I've received a few emails and phone calls regarding yesterday's blog post. Comments have ranged from 'shame on you, where's your compassion?' to 'what you said, that's the truth'.

Now the difference here with me, as opposed to those national celebrity types, is that I don't give a hoot if you agree with me or not. If you do, swell. If you don't, swell.

In my book, and that's what counts to me, as long as I tell the truth then I'm doing the right thing. The truth may not be pretty, the truth may not be pleasant, truth is what it is.

New Orleans, and all the other areas of the USA that were beat down by the hurricanes of last year, those places need to be rebuilt. Those people who had their whole lives destroyed and all of their possessions ripped from them, those folks need help. They are US citizens, taxpayers, childen of the one God, and they deserve to be aided and assisted by us, we the people, the government of the USA.

Do you realize that we--the USA--are spending billions, that's right, billions of dollars per month bombing the hell out of Iraq and Afghanistan?

According to the Congressional Research Service, in 2004 we spent $5.5 billion per month on military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. And in 2005, we spent $7.5 billion per month. And so far in 2006, we're spending $9.5 billion per month.

Add it up, I can't, my brain can't grasp spending that kind of money on death and destruction.

If the US can spend that kind of money to kill, why can't it spend that kind of money to rebuild the towns and lives of those folks in the hurricane ravaged areas?

If the US can spend that kind of money to kill overseas, why can't they use the funds instead to provide jobs, healthcare, decent educations, etc.for our citizens?

And don't, whatever you do, do not tell me that we're spending billions and billions in Iraq and Afghanistan to preserve democracy in the US because I'll laugh so hard at you and your ignorance that I'll end up wetting my pants.

Look at the money, no matter where it's coming from, that's going to be spent on a monument to the dead of 9/11.

What better monument to those who have died than to help those who are alive.

Instead of getting our panties in a twist over the "sacred ground"/hole in the ground where the twin towers once stood, let's put that money and that energy into helping those who are still alive and who are in need. Let's stop worshiping the dead and do something for the living.


Tawny
tawnyford@webtv.net

Yesterday, while watching one of the many cable news network talk shows, I heard one of the hosts--Tim Russert, maybe, middleaged white man with dark hair (yeah, like that really narrowed it down!)--getting after the mayor of New Orleans, Ray Nagin, regarding some remarks he'd made a few days earlier.

Now here's where you had better sit yourself down and get a grip because odds are good I'm going to offend the hell out of some folks with what I'm saying next.

Mayor Nagin had referred to the site of the 9/11 bombing in New York as a "hole in the ground". I believe it was in the context of New Orleans was a city that needed to be rebuilt and that site in New York was a hole in the ground, but don't quote me. Google it for yourself.

So the uproar was Nagin saying it was a hole in the ground, while the official term appears to be "sacred ground".

Nagin took a whole lot of heat for his remark. And, in fact, treaded water when called on it by the host of yesterday's show.

What gets me is this: Why is that spot of ground in New York city considered sacred ground? Because people died there? Is that it?

Then out in Oklahoma where that bombing took place, that's sacred ground too, right? And in Colorado, at Columbine high school, that's sacred ground, right? And in Philadelphia, where the government bombed the hell out of MOVE, that's sacred ground, right?

And in Lebanon, where the Israelis have bombed the shit out of te area and hundreds have died. And in Iraq, from one end of the country to the other, sacred ground.

And New Orleans, and all of the other cities and towns that were hit by the hurricans last year and their citizens died, sacred ground.

And every other spot of ground on this entire earth, all of it must be sacred ground because in all of the gazillion years that the earth has been populated odds are good that someone(s) died on every square inch of the planet.

It's a damn shame that what happened on 9/11 happened. Undeniably.

But that spot of land is no more sacred than any other spot of land on this earth.

And that's a fact.


Tawny
tawnfyord@webtv.net

Okay, gear heads, who's coming to the metro Detroit area this week for the Woodward Dream Cruise? (www.woodwarddreamcruise.com)

While the Dream Cruise is officially this coming Saturday, the 19th, from 9a to 9p, fact is, cruisers began arriving this past weekend.

If you don't know what the Cruise is, check out the website. And if you do know, check it out anyway, there's always something else to learn about it.

