The Coverup continues – Book Review: Watergate – A Novel

By Jim Smith

We live in a world shaped by history. It is hard to escape our personal history – parents, aunts, uncles – and others who want to shape us in their molde. One means of escape that has likely been practiced by many readers is to run away to Venice. Here, at the end of the continent, we can create our own history, our own personality.

Even harder to escape is social and political history. Like it or not, we are all Americans and we carry considerable baggage, even here in Venice. We live in a country that has been shaped by world-historic events including the atom bomb, Nazism, the Holocaust, the demise of the socialist bloc, terrorism and seemingly endless wars, to name a few. And it is the political history of this country that has brought us to a more and more authoritarian society. These events include the Kennedy assassination(s), Watergate, Iran Contra, and 9/11. No matter when one was born, these events continue to play a role in our everyday lives.

Neither the mass media nor academia seem to have any interest in explaining why events happen and their significance to our lives. Thus we are left with the story that Kennedy was shot by a lone gunman (Oswald), who in turn was shot by a lone gunman (Ruby); Watergate was caused by a bunch of Keystone Kops or Plumbers; Iran-Contra was dreamed up by a crazy fellow named Ollie North, and was not the subversion of democratic government; and 9/11 was done by a bunch of religious fanatics and had nothing to do with U.S. foreign policy.

Thomas Mallon, author of Watergate: A Novel (Pantheon, 2012) seemingly has no interest in delving deeper into this pivotal event in American history. Mallon’s main interest is character development, which quickly turns into character distortion. Oilman Fred LaRue, who was a highly placed actor in the Nixon administration, was a man without a title or a clear job duty. This undoubtedly made it easier for him to work on Nixon’s reelection since he had no bothersome job duties. He was a protege of Mississippi’s Senator James Eastland, an unrepentant racist. He was also the architect of the Republican “southern strategy,” which gained that party a solid block of electoral votes in the South. In Mallon’s treatment, LaRue is a really nice guy with a liberal girlfriend.

Another Watergate conspirator to get a personality makeover by Mallon is the infamous E. Howard Hunt. He was the CIA’s point man on the Bay of Pigs fiasco, a failed invasion of Cuba in 1961. He later became a personal assistant to CIA Director Allen Dulles. Shortly before his death in 2007, Hunt made a taped death-bed confession of his involvement in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. He named as co-conspirators David Phillips, Cord Meyer, Frank Sturgis, David Morales, William Harvey, as well as a French gunman, Lucien Sarti, who worked for the Mafia, and Lyndon B. Johnson. Sturgis was one of the “Plumbers” who was arrested in the Watergate burglary of the Democratic National Committee’s offices.

In Mallon’s novel, Hunt is portrayed as a family man who is very much in love with his wife Dorothy, who was also the “bag lady” who delivered hush money to those arrested in the break-in. Mallon says Hunt’s life was shattered when Dorothy was killed in a plane crash in 1972, while carrying $10,000 in cash. All of what Mallon says may be true, but Hunt and LaRue were by no means upstanding citizens. Both had no compulsion when it came to subverting democratic government to get what they wanted.

The real story behind Watergate surfaced with the publication of the best seller, Silent Coup (St. Martin’s Press, 1991). Perhaps Mallon doesn’t read non-fiction. In it, authors Len Colodny and Robert Gettlin show that Nixon was not only paranoid but that people – powerful people – were really out to get him.

As is often the case in real life, there was something even more evil and dangerous lurking in the shadows behind Nixon. For those of us in the anti-war movement, Nixon was the president we loved to hate, perhaps more than Bush. But to the military/covert action establishment there was growing alarm about Nixon’s liberal foreign policy, including his efforts to establish detente with the Soviet Union and his unprecedented trip to China and meeting with Mao Zedung. Now that China makes all our cool gadgets, it may be hard to understand just how much the far right hated China in 1972. The rabid anti-communists in the Pentagon and CIA were horrified that the President of the United States would sit in the same room with the devil incarnate. Chief of U.S. Naval Operations, Admiral Thomas Moorer, went so far as to establish a spy operation in the White House.

When the spying was uncovered by the soon to be infamous Plumbers, Nixon and his staff first considered filing treason charges against the ring. However, they later decided to hush up what was known as the Moorer-Radford Affair (Navy Yeoman Charles Radford was the spy in the White House). Even though the spying stopped, the Pentagon unease continued.

Moorer had another protege in addition to Radford. His name was Bob Woodward, who stated in 2005, “In 1970, when I was serving as a lieutenant in the U.S. Navy and assigned to Adm. Thomas H. Moorer, the chief of naval operations, I sometimes acted as a courier, taking documents to the White House.” However, Moorer said that Woodward’s role was to brief White House aide, General Alexander Haig. Woodward left the Navy, went to work as a reporter for a string of suburban Washington newspapers and quickly became one of the most famous journalists in history at the Washington Post, where he played a key role in bringing down Nixon.

