Soldiers from the Company in That "Collateral Damage" Video Speak Up

from Antiwar.com:

AN OPEN LETTER OF RECONCILIATION & RESPONSIBILITY TO THE IRAQI PEOPLE

From Current and Former Members of the U.S. Military

Peace be with you.

To all of those who were injured or lost loved ones during the July 2007 Baghdad shootings depicted in the “Collateral Murder” Wikileaks video:

We write to you, your family, and your community with awareness that our words and actions can never restore your losses.

We are both soldiers who occupied your neighborhood for 14 months. Ethan McCord pulled your daughter and son from the van, and when doing so, saw the faces of his own children back home. Josh Stieber was in the same company but was not there that day, though he contributed to the your pain, and the pain of your community on many other occasions.

There is no bringing back all that was lost. What we seek is to learn from our mistakes and do everything we can to tell others of our experiences and how the people of the United States need to realize what have done and are doing to you and the people of your country. We humbly ask you what we can do to begin to repair the damage we caused.

We have been speaking to whoever will listen, telling them that what was shown in the Wikileaks video only begins to depict the suffering we have created. From our own experiences, and the experiences of other veterans we have talked to, we know that the acts depicted in this video are everyday occurrences of this war: this is the nature of how U.S.-led wars are carried out in this region.

We acknowledge our part in the deaths and injuries of your loved ones as we tell Americans what we were trained to do and carried out in the name of “god and country”. The soldier in video said that your husband shouldn’t have brought your children to battle, but we are acknowledging our responsibility for bringing the battle to your neighborhood, and to your family. We did unto you what we would not want done to us.

More and more Americans are taking responsibility for what was done in our name. Though we have acted with cold hearts far too many times, we have not forgotten our actions towards you. Our heavy hearts still hold hope that we can restore inside our country the acknowledgment of your humanity, that we were taught to deny.

Our government may ignore you, concerned more with its public image. It has also ignored many veterans who have returned physically injured or mentally troubled by what they saw and did in your country. But the time is long overdue that we say that the value of our nation’s leaders no longer represent us. Our secretary of defense may say the U.S. won’t lose its reputation over this, but we stand and say that our reputation’s importance pales in comparison to our common humanity.

With such pain, friendship might be too much to ask. Please accept our apology, our sorrow, our care, and our dedication to change from the inside out. We are doing what we can to speak out against the wars and military policies responsible for what happened to you and your loved ones. Our hearts are open to hearing how we can take any steps to support you through the pain that we have caused.

Solemnly and Sincerely,
Josh Stieber, former specialist, U.S. Army
Ethan McCord, former specialist, U.S. Army

The soldiers are asking Americans to co-sign the letter on this website.

and here's a bit more information, from one of the comments:

Barbara Wien:
To those of you who feel their apology is too little, too late, please don't misjudge these soldiers. One of them defied and tried to stop the killing of Iraqi civilians many times while he was deployed in Baghdad. He was punished, put in the Brigg, and more. He only recently returned. That's why he was not able to speak out sooner. I know because he is now my student in my Peace Education class. He was only 17 yrs. old when he volunteered, in the aftermath of the attack on the Pentagon. He was horrified by what his commanders were making the troops do in Iraq. You can't imagine their own personal hell.

The Sad Story of Perhaps the Most Valuable Whistleblower of All Time, Bradley Birkenfeld, Who Started his Prison Sentence...

...just as the banker (who's the head of the US branch of the Swiss bank on which the whistle was blown) was teeing off in a foursome playing golf with the President.

Apparently, I've been out of the loop. By the classic internet game of "following the links" I stumbled into this story, which appears to be extremely important and sadly indicative of where this country is at and where it is going.

If you combine this story with that of Governor Don Siegelman (also in jail) and remember all Rove's Justice Department Attorneys who Obama has retained (Rove fired all the honest ones who wouldn't unfairly prosecute Democrats running for office) it make a very ugly picture of the US government today...