In a nutshell, the Woodward Dream Cruise was this little local car event conceived to raise money for a charity. It became so popular with the baby boomers and car afficionados that, well, now it's this huge corporate sponsored event that draws a gazllion people from all over the world.

Perhaps I'll see you there.

Tawny

I'm betting that unless you have a wife or a live-in girlfriend you never get your hands on a copy of Woman's World. I never buy it, but I like to thumb through it while I'm waiting in the check-out line at the grocery store. This past week it got me--there was an article 'Best-ever s'mores! Make 'em in your microwave!'--and I tossed the magazine onto the conveyor belt. If there's one thing I love it's s'mores!

Since that issue is mine, I own it now, I started looking through the whole thing, page by page, and found some good stuff to share with you:
http://space.about.com/library/weekly/biskymaps.htm
Download a free sky map at this site to help you locate stars and constellations.


www.goalsetting1.com
People worldwide post their goals and track them online.

www.couponcabin.com
www.couponmountain.com
Every Moday online sites like the two above ome out with new coupons + promotions which can save you up to 50% at online stores.
------

Contests-Enter to try and win:

www.foxhome.com/ww
An HDTV.

www.collegebedlofts.com/ww.html
A loft bed.

www.vitabath.com
A vitabath gift basket.

www.clubmom.com
A Dodge Durango.

www.mortongirlsweepstakes.com
$10,00 grand prize.
----

www.K7.net
You'll get your own phone number that folks can use to leave you voicemails or send you faxes, and they get automatically emailed to you for free.

www.telefip.com
Send an email from your computer to any cellphone for free.

www.gotvoice.com
Save important voicemail to email and share it with family + friends for
free.

www.freeconference.com
You can create a free conference call for 24 of your friends + loved ones. You pay only what your phone company charges for the call.

800-FREE-411
800-411-METRO
Get free directory assistance from any phone.

If you're interested in the recipes, well, you're going to have to buy your own copy!


hugs, Tawny

I know I've suggested, at least a few times, that you should read Juan Cole's blog. In case you've been too busy, or too lazy, or whatever......here's his entry from yesterday. It comes to you fom the pages of the Metro Times (www.metrotimes.com).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Perilous times

Lebanon’s strife and the danger to U.S. forces in Iraq

by Juan Cole
8/9/2006

Editor's note: While many pundits paint Middle Eastern conflicts in broad strokes, University of Michigan history professor Juan Cole, on his blog Informed Comment, is more of a pointillist, offering analysis steeped in detail. This piece, which examines how the fighting in Lebanon could affect the U.S. position in Iraq, is a prime example of the importance he places on nuances that others often overlook.

The U.S. punditocracy and ruling elite is fixated on Hizbullah as a "terrorist group" even though the organization hasn't engaged in international terror against American civilians in many years. What they forget about Hizbullah is that it is also a Shiite religious party, and that that is how it is perceived for the most part by Iraqi Shiites. Some 45 percent of Lebanese are probably Shiites.

The other thing to remember is that the United States is now a Shiite power in part, insofar as it semi-rules a Shiite-majority country, Iraq.

The Associated Press last week carried the story that Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani [the most senior Shia cleric in Iraq] has demanded an immediate cease-fire in Israel's war on Lebanon, in the wake of the Qana massacre:

"Islamic nations will not forgive the entities that hinder a cease-fire," al-Sistani said in a clear reference to the United States.

"It is not possible to stand helpless in front of this Israeli aggression on Lebanon,'' he added. "If an immediate cease-fire in this Israeli aggression is not imposed, dire consequences will befall the region.''

Sistani had earlier condemned Israeli air raids on Lebanon but had confined himself to ordering the Iraqi Shiite religious establishment to provide aid to victims of the war in Lebanon.

Sistani's statements of early Monday morning (which are not yet reflected at his Web site in Arabic) go substantially beyond his earlier statement.

Several questions arise: 1) Why is Sistani speaking like this? 2) What can he do about it all? and 3) What are the possible consequences if he turns anti-American in practice, not just in rhetoric, as in the past?