None of this should excuse Nixon, who was guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors, including repression of domestic dissent and war crimes for his bombing of Hanoi and invasion of Cambodia. However, it should remind us that Presidents, including Barack Obama, are often manipulated and coerced by entrenched financial and government bureaucracies that are neither electable nor accountable. These bureaucracies, whether in the Pentagon, Wall Street or even in the Postal Service continue to lead us down a path of less freedom and more authoritarianism regardless of who is in the White House or Congress.

Watergate: A Novel will likely get a lot of publicity as the 40th anniversary of Watergate rolls around. Unfortunately, the book is a fantasy that uses real people’s names but alters them beyond recognition. Those who want to know the true story of Watergate should take a look at Silent Coup (silentcoup.com), which is available at Powell’s Books (powells.com) for as little as $3.50. Powell’s is a fully unionized alternative to Amazon.com. It might also be available at used book shops or thrift stores. Parts of the book are on-line at: nixonera.com/etexts/silentcoup/contents.asp. There have been new developments in recent years, as memoirs are written and files are declassified. Do a little sleuthing on the internet to uncover the facts. 

Questions Persist As To US Arms Treaty Compliance

By Janet Phelan

Geneva, Switzerland — Questions concerning the compliance of the United States with the international treaty, the Biological Weapons Convention, came to a head recently during the Seventh Review Conference of the Convention, which is being held now in Geneva, Switzerland at the United Nations.

The most recent compliance report, listed in the BWC catalogue as BWC/CONF.VII/INF.2/Add.1, has failed to quash concerns as to the reliability of statements made by the United States as to its compliance with obligations under the BWC.

The specific concerns focus on the United States’ lack of disclosure of a law which amends the prior biological weapons statute. The original statute is entitled the Biological Weapons Statute–Title 18 Chapter 10 Section 175 of the U.S. code. The amended law, which is entitled The Expansion of the Biological Weapons Statute (Section 817 of the USA PATRIOT Act) radically changes the legal culpability incurred by agents of the US government for violating the statute, granting them immunity.

While this most recent report submitted to the BWC by the United States does mention that the original law was indeed amended by the USA PATRIOT Act, The U.S. has once again failed to disclose the revolutionary nature of this amendment, and is instead persisting in reporting the text of the older statute without coming clean about the implications or even the wording of the amended version. The critical amendment to 175 literally removes U.S. agents from liability for violating legal prohibitions for possessing and transporting biological weapons. The implications are serious and deserve careful scrutiny.

Questions have also been raised as to whether or not the U.S. ever reported this legislative landmine on the CBM (Confidence Building Measures) Form E’s. The CBM’s mandate that state parties report the status of their labs, research projects and other matters of concern to the BWC. The form E mandates the disclosure of new legislation relevant to biological weapons and is considered to be politically binding.

Section 817 was passed along with the rest of the USA PATRIOT Act in 2001. What is publicly available for this time period reveals that the U.S. reported that there was nothing new to declare for both 2001 and 2002. This is revealed at the following link, on page 97 (http://bit.ly/sVwgOY).

United States Ambassador Laura Kennedy and the CBM unit of the U.S. State Department have been repeatedly contacted with questions as to whether the U.S. ever disclosed Section 817 to the other parties to the Convention. No response has been forthcoming. A United States delegate to the Seventh Review Conference, Chris Park, recently offered assurances that the requests for information about CBM Form E  had been received and were being researched. He also admitted that “there may have been an oversight.”

Here is the complete text of Section 817 of the USA PATRIOT Act, with the questionable subsection underlined: (http://bit.ly/tYv3S4).

Interview with Singer-Songwriter Jacqueline Fuentes

Interviewed by Karl Abrams

Jacqueline Fuentes is a dynamic and charismatic Chilean folk singer, songwriter and international activist. She moved to Venice about 15 years ago from Santiago and has been playing for small to medium-sized groups of lucky people ever since. The legend is true – to hear her sing is to be instantly mesmerized by the power of her voice.

Jacqueline’s deep and beautifully written lyrics, mostly in Spanish, may be described as a mix of Chilean folk music with a fusion of love, solidarity and revolution. Or, by some accounts, a life-changing musical experience able to move people to their deepest levels.