...oh, and one more tidbit...Where does Eric Holder, the Attorney General of the US, come down on all this? He recused himself—since he once worked on a case as a lawyer for UBS, the corrupt Swiss bank at the center of this story.

I got started on this winding road from this post at Cryptogon:

The Game That Goes On and On: a Swiss Bank, a President, and the Permanent Government

April 18th, 2010

Flashback: Backbone of Complex Networks of Corporations: The Flow of Control

Via: Smirking Chimp:

Last August, the presidential press corps followed Barack Obama and his family to Martha’s Vineyard for their brief vacation. The coverage focused on summery fare–a visit to an ice cream parlor, the books the president had brought along. Nearly everyone mentioned his few rounds of golf, including his swing, and the enthusiasm of onlookers. What caught my eye, though, was the makeup of his foursome. The president was joined by an old friend from Chicago; a young aide; and Robert Wolf, Chairman and CEO, UBS Group Americas. In a decidedly incurious piece, a New York Times reporter made light of Wolf’s presence:

“The president has told friends that to truly relax he prefers golfing with young aides…But he departed from that pattern Monday when he invited a top campaign contributor, Robert Wolf, president of UBS Investment Bank, to join him for 18 holes. Call it donor maintenance.”

Wolf, however, is hardly–as the Times suggested– just another donor. For one thing, he is a leading figure in an industry that almost brought down the entire financial system–and then was the recipient of astonishing government largesse. UBS, along with other banks, benefited directly from the backdoor bailout of the insurance giant AIG.

But UBS stands alone in one rather formidable respect–it was the defendant in the largest offshore tax evasion case in U.S. history, accused of helping wealthy Americans hide their income in secret offshore accounts. To settle a massive investigation, UBS forked over $780 million to the US treasury. This settlement came shortly before Wolf rounded out Obama’s golfing party. Given this rather problematical situation, why then would the President choose UBS’s Wolf of all people for this honor?

Wolf declined a request for an interview about his relationship with the President, so it was not possible to pose that question to him. This hardly matters, though, for the story goes far beyond Wolf and UBS. It involves Republicans as well as Democrats, the Bush Administration as well as Obama’s. More importantly, behind the trivialized golf outing on Martha’s Vineyard, lie the interests that increasingly set the course for every administration. And that now game the system so well that the rest of us–wherever we live in the world–are kept fighting for the scraps.

When most people criticize those aspects of government that seem most impervious to the democratic process, they cite the permanency and perceived self-interest of the mandarins of the Washington bureaucracy. But when it comes to real power, an ability to come out ahead no matter which party is in power, it’s hard to top certain financial institutions.

UBS is very much a part of that permanent government.

Research Credit: dagobaz

1. anothershamus Says:
   April 18th, 2010 at 1:48 am

   Democracy Now had an interview with the whistle blower that told the gov. about the techniques of UBS hiding income overseas. The whistle blower is now in federal prison. The architects of the tax dodge are playing golf with Obama.

   http://www.democracynow.org/2010/4/16/ubs

   A.Shamus

Along with that link, here are two more Democracy Now transcripts that tell the quite depressing and yet horribly revealing tale of Bradley Birkenfeld, whistleblower who enabled the US to reclaim billions in back taxes and is currently serving 40 months in jail on false charges for his trouble.

http://www.democracynow.org/2010/1/7/why_is_the_whistleblower_who_exposed

http://www.democracynow.org/2010/4/15/ubs

His tale, coincidentally, involved revealing to any US authority who would listen (and several wouldn't) the existence and mechanism behind thousands of secret Swiss bank accounts, used by US multimillionaires and billionaires, politicians, judges, whoever is rich and powerful in the US. No wonder he's in jail. . . .

And the holders of those secret accounts? All paid fines, all are free, and all the names are kept secret. Watch whistleblowers everywhere get the hint and never report anything again.

The Sad Truth about Massacres these days

The really really sad part of this is that this author is wrong about one vital point. See if you can find it.