Sistani is taking such a hard line on this issue not only because he feels strongly about it (his fatwa against the Jenin operation of 2002 was vehement) but also because he is in danger of being outflanked by Muqtada al-Sadr. Sadr's Mahdi Army is said to be "boiling" over the Israeli war on Hizbullah, since, after all, the Sadrists are also fundamentalist Shiites and they identify with the Lebanese Hizbullah. There have already been big demonstrations in Baghdad against the Israeli attacks, to which Sadrists flocked but probably also other Shiites.

Sistani cannot allow Muqtada to monopolize this issue, or the young cleric's legitimacy will grow among the angry Shiite masses at the expense of Sistani's.

Sistani is not linked to Hizbullah, which is strongly Khomeinist in orientation. Sistani largely rejects Khomeinism [government ruled by Islamic clerics]. He told an Iraqi acquaintance of mine, "Even if I must be wiped out, I will not allow Iraq to repeat the Iranian experience." When Sistani had his heart problems in summer 2004, he flew to London via Beirut. He stopped in Beirut for several hours, and Nabih Berri came out to the airport to consult with him. Berri is the speaker of the Lebanese parliament and the leader of the Amal Party. Amal is the party of the secularizing, moderate Lebanese Shiites. It was more militant in the 1980s but it mellowed.

So Sistani's political ties in Lebanon go to Amal much more than to Hizbullah. Sistani has many followers or "emulators" (muqallidun) among the Lebanese Shiites, though the hardcore Hizbullahis tend to follow Supreme Jurisprudent Ali Khamenei of Iran instead. Some Lebanese Shiites follow the Lebanese grand ayatollah, Husain Fadlullah.

Note that Amal is allied with Hizbullah in parliament, and some Amal fighters have been killed in clashes with Israelis in the deep south. Amal abandoned its paramilitary during the 1990s, but seems to have kept some units active down near the Israeli border.

So Berri would have been in a position to implore Sistani to intervene. Sistani is hoping for something like a moderate Amal party to coalesce in Iraq and would want to help Berri any way he could.

Sistani has issued a warning to the United States. He wants Bush to intervene to arrange a cease-fire, i.e. the cessation of Israeli air raids on Lebanon in general.

What could he do if he were ignored? Sistani could call massive anti-U.S. and anti-Israel demonstrations. Given Iraq's profound political instability, this development could be extremely dangerous. U.S. troops in Baghdad and elsewhere are planning offensives against Shiite paramilitary groups, so tensions are likely to rise in the Shiite areas anyway. But big demonstrations could easily boil over into actual attacks on U.S. and British troops. Both depend heavily on fuel that is transported through the Shiite south. Were the Shiites actively to turn on the United States for its wholehearted support of continued Israeli air raids, the U.S. military could be cut off from fuel and supplies. The British only have around 8,000 troops in Iraq, and they would be in profound danger if Iraq's Shiites became militantly anti-occupation.

Since the Israeli treatment of Arabs is an issue on which Sunnis and Shiites agree, there is also a possibility that Sistani could finally get some respect from the Sunni community if he led such a campaign. That development would be more dangerous to the continued U.S. military presence in Iraq than any other I can think of.

The United States is already not winning against a Sunni Arab insurgency, backed by around 5 million Iraqis. If 16 million Shiites turned on the United States because of its wholehearted support for Israel's actions in Lebanon, the U.S. military mission in Iraq could quickly become completely and urgently untenable. In this case, the British troops in particular would be lucky to escape the country with their lives.

Sistani does not issue threats lightly, and he has repeatedly shown a willingness to back them up with action. Bush and U.S. ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad will ignore him to their peril.

Other views

If anyone wonders why the UN has rendered itself worse than irrelevant in the Arab-Israeli conflict, all he or she need do is read UN Secretary General Kofi Annan's July 20 statement. Annan goes to great pains to suggest equal fault and moral equivalence between the rockets of Hezbollah and Hamas that specifically target innocent civilians and the self-defense efforts by Israel, which tries desperately, though not always successfully, to avoid causing civilian casualties. In his statement, Annan never condemns, or even mentions, terrorism, which is a root cause and precipitator of the conflict. ... Annan knows better than to suggest a moral equivalence. He is fully aware of the tactic employed by terrorists of launching their rockets from, and hiding behind, civilian shields, so as to make democracies have to kill some civilians to get at the terrorists.