Her political influences goes back to when she was a child of ten. It was then, in 1973, that a CIA-backed coup d’etat assassinated the Chilean President, Salvador Allende. Jacqueline’s mother, a fiery anti-Pinochet activist, told her that the great folk singer Victor Jarra had his fingers broken by Pinochet’s soldiers so he could no longer play his guitar to lift the spirits of the people. He was then machine-gunned in a sports arena now bearing his name.

Today, Jacqueline’s music is dedicated to help keep alive the same message of love and social revolution that nurtures hope during such politically repressive times.

BH: Jacqueline, who were your early influences as a young musician?

JF: My father was certainly my earliest influence. He was a radio singer way back when we were little kids in Santiago. After work he would record all of my brothers and sisters singing. We loved it. Later, as a teenager, I became influenced by the music and powerful lyrics of Mercedes Sosa, Violetta Parra and Victor Jara.

BH: It looks like you got off to an early start as a young singer in Santiago, Chile.

JF: I was actually 15 when I did my solo debut with the National Folklore Ballet at the Vina Del Mar Festival. That was a wonderful experience for me. That same year I joined a band called “Chamal.” This early experience was very important to my development as an artist. During college I continued to travel with the Ballet.

BH: Did you have time for college studies with so many shows to perform all over the world?

JF: I was very busy. I studied classical music and singing at the University of Chile, one of the oldest schools in Latin America. Pablo Naruda studied there, you know. I also studied music therapy later. Together, they are a good combination I think.

BH: What is the deeper message or meaning of your music?

JF: There is an invisible thread that runs through my three albums. The Great Mother Spirit energy (you know her, right?) is here for all of us to become transformed…to be vulnerable again to life, to be open, to feel deeply once again…to feel interconnected. My songs channel this energy.

BH: I understand. I’ve been listening to your music for about 5 years now. Can you tell us a little about your latest album?

JF: Yes,  “Amo La Vida – I Love Life” is the name of my latest album and one of the songs on it. I decided to use a lot of diverse musical instrumentation with a very nice ethnic blend of musicians for all people to connect with. It’s my way of awakening a deep love in people, the first step in real global change.

BH: What kind of changes would you like to see in the world?

JF: My work is mostly about healing and bringing people together, it is capitalism that divides. Through my music, I would like to play my part in helping to integrate the Latin and American communities and contribute towards healing their differences. I prefer to work with all people who are struggling…all over the world.

BH: How about a world tour?

JF: Thank you. It’s coming soon.

Depleted Uranium strikes friends and foes alike in Libya

By Karl Abrams

High in the skies of Libya, NATO jets, equipped with uranium bullets and uranium-tipped missiles, are probably being used to assist Libyan rebels in toppling the regime of Muammar Gaddafy.

France, Great Britain and the US regularly employ concrete bunker-busting uranium weapons and have consistently blocked UN proposals to ban them. They won’t admit they’re using them, but they do acknowledge the use of jets that always seem to carry them. When used in jet machine guns, high-density uranium bullets as large as 30 mm (and 70% more dense than lead) can be shot at an astounding rate of 70 bullets per second. This often cuts an armored vehicle or tank in two.

It’s no wonder that such kinetic energy penetrators are called “Armor Piercing Incendiary.” Upon incandescent penetration, such bullets and missiles ignite ordinance stored in the armored vehicle. The resulting toxic explosion decomposes the uranium into a white oxide powder that quickly moves across the wind-swept desert terrain into cities and lungs of the Libyan people.

The dust is uranium dioxide. The uranium in it ultimately comes from uranium ore that is unusable by nuclear reactors. Such uranium is considered unusable or “depleted” because it is not radioactive enough to drive a nuclear power plant. For this reason, it is called “depleted uranium” or DU, and is primarily made up of U-238, a form of uranium that’s heavier but less radioactive than the more radioactive U-235 that is used in nuclear reactors.

But its DU name is conveniently misleading. According to the military, DU is a “mild health risk” outside of the human body. And this is what soldiers and pilots are told. What is generally ignored, however, is what happens when the dust enters the body. By drinking, eating or breathing it in, DU radiation severely damages bone marrow and cellular chromosomes by internally emitting sub-atomic “bullets” known as alpha particles. This causes lung, lymph and brain cancers as well as mutagenic effects such as unusually high rates of leukemia and fetal radiation damage that cause grotesque birth defects. Uranium contamination also permanently impairs kidney, heart and liver function.

Ever since the 1960s, the corporations that own nuclear power plants safely stored tremendous amounts of DU, on average 20 tons/yr. Surely, their CEOs must have wondered more than once if this DU could turn a profit by selling it as a high-density armor-piercing bullet or missile. After all, production cost of DU is cheap – only $2 per kilogram.

Their chance came in the 1970s when the Soviet Union developed tanks with armor that could not be penetrated by ordinary weapons. The Pentagon then developed and perfected DU weapons. The price of DU increased 10-fold, creating a multi-billion dollar industry.