From an email from ANSWER SF Alerts:

One drop in a sea of blood

The statement below was authored by Michael Prysner, an Iraq war veteran and co-founder of March Forward!, an affiliate of the ANSWER Coalition.

Dear STEVE,


Click here to see the video

The harrowing Apache footage released by WikiLeaks gives us a stomach-turning glimpse of war. Seventeen minutes of cold-blooded massacre in a war of more than seven years. A brief clip of one Apache video; a quick look at one part of one mission. Hundreds of those missions take place every day.

The video came to light thanks to military whistleblowers who provided it to WikiLeaks together with supporting documents. Imagine if we had access to all such videos, the things we would see. Imagine all the Iraqis killed who have no one to uncover the truth about their deaths. Had the death of two Reuters news staffers not generated interest in this video, then the destruction of three families by hellfire missiles fired into an apartment building with no provocation, in a separate engagement also featured in the video, would have never been made public.

This massacre is a drop in a sea of blood. Many other such “incidents” will never be known.

Officers claimed there was “no question” that the pilots were responding to enemy fire; the video shows there is no question that they were not responding to enemy fire. They said that they had “no idea” how the journalists were killed; the video shows that they know very well how those journalists were killed. They were gunned down standing in a crowd of unarmed people.

After the slaughter of that group, the pilots beg for permission to kill the innocent passers-by who had come to the aid of one of the wounded, like any of us would have done if we saw our neighbor dying on the ground as we drove down the street. They kill everyone trying to help the dying journalist, and critically wound two children seen sitting in the front seat.

We see a group of unarmed men mowed down by a machine gun designed to destroy armored vehicles. We see a vanload of good Samaritans obliterated for trying to help a dying victim. We see all this with the soundtrack of the pilots mocking the dead, congratulating each other and laughing about the massacre.

No wonder the U.S. military goes to such great lengths to keep such videos from us. They want us to see Iraq and Afghanistan through their lens, through their embedded reporters, filtered by censorship and restrictions. They know that, once the people of this country see the extreme racism and brutality behind these occupations, they will be repulsed by what their tax dollars are paying for.

The military brass and the White House politicians have tried to justify this senseless atrocity. “Cut the pilots some slack. This was in Baghdad. This was a battle zone”—that’s been their line. The pilots had been indoctrinated with the same colonial mentality. “That’s what they get for bringing their kids into battle,” one pilot says.

The father driving that van was not “bringing his kids into battle.” He was bringing them to school, driving down the street where they live. But the U.S. occupation has made all of Iraq a battle zone. To those pilots, to their commanders over the radio and to the generals in the Pentagon, every single person in Baghdad and in Iraq is “fair game.”

The pilots joked about the people they killed, laughed about U.S. military vehicles running over dead bodies, knowing that their commanders were listening and that they were being recorded. They were not acting out of character. This is the culture of the occupation. This is how these wars are being conducted.

Having seen this, one cannot honestly believe that these atrocities are committed day in and day out for the liberation of the Iraqi people.

The Pentagon’s talking heads and media lackeys are hard at work putting their spin on this story. It’s time to tell the truth. For more than seven years, the U.S. has unleashed criminal, unprovoked aggression against the people of Iraq, and they have been doing the same thing in Afghanistan for more than eight years.

The U.S. military presence in Iraq is a colonial occupation force. The only way forward is a complete, immediate and unconditional withdrawal of all U.S. forces from Iraq and Afghanistan. This government will not do that unless all of us who are outraged by these criminal acts stand up and demand it.

Michael Prysner
Iraq war veteran and co-founder of March Forward

Did you catch the error?

He said:

No wonder the U.S. military goes to such great lengths to keep such videos from us. They want us to see Iraq and Afghanistan through their lens, through their embedded reporters, filtered by censorship and restrictions. They know that, once the people of this country see the extreme racism and brutality behind these occupations, they will be repulsed by what their tax dollars are paying for.