... If a space alien from a distant planet were to land at the UN, he would come away with the impression that Israel is not only the sole offender in the Middle East, but the worst offender in the entire world. He would single out Israel for condemnation and exclude it from membership on many UN bodies, on which Syria, Lebanon and Iran serve in positions of honor.

—Alan M. Dershowitz,,Harvard Law School professor, defense attorney and author, JewishWorldReview.com

It is inarguable that Israel has a right to defend itself against attacks on its citizens, but it is inhumane and counterproductive to punish civilian populations in the illogical hope that somehow they will blame Hamas and Hezbollah for provoking the devastating response. The result instead has been that broad Arab and worldwide support has been rallied for these groups, while condemnation of both Israel and the United States has intensified.

—Jimmy Carter,former U.S. president,The Washington Post op-ed

Before he launched his democracy project, Bush was warned that free elections would advance the fortunes of Islamic militants. At his insistence, the elections were held. Results:

In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood won 60 percent of the seats it contested. Hezbollah swept south Lebanon. Hamas recorded a stunning victory on the West Bank and Gaza. These were the freest and fairest elections ever held in those nations. But Bush refused to engage the winners.

The painful truth is that, in the Middle East, democracy will produce, as it does in the West, two dominant parties. One will be a state party, and the other is going to be a party rooted in the Islamic faith.

Time to recognize reality — and stop isolating America.

—Pat Buchanan,syndicated conservative newspaper columnist, former Nixon speechwriter

This could produce a thousand new bin Ladens. The level of anger and frustration in the Arab world is extremely dangerous. It could easily turn toward the United States, which is blindly supporting Israel.

—Diaa Rashwan,a leading expert on militants at the Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies in Cairo, quoted in Newsday

The Israeli government's brutal retaliation against Palestinian civilians constitutes a form of collective punishment specifically prohibited by several international treaties and regulations. As Marjorie Cohn, president-elect of the National Lawyers Guild and U.S. representative to the executive committee of the American Association of Jurists, has indicated, collective punishment violates Article 50 of the Hague Regulations and is also prohibited by the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Is there a way out of this present escalation of violence that threatens to engulf the whole Middle East? There is, but it requires a balanced outside intervention that is presently lacking, particularly by the U.S., which has maintained its unwavering support for the actions carried out by the Israeli government.

Peace now is as elusive as ever in the Middle East. And it will continue to be so as long as innocent civilians, on both sides, are made to be pawns in a larger political game.

—Dr. César Chelal,international public-health consultant who writes extensively on public health and human-rights issues, The Seattle Times

What is most extraordinary in this story is that the Israelis, although the best informed in their region, should have made the same error in Lebanon as the Americans in Iraq: underestimating the terrorist tactics of their adversaries and planning to replace a bad government with men to their liking, thanks to handy opponents.

Especially, like the Americans at the time of the war in Iraq, they didn't bother with the Lebanese because they thought that they, out of fear of Hezbollah and respect for strength, would want only to unite with a victorious Israel.

Some Israelis fear today, rightly, that Hezbollah will appear to emerge victorious from no matter what international arrangement. You would have to be blind, in fact, not to recognize that a certain Hezbollah victory is already gained and that the threat today is the tipping over of the entire moderate Arab world: The Sunni rallying to the Shiite Hezbollah fight heralds the promotion of its Iranian sponsor to the status of a great regional power.

—Jean Daniel,co-founder and director of the Nouvel Observateur, a Paris-based newsweekly that covers political, business and economic issues

It's an amazing figure: Almost 15,000 shells were fired by the Israeli armed forces in the last six weeks. Not on Lebanon, but in the Gaza strip. The number of Palestinians killed in that period is close to 300. No wonder Palestinian leaders are screaming for a halt to the "aggression" and feeling forgotten by the world as the war in Lebanon keeps moving from one "worst attack thus far" to yet another even worse assault.

But the Palestinians will have one thing to celebrate as the Lebanon war nears its final act of violence. On the diplomatic front, they might be the winners of this war, or, at least, the main beneficiary. And this achievement, more than many others, reflects Israel's failure to win the propaganda battle with its enemies.