Fortunate for corporate profit motives, first-world war-makers – be they French, British or American – apparently have no problem using DU weapons and spreading poisonous uranium oxide dust into the environment. After all, it does the job nicely and doesn’t hurt the soldiers or pilots who use it, provided they are a “safe” distance away from the DU dust.

While the World Health Organization is vehemently against it, NATO’s war makers are not. They know but don’t seem to care that the half-life of DU is over 4 billion years. This means that half of the DU released into Libya’s environment will, by definition, linger for that same incredible amount of time. In other words, the DU will contaminate the people of Libya forever, or 4 billion years, whichever comes first. How does NATO pretend to help the Libyan people by permanently poisoning them and their precious water supply and farmland?

DU is considered a long-term poison because it is both a heavy metal contaminant and a radioactive alpha-particle emitter. This creates a deadly “cocktail effect”. Both are deadly to combatants and civilians alike, and both should be viewed as a crime against humanity. According to the International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons (ICBUW), DU needs to be immediately and internationally outlawed along with dum-dum bullets, poison gas, and cluster bombs.

Developed by the Pentagon in the 1980s at a cost of hundreds of billions of dollars, it was first used in the Iraq invasions of 1991 and 2003 and probably used in the Balkans and Afghanistan. According to conservative estimates, about 1 in 8 soldiers who served in Iraq have been poisoned by DU, which manifests as Gulf War Syndrome. That’s about 100,000 soldiers who may need life-long medical care.

The UN has dramatically called for a ban on the use of such nefarious military DU weapons because it violates the Geneva Convention. Germany, Belgium, Italy and all Latin American countries refuse to use it. The French, British and US militaries still refuse to ban it. What do we tell the Libyan people when the DU dust settles?

Nuclear Nightmare

By Ralph Nader

The unfolding multiple nuclear reactor catastrophe in Japan is prompting overdue attention to the 104 nuclear plants in the United States—many of them aging, many of them near earthquake faults, some on the west coast exposed to potential tsunamis.

Nuclear power plants boil water to produce steam to turn turbines that generate electricity. Nuclear power’s overly complex fuel cycle begins with uranium mines and ends with deadly radioactive wastes for which there still are no permanent storage facilities to contain them for tens of thousands of years.

Atomic power plants generate 20 percent of the nation’s electricity. Over forty years ago, the industry’s promoter and regulator, the Atomic Energy Commission estimated that a full nuclear meltdown could contaminate an area “the size of Pennsylvania” and cause massive casualties. You, the taxpayers, have heavily subsidized nuclear power research, development, and promotion from day one with tens of billions of dollars.

Because of many costs, perils, close calls at various reactors, and the partial meltdown at the Three Mile Island plant in Pennsylvania in 1979, there has not been a nuclear power plant built in the United States since 1974.
Now the industry is coming back “on your back” claiming it will help reduce global warming from fossil fuel emitted greenhouse gases.
Pushed aggressively by President Obama and Energy Secretary Chu, who refuses to meet with longtime nuclear industry critics, here is what “on your back” means:
1. Wall Street will not finance new nuclear plants without a 100% taxpayer loan guarantee. Too risky. That’s a lot of guarantee given that new nukes cost $12 billion each, assuming no mishaps. Obama and the Congress are OK with that arrangement.

2. Nuclear power is uninsurable in the private insurance market—too risky. Under the Price-Anderson Act, taxpayers pay the greatest cost of a meltdown’s devastation.

3. Nuclear power plants and transports of radioactive wastes are a national security nightmare for the Department of Homeland Security. Imagine the target that thousands of vulnerable spent fuel rods present for sabotage.

4. Guess who pays for whatever final waste repositories are licensed? You the taxpayer and your descendants as far as your gene line persists. Huge decommissioning costs, at the end of a nuclear plant’s existence come from the ratepayers’ pockets.

5. Nuclear plant disasters present impossible evacuation burdens for those living anywhere near a plant, especially if time is short.

Imagine evacuating the long-troubled Indian Point plants 26 miles north of New York City. Workers in that region have a hard enough time evacuating their places of employment during 5 pm rush hour. That’s one reason Secretary of State Clinton (in her time as Senator of New York) and Governor Andrew Cuomo called for the shutdown of Indian Point.