Now, anyone who follows the news closely will realize that the extreme racism and brutaity behind these occupations have been on display for the whole world to see, including the US public, and what has been the official result? No One Cares!

The reaction seems to be either jingoistic bloodthirsty enthusiasm from those who think it's great, or dejected withdrawal and a feeling of helplessness from those who are replused by it and realise they are powerless to effect it. But either way, it turns out the military has nothing to fear!

The prevailing opinion allowed into the mainstream media are those who either see it as an abberation by a few "bad apples" or those that support it. The rest of us are usually represented by either no voice in the official discussion at all, or else officially consigned to the "don't count" off-the-wall extremist looney bin, which is the permanent home of Dennis Kucinich, Cindy Sheehan, Noam Chomsky, and anyone else who dares to actually talk rationally about reality.

A little biographical note about Eric Holder

Eric Holder...honest now, did you ever hear of him before he was nominated to be Attorney General of the United States? I knew nothing of him whatsoever.

For your consideration: two articles via Cryptogon—

First, a story from this week:

Courthouse News:

Hostages Say Chiquita Funded Death Squads

By BARBARA LEONARD
(CN) - Three U.S. citizens were held hostage by a Colombian death squad for 5 years, and one was murdered, while Chiquita Brands International gave the terrorists weapons and millions of dollars in "protection payments," the former hostages and their families claim in Tampa Federal Court.
Former hostages of the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC) say Chiquita owes them treble damages under the U.S. Anti-Terrorism Act, because the New Jersey-based company paid FARC up to $200,000 a year for 10 years.
In a March 2007 plea agreement, Chiquita admitted it had paid $25 million and funded the Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia (AUC) - a right-wing, anti-labor death squad - and other terrorist groups, according to the eight plaintiffs' 82-page complaint.
The FARC and the AUC fought for control of land and lucrative cocaine crops for years, through open war, death squads and terror.
A February 2009 report from the Special Litigation Committee of the Chiquita board of directors found that the company began paying FARC "protection money" in the late 1980s.
In 2003 the FARC shot down a plane carrying Keith Stansell, Marc Gosalves, Thomas Howes and Thomas Janis, who were conducting a civilian counternarcotics surveillance mission for their employer, Northrup Grumman.
The plane's five passengers all survived the crash, but FARC members shot to death the U.S. citizen pilot, Janis, and the Colombian host-nation rider, Sgt. Luis Alcides Cruz, within minutes of taking the group hostage, according to the complaint.
Stansell, Gosalves, Howes and Janis' wife and four children demand damages from Chiquita for its giving money, arms and ammunition to FARC - "a foreign terrorist organization that has killed, maimed, injured, kidnapped and held hostage thousands of civilians, including many U.S. citizens," according to the complaint.
The three hostages say they were held captive for 1,967 days, until they were rescued on July 2, 2008.
The FARC publicly took credit for the kidnapping and promised to release the Americans and 250 high-level Colombian citizens in exchange for certain political concessions, territory in a demilitarized zone for FARC's base of operations, and the release of hundreds of FARC combatants apprehended by the Colombian authorities, according to the complaint.
"FARC supports its operations through kidnappings, extortion, drug trafficking and 'war taxes' it collects from residents, businesses and landowners," according to the complaint.
Chiquita made its first "guerrilla payment" of $10,000 to Chiquita in 1989 - when the banana giant opened its Banadex export subsidiary in Colombia - and ultimately paid $100,000 to $200,000 a year through 1999, according to the complaint.
"Over time, the payments were fixed to a percentage of Banadex's gross revenues, with as much as 10 percent being diverted to FARC," the complaint states.
The former hostages say Chiquita knew about FARC's practice of murdering and kidnapping Americans. At least 23 Americans were taken hostage between 1993 and 1997. But Chiquita benefited from its relationship with terrorists and spent years covering it up, according to the complaint.
"During the period relevant to this action, FARC held significant influence over, controlled, or was fighting other terrorist organizations for control of labor unions in Colombia's banana-growing regions," the complaint states.
The former hostages say Chiquita worked with FARC-controlled labor unions, such as Sintrabanano, and helped FARC subvert many local labor unions.
By helping FARC wrest control of local labor unions, Chiquita carved out "a competitive advantage over other banana growers facing less accommodating unions," according to the complaint. Chiquita also allegedly benefited from FARC's harassment of competitors in the region.
"Defendants knew that FARC engaged in acts of terrorism against U.S. interests in Colombia and knew the danger that providing material support to FARC would pose to the safety of other individuals and entities working within Colombia, but defendant ignored these risks in order to further their own narrow business interests in growing and exporting bananas in Colombia," according to the complaint.
The former hostages and Janis' family seek treble damages from Chiquita. They are represented by Newton Porter with Porter & Korvick of Miami.