—Shmuel Rosnerchief U.S. correspondent for the Israeli paper Haaretz, Slate

Hizbullah is proving to be something altogether new, an Arab guerrilla army with sophisticated weaponry and remarkable discipline. Its soldiers have the jihadist rhetoric of fighting to the death, but wear body armor and use satcoms to coordinate their attacks. Their tactics may be from Che, but their arms are from Iran, and not just AK-47s and RPGs. They've reportedly destroyed three of Israel's advanced Merkava tanks with wire-guided missiles and powerful mines, crippled an Israeli warship with a surface-to-sea missile, sent up drones on reconnaissance missions, implanted listening devices along the border and set up their ambushes using night-vision goggles.

Newsweek has learned from a source briefed in recent weeks by Israel's top leaders and military brass that Hizbullah even managed to eavesdrop successfully on Israel's military communications as its Lebanese incursion began.

—Kevin Peraino, Babak Dehghanpisheh and Christopher Dickey, staff writers in Newsweek

The invasion itself is a serious breach of international law, and major war crimes are being committed as it proceeds. There is no legal justification.

The "moral justification" is supposed to be that capturing soldiers in a cross-border raid, and killing others, is an outrageous crime. We know, for certain, that Israel, the United States and other Western governments, as well as the mainstream of articulate Western opinion, do not believe a word of that. Sufficient evidence is their tolerance for many years of U.S.-backed Israeli crimes in Lebanon, including four invasions before this one, occupation in violation of Security Council orders for 22 years, and regular killings and abductions

To mention just one question that every journal should be answering: When did [Hezbollah leader Sheikh Hassan] Nasrallah assume a leadership role? Answer: When the Rabin government escalated its crimes in Lebanon, murdering Sheikh Abbas Mussawi and his wife and child with missiles fired from a U.S. helicopter. Nasrallah was chosen as his successor. Only one of innumerable cases. There is, after all, a good reason why last February, 70 percent of Lebanese called for the capture of Israeli soldiers for prisoner exchange

—Noam ChomskyMIT linguistics professors and leftist intellectual, interview with Global Interfaith Peace

Send comments to letters@metrotimes.com. Juan Cole’s blog, Informed Comment, can be found at juancole.com.

I've been quiet for a little over a week, no new posts at all. The horrendously hot weather, the wars, just too much going on for me to make sense of anything.

But today I found this in my email mail box from Michael Moore and I want to share it with you.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Friends,

Let the resounding defeat of Senator Joe Lieberman send a cold shiver down the spine of every Democrat who supported the invasion of Iraq and who continues to support, in any way, this senseless, immoral, unwinnable war. Make no mistake about it: We, the majority of Americans, want this war ended -- and we will actively work to defeat each and every one of you who does not support an immediate end to this war.

Nearly every Democrat set to run for president in 2008 is responsible for this war. They voted for it or they supported it. That single, stupid decision has cost us 2,592 American lives and tens of thousands of Iraqi lives. Lieberman and Company made a colossal mistake -- and we are going to make sure they pay for that mistake. Payback time started last night.

I realize that there are those like Kerry and Edwards who have now changed their position and are strongly anti-war. Perhaps that switch will be enough for some to support them. For others, like me -- while I'm glad they've seen the light -- their massive error in judgment is, sadly, proof that they are not fit for the job. They sided with Bush, and for that, they may never enter the promised land.

To Hillary, our first best hope for a woman to become president, I cannot for the life of me figure out why you continue to support Bush and his war. I'm sure someone has advised you that a woman can't be elected unless she proves she can kick ass just as crazy as any man. I'm here to tell you that you will never make it through the Democratic primaries unless you start now by strongly opposing the war. It is your only hope. You and Joe have been Bush's biggest Democratic supporters of the war. Last night's voter revolt took place just a few miles from your home in Chappaqua. Did you hear the noise? Can you read the writing on the wall?

To every Democratic Senator and Congressman who continues to back Bush's War, allow me to inform you that your days in elective office are now numbered. Myself and tens of millions of citizens are going to work hard to actively remove you from any position of power.

If you don't believe us, give Joe a call.

Yours,
Michael Moore
mmflint@aol.com
www.michaelmoore.com

P.S. Republicans -- sorry to leave you out of this letter. It's just that our side has a little housecleaning to do. We'll take care of you this November.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

hugs, Tawny