6. Nuclear power is both uneconomical and unnecessary. It can’t compete against energy conservation, including cogeneration, windpower and ever more efficient, quicker, safer, renewable forms of providing electricity. Amory Lovins argues this point convincingly (see RMI.org). Physicist Lovins asserts that nuclear power “will reduce and retard climate protection.” His reasoning: shifting the tens of billions invested in nuclear power to efficiency and renewables reduce far more carbon per dollar (http://www.nirs.org/factsheets/whynewnukesareriskyfcts.pdf). The country should move deliberately to shutdown nuclear plants, starting with the aging and seismically threatened reactors. Peter Bradford, a former Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) commissioner has also made a compelling case against nuclear power on economic and safety grounds (http://www.nirs.org/factsheets/whynewnukesareriskyfcts.pdf).

There is far more for ratepayers, taxpayers and families near nuclear plants to find out. Here’s how you can start:

1. Demand public hearings in your communities where there is a nuke, sponsored either by your member of Congress or the NRC, to put the facts, risks and evacuation plans on the table. Insist that the critics as well as the proponents testify and cross-examine each other in front of you and the media.

2. If you call yourself conservative, ask why nuclear power requires such huge amounts of your tax dollars and guarantees and can’t buy adequate private insurance. If you have a small business that can’t buy insurance because what you do is too risky, you don’t stay in business.

3. If you are an environmentalist, ask why nuclear power isn’t required to meet a cost-efficient market test against investments in energy conservation and renewables.

4. If you understand traffic congestion, ask for an actual real life evacuation drill for those living and working 10 miles around the plant (some scientists think it should be at least 25 miles) and watch the hemming and hawing from proponents of nuclear power.

The people in northern Japan may lose their land, homes, relatives, and friends as a result of a dangerous technology designed simply to boil water. There are better ways to generate steam.

Like the troubled Japanese nuclear plants, the Indian Point plants and the four plants at San Onofre and Diablo Canyon in southern California rest near earthquake faults.

The seismologists concur that there is a 94% chance of a big earthquake in California within the next thirty years. Obama, Chu and the powerful nuke industry must not be allowed to force the American people to play Russian Roulette!

 

Ralph Nader is a consumer advocate, lawyer, and author. His most recent book – and first novel – is, Only The Super-Rich Can Save Us. His most recent work of non-fiction is The Seventeen Traditions. b

 

The Diary of Dang Thuy Tram: Last Night I Dreamed of Peace

Book Reviewed by Jim Smith

The definitive book about the Viet Nam war has been written by a twenty-something Vietnamese woman. This may be hard to believe for those raised on a diet of male-oriented sagas of hard fighting, hard loving and hard living American soldiers that dominate the U.S. book market and big screens. Even veterans of Viet Nam don’t know the full story of the war until they read, Last Night I Dreamed of Peace, the best-selling (in Viet Nam) diary of Dang Thuy Tram.

What was the Viet Nam War really like? It was not just the experience of bomber pilots carrying out their missions miles above their intended victims. And certainly it was not the experience of policy makers 10,000 miles away in Washington. Perhaps the best book on the combat experience by an American solider is Ron Kovic’s Born on the Forth of July. A Rumor of War by Philip Caputo also has its fans. Histories of the conflict also abound, as do fantasy films like Apocalypse Now.

What all of these books have in common is that they tell the story from the invader’s point of view. In a relatively poor country like Viet Nam, there are few writers and few publishing houses. This is why Tram’s diaries written from 1968-70, “under the gun,” in Quảng Ngãi province are so illuminating.

Quảng Ngãi province, which lies about half-way from Hanoi and Saigon, was a hotbed of support for the National Liberation Front, called the Viet Cong. It was the sight of numerous bombings and sprayings of Agent Orange, as well as sorties by U.S. infantry, Marines and helicopter gunships. Dr. Tran’s field hospital hid under the forest canopy while enemy soldiers on patrol came within a few feet of it. Quảng Ngãi province was also the sight of the My Lai massacre where soldiers of the Americal Division under Lt. William Calley murdered between 350 and 500 mainly women, children and old men.

The diary became public only in 2005. Within 18 months, it had sold nearly half a million copies in Viet Nam. Most books there have press runs of 5,000 copies. The Diaries have caught the imagination of a generation that never knew the war. Two-thirds of Viet Nam’s 90 million people were born after 1975, when South Viet Nam was finally liberated.

After Dr. Tran’s death at the hands of an American soldier in 1970, the Diaries had come into the possession of an intelligence officer, Fred Whitehurst who took them back to the U.S. Whitehurst later joined the FBI and became a well-known whistle-blower over the FBI’s investigation of the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. In 2005, he gave the Diaries to another veteran who was traveling to Hanoi. The Tran family was tracked down and the book was quickly published. The young doctor is now a national hero.