Now, one from a year and a half ago:

Huffington Post:

Lawyer for Chiquita in Colombia Death Squad Case May be Next U.S. Attorney General

In its recent report entitled, "Breaking the Grip? Obstacles to Justice for Paramilitary Mafias in Colombia," Human Rights Watch (HRW) had specific recommendations for the U.S. Department of Justice. Specifically, HRW recommended that, in order to assist with the process of ending the ties between the Colombian government and paramilitary death squads, the U.S. Department of Justice should, among other things, "[c]reate meaningful legal incentives for paramilitary leaders [a number of whom have already been extradited to the U.S.] to fully disclose information about atrocities and name all Colombian or foreign officials, business or individuals who may have facilitated their criminal activities," and "[c]ollaborate actively with the efforts of Colombian justice officials who are investigating paramilitary networks in Colombia by sharing relevant information possible and granting them access to paramilitary leaders in U.S. custody."

Do not expect these recommendations to be carried forward if Eric Holder decides to forgo his lucrative corporate law practice at Covington & Burling and accept the U.S. Attorney General position for which many believe he is the top contendor. Eric Holder would have a troubling conflict of interest in carrying out this work in light of his current work as defense lawyer for Chiquita Brands international in a case in which Colombian plaintiffs seek damages for the murders carried out by the AUC paramilitaries - a designated terrorist organization. Chiquita has already admitted in a criminal case that it paid the AUC around $1.7 million in a 7-year period and that it further provided the AUC with a cache of machine guns as well.

Indeed, Holder himself, using his influence as former deputy attorney general under the Clinton Administration, helped to negotiate Chiquita's sweeheart deal with the Justice Department in the criminal case against Chiquita. Under this deal, no Chiquita official received any jail time. Indeed, the identity of the key officials involved in the assistance to the paramilitaries were kept under seal and confidential. In the end, Chiquita was fined a mere $25 million which it has been allowed to pay over a 5-year period. This is incredible given the havoc wreaked by Chiquita's aid to these Colombian death squards.

According to Mario Iguaran, the Attorney General of Colombia, Chiquita's payments to the AUC paramilitaries led to the murder of 4000 civilians in the banana region of Colombia and furthered the growth of the paramilitaries throughout Colombia and their violent takeover of numerous Colombian regions. Iguaran, in response to the claims of both Chiquita and Eric Holder himself that Chiquita was somehow forced to pay "protection" to the paramilitaries (see, Washington Post and Conde Nast Portfolio), stated unequivocally that "[t]his was not payment of extortion money. It was support for an illegal armed group whose methods included murder." See, Christian Science Monitor, "Chiquita Case Puts Big Firms on Notice."

One former paramilitary leader who is in federal custody in the U.S., Salvatore Mancuso, has stated that he has more knowledge about Chiquita's relationship with the paramilitary death squads in Colombia. Mancuso further claims that Dole and Del Monte also made payments to the paramilitaries, just as Chiquita did. Yet, Dole and Del Monte remain un-indicted. Query whether, as Human Rights Watch recommends, a Justice Department under Holder would be interested in pursuing this and other similar leads. This is a serious matter given the fact that the Justice Department has already come under great scrutiny for turning a blind eye to what appears to be rampant corporate support for terrorist groups in Colombia. See, L.A. Times, "U.S. accused of bending rules on Colombian Terror."

