the potential horrors only get worse,” Robert C. Koehler of the Chicago-based Tribune Media Services wrote in an article about DU weapons entitled “Silent Genocide.” “DU dust does more than wreak havoc on the immune systems of those who breathe it or touch it; the substance also alters one’s genetic code,” Koehler wrote. “The Pentagon’s response to such charges is denial, denial, denial. And the American media is its moral co-conspirator.”U.S. GOVERNMENT KNOWSThe U.S. government has known for at least 20 years that DU weapons produce clouds of poison gas on impact. These clouds of aerosolized DU are laden with billions of toxic sub-micron sized particles. A 1984 Department of Energy conference on nuclear airborne waste reported that tests of DU anti-tank missiles showed that at least 31 percent of the mass of a DU penetrator is converted to nano-particles on impact. In larger bombs the percentage of aerosolized DU increases to nearly 100 percent, Fulk told AFP.DU is harmful in three ways, according to Fulk: “Chemical toxicity, radiological toxicity and particle toxicity.”Particles in the nano-meter (one billionth of a meter) range are a “new breed of cat,” Moret wrote. Because the size of the nano-particles allows them to pass freely throughout the organism and into the nucleus of its cells, exposure to nano-particles causes different symptoms than exposure to larger particles of the same substance.Internalized DU particles, Fulk said, act as “a non-specific catalyst” in both “nuclear and non-nuclear” ways. This means that the uranium particle can affect human DNA and RNA because of both its chemical and radiological properties. This is why internalized DU particles cause “many, many diseases,” Fulk said.Asked if this is how DU causes severe birth defects, Fulk said, “Yes.”MILITARY AWAREThe military is aware of DU’s harmful effects on the human genetic code. A 2001 study of DU’s effect on DNA done by Dr. Alexandra C. Miller for the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute in Bethesda, Md., indicates that DU’s chemical instability causes 1 million times more genetic damage than would be expected from its radiation effect alone, Moret wrote.Dr. Miller requested that questions be sent in writing and copied to a military spokesman. She did tell AFP that it should be noted that her studies showing that DU is “neoplastically transforming and genotoxic” are based on in vitro cellular research.Studies have shown that inhaled nano-particles are far more toxic than micro-sized particles of the same basic chemical composition. British toxicopathologist Vyvyan Howard has reported that the increased toxicity of the nano-particle is due to its size.For example, when mice were exposed to virus-size particles of Teflon (0.13 microns) in a University of Rochester study, there were no ill effects. But when mice were exposed to nano-particles of Teflon for 15 minutes, nearly all the mice died within 4 hours.“Exposure pathways for depleted uranium can be through the skin, by inhalation, and ingestion,” Moret wrote. “Nano-particles have high mobility and can easily enter the body. Inhalation of nano-particles of depleted uranium is the most hazardous exposure, because the particles pass through the lung-blood barrier directly into the blood.“When inhaled through the nose, nano-particles can cross the olfactory bulb directly into the brain through the blood brain barrier, where they migrate all through the brain,” she wrote. “Many Gulf era soldiers exposed to depleted uranium have been diagnosed with brain tumors, brain damage and impaired thought processes. Uranium can interfere with the mitochondria, which provide energy for the nerve processes, and transmittal of the nerve signal across synapses in the brain.

“Damage to the mitochondria, which provide all energy to the cells and nerves, can cause chronic fatigue syndrome, Lou Gehrig’s disease, Parkinson’s disease and Hodgkin’s disease.”

 Global Research Articles by Christopher Bollyn

Visibility: Everyone
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted: Jun 25, 2007 8:09pm
Sep 10, 2006

Torture is a new freedom and democracy watchword.

You cannot have freedom and democracy without torture, according to Bush and his major media outlet cronies.

Visibility: Everyone
Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted: Sep 10, 2006 12:03pm
May 24, 2006
The government (especially this one) likes to talk about assets, but if you look at what they call assets, they are actually liabilities. This applies to all governments worldwide, but focuses on the US.
Visibility: Everyone
Tags: , , , , ,
Posted: May 24, 2006 8:06am
May 3, 2006
Focus: Media
Action Request: Write E-Mail
Location: United States
WASHINGTON - May 2 - On April 10, Washington Post columnist and deputy editorial page editor Jackson Diehl penned a column arguing that Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez is not very popular and has little democratic legitimacy. FAIR sent the following letter to Diehl on April 18, questioning the accuracy of his comments and his overall thesis.