The Diaries reveal the innermost thoughts of a young woman’s insecurities, loves and crushes, and her desire to serve her people. Dr. Tran – known as Thuy (pronounced Twe) – often talks to herself and criticizes her failings and weaknesses: “Oh, Thuy! Are you pessimistic? Look around you, there are so many comrades, so many young men, who have sacrificed their youth for the revolution. They have fallen without ever finding happiness. Why do you think only of yourself?” (Dec. 21, 1968).

It struck me when I was reading the diary of this heroic young woman that she and I were nearly the same age. Born a world apart, our lives were so different, yet so similar in many ways. I, too, was in the army when her diary begins. Yet I was not there by choice, having been drafted in 1966. Thuy, on the other hand, had turned down a safe assignment in a Hanoi hospital when she graduated from physician training. She wanted to go when she would be most needed, in the war zone, where men and women her own age were suffering bullet wounds and dying. It was up to this young doctor to save them.

Thuy had to operate on wounded soldiers in nearly unimaginably primitive conditions. She often was without drugs that could save her patient’s life. Anesthetics were sometimes missing in critical operations. Through it all, Thuy seems to suffer as much as her patients.

In 1968, I was able to leave the Army when my term of servitude ended. But for Thuy, it was a life and death struggle with the invaders. Defeat meant death. Victory was the only road to a normal life. As Thuy prophetically said in 1968: “So many people have volunteered to sacrifice their whole lives for two words: Independence and Liberty. I, too, have sacrificed my life for that grandiose fulfillment.”

The Vietnamese people did reach “the promised land,” as Martin Luther King called it shortly before his death. But Thuy did not get there with them.

When I visited Viet Nam last December, I saw an independent country at peace. Everyone seemed healthy, well fed and well dressed. Women seem assertive and active in economic and social affairs. I’m not an expert on Viet Nam, but I think Thuy would be pleased with the progress made in spite of war, defoliation and lack of support from the outside world. The U.S. never made reparations for ravishing the country.

If Thuy had lived and could visit Venice today, I wonder what she would think. I’m sure she would disapprove of the selfishness of many young people who think only of themselves and their possessions.

What would she say to those of us who are trying to fend off the rich and powerful while helping the poor and homeless? What would she say to the many women around the world who are protesting against dictators and injustice? Perhaps she would say to us what she wrote to herself 43 years ago: “To live is to face the storms and not to cower before them. Stand up, then, oh, Thuy! Even when the rain and gale are rising, even when tears have flowed in torrents, keep your spirit high.”

Printed and ebook versions of Last Night I Dreamed of Peace: The Diary of Dang Thuy Tram are available from Powells Books<www.powells.com>. An audio book is available from www.audible.com.

A Vietnamese feature film, entitled Don’t Burn, based on the diaries has been released. A clip can be seen on YouTube at http://bit.ly/ihN49U.

 

WikiLeaks and Local Leaks

By Jim Smith

Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you mad.  ~Aldous Huxley

Silly Hillary. Did she really think the internet was a safe place for her deepest, darkest secrets? She’s not alone. The geniuses of the military end of the Empire also put its secrets – massacres in Iraq and Afghanstan – on the net. Private First Class Bradley Manning probably wasn’t the only one to read, and enjoy, other people’s mail. But he was the only one to download the dirty deeds and send them off to Julian Assange at Wikileaks.

For his efforts at letting us know what these fools are doing in our name Manning has been cast into a dank dungeon and will be lucky to survive with his head intact. When it comes to military justice, there isn’t any.

Once it became known that the word was out and that the New York Times and the UK Guardian were actually reprinting the Empire’s secrets, a meeting was called to discuss damage control. A motion by Dr. Stangelove to nuke the headquarters of Wikileaks was passed unanimously. However, it was soon discovered that Wikileaks only had a virtual headquarters, which was immune to thermonuclear attack. A second motion was passed to kill the messenger, Julian Assange. Changing the subject has always been a good defense. U.S. officials caught with their pants down are now threatening to charge Assange with espionage, even though he is Australian and committed no crimes in this country.

Meanwhile, Assange was quickly charged with ‘sex by surprise.” No matter that no one had ever heard of this crime, he was quickly brought to account in London. At this writing, his extradition to Sweden to stand accused of this heinous crime is still in doubt. The Americans are slobbering to take him into custody. If the past is any indication, waterboarding no doubt awaits.

According to Beachhead correspondent and investigative reporter Ron Ridenour (our man in Copenhagen), ‘the accusing women are: Social Democrat party organizer of Assange’s speaking tour last August, 31-year-old Sophia Wilén; and Anna Ardin, a 27-year-old anti-Cuba activist allied with US-paid so-called “dissidents” in Cuba. Ardin was, reportedly, kicked out of Cuba for subversive activities with right-wing groups there. Her brother purportedly worked for the Swedish Secret Service/SEPO, which works with the CIA.”