While Eric Holder is also known to be actively involved in laudable charitable activities, it should be of grave concern to those, like myself, who hope for change from the new Obama Administration, that the new Attorney General would be involved in not only defending corporations against serious corruption and human rights charges, but also publicly apologizing for such abuses. That is not the type of Attorney General we need in the wake of the recent economic collapse created by the unfettered greed of such corporate firms.

Jonathan Schwarz explains why bullies are reviled, most everywhere

When you invade a country on bogus pretexts and then proceed to slaughter their people, sometimes seemingly for sport, it is not looked upon kindly by others. Imagine that.

I cannot fathom is why this is not blatantly obvious to everyone.

a Tiny Revolution.com:

Unfair

Here's my prediction for the final outcome of the Wikileaks video: the U.S. military will continue to claim some of the people killed were armed insurgents. This will satisfy all U.S. conservatives and most U.S. "liberals." Meanwhile, everyone else on this planet will continue to gape at us in slack-jawed horror.

Why the sharp difference between us and the rest of humanity?

1. I have no idea whether any of the people shot were armed, or insurgents, or armed insurgents. There will inevitably be long dreary arguments about this between U.S. liberals and conservatives, complete with 5,000-word blog posts analyzing the video frame by frame.

But here's the thing: even if everyone but the journalist and children were armed insurgents, no one else on earth cares. That's because, when another country invades yours, you're allowed to fight back. And if you invade another country and start slaughtering people, you don't somehow make yourself the good guy by proving that they were trying to fight back.

2. The technological mismatch between the U.S. and everyone else is so gigantic that it violates normal humans' sense of justice. This is something almost no Americans give a second thought to, but it's widely appreciated in those countries (ie, all of them) that don't have noiseless death-machine drones flown by joystick from 10,000 miles away.

In other words, even if everyone shot in the video had been fighting the U.S., and even if it had somehow been on some neutral third ground, the rest of the world would still be horrified at the unfairness. For instance, here's Colin Powell writing in his autobiography about the shelling of Beirut in 1983, and how that led to the suicide bombing of the Marine barracks there:

McFarlane, now in Beirut, persuaded the President to have the battleship U.S.S. New Jersey start hurling 16-inch shells into the mountains above Beirut, in World War II style, as if we were softening up the beaches on some Pacific atoll prior to an invasion. What we tend to overlook in such situations is that other people will react much as we would... And since they could not reach the battleship, they found a more vulnerable target, the exposed Marines at the airport.

I think we can count on the fact that, since no one could reach the Apache attack helicopters shooting from far overhard, someone will try to find a more vulnerable target. And Americans will find this terribly unfair, while to the rest of the world it will seem like the essence of fairness.

—Jonathan Schwarz

Recess Appointments - Score One for Monsanto

When Democrats hear the term Recess Appointments they usually either think of a Bad President (like Bush) trying to sneak some industry lobbyist (or maybe John Bolton) into a position of authority, or a Good President (like Obama) trying to get some good upstanding person past a blindly-unthinking Republican roadblock. They seldom consider the other possibilities.

I heard on the radio show Ring of Fire yesterday an interesting exchange about recess appointments. The host for the day, David Bender, was talking to a caller who brought up Obama's 15 recess appointments, which apparently have been compared to Bush's 15 recess appointments in a similar situation. Turns out that Obama has had more than 70 (I think it was 74) fairly vital appointments held up by the Republicans for a year, and now has appointed 15 of these during the recess. Bush, on the other hand, had 5 appointments similarly held up, and then recess appointed 15 nominees. In other words, Obama recess-appointed about 7% of his nominees who had been blocked for a year. Bush recess-appointed three times as many as were blocked! (...including that shining light of the pantheon of diplomacy, John Bolton...) Folks trying to equate the Republican tactics (blocking 74 appointments) with the Democrat tactics (blocking 5) are obviously way way off base.