FAIR's letter has so far received no response. If you would like to see Diehl respond to questions of accuracy raised by FAIR, you can contact him and his editor, editorial page editor Fred Hiatt, at:

Jackson Diehl:

Fred Hiatt:

April 18, 2005

Jackson Diehl
The Washington Post

Dear Jackson Diehl:

In your column, "In Venezuela, Locking Up the Vote" (4/10/06), you write that Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez "has never enjoyed overwhelming support in Venezuela," adding, "his ratings have mostly fluctuated a few points above and below 50 percent."

While the term "overwhelming support" may be somewhat subjective, Chavez has won three elections with 59 percent or more of the popular vote. In the U.S. context, such winning percentages would be considered landslides, comparable to Ronald Reagan’s win with 59 percent of the vote over Walter Mondale in 1984.

What is less subjective is the record on Hugo Chavez’s approval ratings. A recent report in your own paper (
12/5/05) pegged Chavez's support at 68 percent, as measured by the opposition Venezuelan polling firm Datanalisis. In May 2005, Datanalisis reported his support at 71 percent.

According to a
Venezuelan Institute for Data Analysis poll published last week, 60 percent of respondents characterized Chavez's presidential performance as either excellent (18 percent) or good (42 percent). Only 16 percent rated Chavez as "average to bad" or worse.

February 2006 poll by North American Opinion Research Inc. found 66 percent of Venezuelan respondents saying they would vote for Chavez in the election later this year--more than four times the number who say they would vote for all other candidates combined. And on a related issue, the Chilean polling firm Latinobarómetro found more people in Venezuela considered their country "totally democratic" than in any other nation in Latin America.

In light of this polling data, we are curious as to how you would justify your assertion that Chavez's "ratings have mostly fluctuated a few points above and below 50 percent." It's a claim that cries out for either explanation or correction.

Steve Rendall
Senior Analyst


Printer Friendly Version E-Mail This Article
Common Dreams NewsCenter is a non-profit news service
providing breaking news and views for the Progressive Community.
The press release posted here has been provided to Common Dreams NewsWire by one of the many progressive organizations who make up America's Progressive Community. If you wish to comment on this press release or would like more information, please contact the organization directly.
*all times Eastern US (GMT-5:00)

Visibility: Everyone
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted: May 3, 2006 6:59am
Apr 13, 2006
Focus: Media
Action Request: Write E-Mail
Location: United States

Action Alert
Intelligence Manipulation at the Washington Post
Paper's editorial page ignores facts to back Bush


Newspaper editorial pages are entitled to their own opinions—but not to their own facts. The Washington Post's editorial page, however, seems to want to have it both ways.

The paper's April 9 editorial,
"A Good Leak," defended the White House's actions amid new revelations in the investigation of the leaking of an undercover CIA employee's name to reporters. CIA analyst Valerie Plame Wilson was outed by administration sources in July 2003 after her husband, former diplomat Joseph Wilson, publicly challenged a key White House argument for war—that Iraq was attempting to procure uranium from Africa.

Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald recently filed new documents indicating that Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, testified that he was authorized by George W. Bush to release portions of a classified National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) to reporters to rebut Wilson's criticisms of the case for war.

The Post editorial supported Bush's action, which is the paper's prerogative. But it backed up its positions with an inaccurate claim:

"The material that Mr. Bush ordered declassified established, as have several subsequent investigations, that Mr. Wilson was the one guilty of twisting the truth. In fact, his report supported the conclusion that Iraq had sought uranium."

But the actual National Intelligence Estimate did not support the White House's claims about uranium, nor did Wilson's report. That much was clear in the news section of the same day's Washington Post. The paper's reporting showed that Wilson's findings-that there was "no support for charges that Iraq tried to buy uranium" in Niger-were consistent with what many intelligence analysts thought about the allegations. In the body of the NIE, according to the Post, the uranium allegations were treated skeptically:

"Unknown to the reporters, the uranium claim lay deeper inside the estimate, where it said a fresh supply of uranium ore would 'shorten the time Baghdad needs to produce nuclear weapons.' But it also said U.S. intelligence did not know the status of Iraq's procurement efforts, 'cannot confirm' any success and had 'inconclusive' evidence about Iraq's domestic uranium operations."

The Post added that in closed Senate testimony in September 2002, top CIA officials expressed reservations about the uranium claim—and they weren't the only ones: "The State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research, likewise, called the claim 'highly dubious.' For those reasons, the uranium story was relegated to a brief inside passage in the October estimate." The disconnect between what Libby was alleging was in the NIE and the actual document has been noted by other reporters (, 10/19/05).

The Post seems to have based its argument on a Senate Intelligence Committee report, which some suggest debunked Wilson's claims (Washington Post, 7/10/04). That report found that some CIA analysts believed Wilson's findings backed up their conclusions, though skeptics (most notably at the State Department) were unmoved. As Knight-Ridder reported (7/10/04), the Senate report found "that State Department analysts concluded that Wilson's information supported their view that there wasn't much substance to the Iraq-Niger link."