In spite of having Assange in a British prison, secret messages from the Empire continue to be released at countless internet sites around the world. The machinations of the Empire in the four corners of the world continue to be revealed. It should be no secret that the bloodthirsty king of the Saudis – a staunch U.S. ally – wants the Empire to invade Iran should come as no surprise. But to see it is print is delightful.

Who are these people running rampant over the globe? They are our public servants. And yes, we had a right to know what they are doing in our name. If Cablegate reveals anything, it is that our public servants have gone seriously off the track. Now that we know what they are doing, thanks to Wikileaks, they need to be reined in. If we allow them to continue on their merry way, we will have done a disservice to ourselves and to them. While we can’t say that their souls will burn in hell for their misdeeds, we can say that what they are doing is not in our interest, and they should resign forthwith, after apologies all around.

The Wikileaks disclosures and the official reaction to them are a classic battle between free speech and government secrecy. Lately, secrecy has been gaining ground with illegal spying and wiretapping of millions of people, the accumulation of “data” on all of us from the internet, credit reports, Facebook and countless other sources. Wikileaks should be welcome by everyone who values the Constitutional “guarantees” of free speech, a free press and privacy. A few governments, including Brazil, Russia, Ecuador, Venezuela and the United Nations, have applauded Wikileaks, but not Uncle Sam.

Unfortunately, the U.S. government is attempting to bluster through this debacle. The attacks on Bradley Manning and Jason Assange are misplaced. Russia’s president Dmitry Medvedev was correct in recommending the Noble Peace Prize for Assange. There should be ticker-tape parades in every American city for Assange and Manning. For they have stolen the fire of the gods and brought it to earth. Prometheus lives.

But will Assange and Manning’s deeds have a lasting effect among the less-than-heroic American populace? The Pentagon Papers, stolen and released in 1971 by Daniel Ellsberg and Tony Russo certainly helped bring some sanity to the U.S. cruel invasion and bombing of a third world country, Vietnam. Both the New York Times and the Washington Post printed extracts of the Pentagon Papers. Alaskan Senator Mike Gravel read it into the Congressional Record (where is a Senator or Representative today with the courage to do that?). Yet, by 1971 the Vietnam War had largely been decided in Vietnam’s favor by a combination of worldwide support, a powerful U.S. peace movement, an army that would no longer fight, and more importantly, by a determination of the Vietnamese to win freedom and independence in their land no matter the cost.

Closer to home, official secrets of Los Angeles city officials were disclosed in February, 2005, thanks to the investigative work of Beachhead reporter John Davis. The documents showed how city officials including Arturo Pena (now Venice deputy to Councilmember Bill Rosendahl) LAPD Capt. Bill Williams and officers Gerry Smedley and Theresa Skinner; Sandy Kievman (aide to Councilmember Cindy Miscikowski); city attorneys Mary Molidor, Gita Isagholian, Aaron Gross and Susan Wagner; mediator Gary De La Rosa and one Venice resident, Rick Feibusch, conspired to destroy the Grass Roots Venice Neighborhood Council (GRVNC). One of those, de La Rosa, was supposed to be a neutral arbitrator ruling on an election challenge, which he used to bring down the Council.

While none of the conspirators were fired, or even disciplined, for subverting democracy, the revelations did create a healthy skepticism among Venetians which exists to this day.

Likewise, the Wikileaks revelations should create a healthy skepticism about U.S. government pronouncements, which may or may not be the truth.

Because of aggressive efforts by government hackers to bring down Wikileaks websites, no web address can be considered permanent. To read the documents, and see the videos, on Iraq, Afghanistan and diplomatic cables, search the web for “Wikileaks” or “Cablegate.” To read L.A.’s secrets described above, go to: http://www.freevenice.org/Secrets/andemails.html

A Tale of Two Wars: Vietnam/Afghanistan

By Clay Claiborne

In the spirit of Mark Twain, “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it rhymes.”  I offer the following combined brief history of the Vietnam and Afghan Wars:

Although the War in [Vietnam|Afghanistan] was started by the previous occupant of the Whitehouse, President [Johnson|Obama] made it his own and greatly expanded it. There were problems from the beginning. The [Diem|Karzia] regime installed by the U.S. proved to be a very corrupt one that became increasingly problematic as it lost all support among the [Vietnamese|Afghan] people. On the other hand, the [Viet Cong|Taliban], having already succeeded in it’s struggle against [French|Russian] colonialism, proved ready for a long struggle against American imperialism as well. The [Vietnam|Afghanistan] War would prove to be the [second longest| longest] in our history.