I still hold out some faint hope that Obama will prove to be a good president in the long run (despite huge misgivings I have after his first year in office.) The part of me that can still imagine that he's an intelligent, well meaning guy felt good to hear about this.

Good until I read this:

Greenchange.org:
(via Cryptogon.com)

Obama gives key agriculture post to Monsanto man

Gary Ruskin | Green Change | 03.27.2010

Today, President Obama announced that he will recess appoint Islam A. Siddiqui to the position of Chief Agricultural Negotiator, Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.

Siddiqui is a pesticide lobbyist and Vice President for Science and Regulatory Affairs at CropLife America, an agribusiness lobbying group that represents Monsanto.

Following is a letter sent by 98 organizations to U.S. Senators in opposition to Siddiqui's appointment, and a fact sheet about him.

Dear Senator:

The following 98 organizations are writing you to express our opposition to the nomination of Islam Siddiqui as Chief Agriculture Negotiator at the office of the United States Trade Representative. Our organizations— representing family farmers, farmworkers, fishers and sustainable agriculture, environmental, consumer, anti-hunger and other advocacy groups—urge you to reject Dr. Siddiqui’s appointment when it comes up for a floor vote, despite the Senate Finance Committee's favorable report of his nomination on December 23, 2009.

Siddiqui’s record at the U.S. Department of Agriculture and his role as a former registered lobbyist for CropLife America (whose members include Monsanto, Syngenta, DuPont and Dow), has revealed him to consistently favor agribusinesses’ interests over the interests of consumers, the environment and public health (see attached fact sheet). We believe Siddiqui’s nomination severely weakens the Obama Administration’s credibility in promoting healthier and more sustainable local food systems here at home. His appointment would also send an unfortunate signal to the rest of the world that the United States plans to continue down the failed path of high-input and energy-intensive industrial agriculture by promoting toxic pesticides, inappropriate seed biotechnologies and unfair trade agreements on nations that do not want and can least afford them.

[. . .]

Please read the rest for a rundown on a truly ghastly appointment, made without oversight, without any real recourse, opposed by just about every environmental group you've ever heard of. Think I'm kidding?

98 organizations who signed on to the letter to the Senate:

Alaska Community Action on Toxics (AK)
AllergyKids (CO)
American Raw Milk Producers Pricing Association (WI)
Beyond Pesticides (DC)
Breast Cancer Action (CA)
California Food and Justice Coalition (CA)
Californians for GE-Free Agriculture (CA)
Californians for Pesticide Reform (CA)
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation (CA)
Center for Environmental Health (CA)
Center for Food Safety (DC)
Center on Race, Poverty & the Environment (CA)
Central Florida Jobs with Justice Project (FL)
Columban Center for Advocacy and Outreach (NE)
Community Farm Alliance (KY)
Concerned Citizens for Clean Air (OR)
Cornucopia Institute (WI)
Earth Justice (CA)
Equal Exchange (MA)
Fair Trade Coalition (MN)
Family Farm Defenders (WI)
Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance (TX)
Farm Worker Pesticide Project (WA)
Farmworker Association of Florida (FL)
Farmworker Justice (DC)
Farmworkers Self-Help (FL)
Food & Water Watch (DC)
Food First/Institute for Food and Development Policy (CA)
Food for Maine’s Future (ME)
Florida Immigrant Coalition (FL)
Food Democracy Now! (IA)
Food Systems Integrity (MA)
Florida Organic Growers (FL)
Fresno Metro Ministry (CA)
Friends of the Earth (DC, CA)
Greenpeace US (DC, CA)
Grassroots International (MA)
Growing Power Inc. (WI)
Indigenous Environmental Network (MN) Indiana Toxics Action (IN) Innovative Farmers of Ohio (OH) Institute for Agriculture & Trade Policy (MN)
Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement (IA)
Kids for Saving Earth (MN)
Kentucky Environmental Foundation (KY)
Land Stewardship Project (MN)
Lideres Campesinas (CA)
Maine Fair Trade Campaign (ME)
Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners (ME)
Maryland Pesticide Network (MD)
Mississippi Association of Cooperatives (MS)
Missouri Rural Crisis Center (MO)
Mvskoke Food Sovereignty Initiative (OK)
National Family Farm Coalition (DC)
National Farm Worker Ministry (MO)
National Latino Farmers & Ranchers Trade Association (DC)
New York Environmental Law & Justice (NY)
Northeast Organic Farming Association Interstate Council (CT)
Northern Plains Resource Council (MT)
Northwest Atlantic Marine Alliance (ME)
Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides (OR)
Oakland Institute (CA)
Ohio Conference on Fair Trade (OH)
Oklahoma Black Historical Research Project (OK)
Oregon Fair Trade Campaign (OR)
Oregon Toxics Alliance (OR)
Organic Consumers Association (MN)
Partners for the Land & Agricultural Needs of Traditional Peoples (WV)
Pesticide Action Network North America (CA)
Pesticide Free Zone (CA)
Pesticide Watch (CA)
Physicians for Social Responsibility/Los Angeles (CA)
Public Citizen (DC)
Rochesterians Against the Misuse of Pesticides (NY)
Rural Advancement Foundation International USA (NC)
Rural Coalition/ Coalición Rural
Safe Alternatives for our Forest Environment (CA)
Science and Environmental Health Network (IA)
Sciencecorps (MA)
Search for the Cause (CA)
Sierra Club (CA, DC)
Small Holders Alliance of Massachusetts (MA)
Student Action with Farmworkers (NC)
The Endocrine Disruption Exchange (CO)
The Safe Lawns Foundation (ME)
The Second Chance Foundation Washington (WA)
Washington Fair Trade Coalition (WA)
Western Organization of Resource Councils (MT)
World Hunger Year (NY)

I couldn't help thinking as I read this of how we were assured that the current Health Care Bill may have lots of flaws, but they will be fixed, that negotiations and further bills can expand it and make it better.

This reminds me that we were told by President Clinton that NAFTA would be improved and bettered by later negotiations. Should such a "NAFTA fixing session" ever occur, this very appointee would be exactly that negotiator.
___________________________________________________________________

As an example of the eco-world's reaction to the nomination, here's an article that came out in November, when Obama first nominated the guy:

Foodista Blog:

Obama Nominates Pesticide Lobbyist as Chief Agricultural Negotiator

November 12th, 2009

by

Giao.

Haven’t heard of Islam Siddiqui? You should know him. The Obama administration preferred if you didn’t, but you should know him. Why? Because he may soon have the power to directly influence the food you eat.

President Obama recently nominated Islam Siddiqui to the role of Chief Agricultural Negotiator at the Trade Office. He will be charged to lead an organization which represents our agricultural interests both here and abroad. The problem is, Islam Siddiqui is a former pesticide lobbyist for CorpLife. He is the same guy who openly chided Michelle Obama for not using “crop protection” (a.k.a. toxic pesticides), in the new White House vegetable garden. CorpLife even set up a letter writing campaign. He’s also the same guy who undermined the European Union’s attempt to ban hormone-treated beef in 1999 and rejected the mandatory labeling and disclosure of genetically modified animals in Japan, stating, “Mandatory labeling could mislead consumers about the safety of these products”.

What happened to the push by this White House for sustainable agriculture and chemical-free, local foods? What happened to President Obama’s vow to ban lobbyists from his administration?

Michelle Obama demanded a pesticide-free garden for her family at the White House, so shouldn’t the American people be given a fair shot of having the same for their families?

Photo by deharris