But to reach the conclusion that Wilson was "the one guilty of twisting the truth" also ignores a long-established part of the story—namely, that the CIA was trying to remove the Niger story from Bush's speeches long before the decision to leak parts of the NIE to the media. And the White House itself admitted in July 2003—shortly after Wilson went public—that the Niger allegation should have been kept out of Bush's January 2003 State of the Union address. The Washington Post covered this story extensively at the time (beginning on July 8, 2003), reporting at length on efforts by the CIA (7/23/03) to keep the uranium claim out of Bush's public remarks about Iraq. On July 20, the Post's Dana Priest reported that "recent revelations by officials at the CIA, the State Department, the United Nations, in Congress and elsewhere make clear that the weakness of the claim in the State of the Union speech was known and accepted by a wide circle of intelligence and diplomatic personnel scrutinizing information on Iraqi weapons programs months before the speech."

So why is the paper's editorial page still arguing that the White House had a strong case against Wilson—especially on a claim that the White House has long admitted was incorrect?

Contact the Washington Post and ask whether its editorial page must adhere to the same rules as its reporters-namely, that it get its facts right.

Washington Post

Editorial Page Editor
Fred Hiatt
(202) 334-6000

Deborah Howell
(202) 334-7582

Visibility: Everyone
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted: Apr 13, 2006 12:58pm


Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of or its affiliates.


Good H.
, 1, 1 child
Santa Rosa, CA, USA
Shares by Type:
All (3326) | Blog (3164) | Alert (64) | Poll (3) | Tribute (9) | Message (86)

Showing shares tagged with: spin [show all]
(1 comments  |  discussions )
\\nZEN was suspended by Eric with no warning. We don\\\'t know any reasons nor how long it will last....\\r\\nI asked about it on the forum but my post was immediately deleted. 2 threads and petitions about Zen also. And 2 her help-groups. :-(\\r\\nUntill to...
(0 comments  |  discussions )
\\r\\nCOME TO: \\r\\nTucson\\\' s 32nd Annual Peace Fair and Music Festival2014 Theme: Climate JusticeThis FREE event is Arizona\\\'s largest gathering of Peace, Justice, and Environmental groups, with Live Music, Tables, Food, Entertainment, Children\\\'s ...
by Barb K.
(0 comments  |  discussions )
\\n\\r\\nHello my C2 Family, \\r\\nFirst let me say Thank You to those of you who have so sweetly fwd my posts. You are SO AWESOME!! I will never forget your help. Anytime I can repay the favour, please tell me. Second, my Submit button has disappeared lea...
(0 comments  |  discussions )
My little Valentine, Lily, loves taking pictures. She said \\\"Mom, let\\\'s do a Valentines photo shoot, so I can send the pics as cards to our friends\\\" lol.  I can\\\'t believe she\\\'s 5 yrs old! Looking back at my 1st album of her: \\\"Lilyanna Jane, ...
by Rock H.
(0 comments  |  discussions )
\\n \\r\\nIn recognition of the environmental benefits of a plant-based diet, the Sierra  Club  is  pleased  to announce a week  long  vegan “volunteer  vacation”  in  Yosemite National Park, Calif...
(0 comments  |  discussions )
\\n\\r\\n“Integrity is telling myself the truth. And honesty is telling the truth to other people.”\\r\\n\\r\\ n \\r\\n\\r\\nSpence r Johnson\\r\\n\\r\\n  \\r\\n\\r\\nMany years ago, when I was in high school chemistry lab, I was assigned to do a litm...
(0 comments  |  discussions )
New Petition! Speak out against Time-Warner Merger with Comcast! Let your opinion be know before your bill goes up and your programming choices dwindle.\\r\\n\\r\\nUrge DOJ and FCC to Not Allow Merger of Time-Warner and Comcast\\r\\nhttp://www.t hepetitionsi...
(0 comments  |  discussions )
\\nThis is Venus Marquez\\\'s friend, Gina Arellano. Venus is a friend of my daughter Nikka.  She seems to be covered in rashes/sores due to possibly chickenpox and needs to raise at least 200 Euros - about $275 US - to cover medical expenses.\\r\\nIf...
by Resa G.
(0 comments  |  discussions ) ction/petition/stand-agai nst-legalized-discriminat ion
(0 comments  |  0 discussions )
New Petition! Speak out against Time-Warner Merger with Comcast! Let your opinion be know before your bill goes up and your programming choices dwindle.\\r\\n\\r\\nUrge DOJ and FCC to Not Allow Merger of Time-Warner and Comcast\\r\\nhttp://www.t hepetitionsi...