Support for the [Vietnam|Afghanistan] War, already at an all time low, fell even lower after [Daniel Ellsberg|Julian Assange] released the [Pentagon Papers|WikiLeaks Documents] that revealed much that the government had kept hidden about the war.  By the time reports came out about U.S. soldiers in [Vietnam|Afghanistan] killing civilians and collecting [ears|fingers], most people were ready to bring the troops home.

Instead, the President expanded the war from [Vietnam|Afghanistan] into neighboring [Cambodia|Pakistan] with a series of ‘secret” [B52|drone] strikes and commanding General [William Westmoreland|David Petraeus] called for more troops to implement his strategy of [search and destroy|clear, hold & build] on the ground and still more civilians died and because of the special weapons used by the U.S. in the war, both our soldiers and the people of [Vietnam|Afghanistan] would suffer from cancer, birth defects and many other diseases caused by [Agent Orange|Depleted Uranium] for generations to come. By the time the U.S. pulled out of [Vietnam|Afghanistan], the number of young Americans to die in the war numbered over [58,000|1,445].

The first American soldier killed in the Vietnam War was Lt. Col. Pete Dewey on September 26, 1945. 58,000 Americans and millions of Vietnamese were to follow him in the next 30 years, but nine years into the war, fewer Americans had died in the Vietnam fighting than the 1,445 that have so far died in Afghanistan.

Dumping Sidebar: United Nations Declares Sanitation A Basic Human Right

Sanitation and safe and clean drinking water is a human right essential to the full enjoyment of life and all other human rights, the General Assembly declared July 28, voicing deep concern that 2.6 billion people, including the homeless in Venice, do not have access to basic sanitation and almost 900 million people worldwide do not have access to clean water.

The 192-member Assembly also called on United Nations Member States and international organizations to offer funding, technology and other resources to help poorer countries scale up their efforts to provide clean, accessible and affordable drinking water and sanitation for everyone.

The Assembly resolution received 122 votes in favour and zero votes against, while 41 countries abstained from voting, including the United States.

New “Pentagon Papers” Describe the Insanity of the Afghan War

EDITORIAL: Time To Pull Out

About 75,000 documents describing a war without a purpose in Afghanistan have been “liberated” from military computers with another 15,000 to come.

The documents describe, among other things, U.S. soldiers randomly shooting Afghan civilians and Pakistan officials funneling U.S. funds to the Taliban. About 180 documents say the U.S. military believes Pakistan’s spy agency, ISI (Inter-Services Intelligence), has given support and guidance to the Taliban.

The documents appeared on the website WikiLeaks, which protects the source of submitted material. However, the U.S. Army has arrested Army Specialist Bradley Manning, who apparently tapped into the military’s computers and copied the material on CDs.

The original Pentagon Papers exposing the war in Vietnam were made public by Daniel Ellsberg and Anthony Russo. U.S. Senator Mike Gravel entered 4,100 pages into the Congressional Record, which insured they would be public documents. Then President Richard Nixon authorized a break-in of the office of Ellsberg’s psychiatrist. This revelation contributed to Nixon’s downfall.

Our own Representative Jane Harman took a dim view of the public learning the real story of the war in Afghanistan saying, “Someone inadvertently or on purpose gave the Taliban its new ‘enemies’ list.” But the real danger, as she must know, is that the whole military adventure has been exposed. Harman also voted, July 27, to send more troops to Afghanistan.

One item that will not be found in the 90,000 documents is a justification for the war and resulting deaths and destruction (1,209 U.S. deaths and at least 20 times as many Afghan civilians). It is time for the U.S. to immediately withdraw from this quagmire. It is a meaningless war, as were those in Vietnam, Panama, Grenada and Iraq. It was unnecessary from the beginning.

The Taliban were never accused of being involved in the attack on the World Trade Center in New York City on Sept. 11, 2001. In fact, according to CBS News, the Taliban told the U.S. that they would turn over Bin Laden if it would provide evidence linking him to the attack. Had the Bush administration complied, there would have been no invasion or subsequent war in Afghanistan, which is now the longest in this nation’s history.

An immediate U.S. pullout would be a threat to the government of Hamid Karzai, a former Union Oil executive, whose regime, on a good day, controls the capital and outskirts of Kabul. However, the United States has no right or business in deciding who the Afghans have in their government. It is almost a cliché to say that the U.S. cannot be the world’s policeman.

The U.S. should also end the occupation of Iraq for the same reasons. It should withdraw troops from around the world, including Columbia, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea and other bases.

The billions of dollars used on these military adventures could be better spent reviving the economy here at home.

We owe Brandon Manning and WikiLeaks a debt of gratitude for reminding us once again of the futility of war.

–The Beachhead Collective