Admission: It doesn't matter how hard I try, I cannot shake my absolute obsession for RADIOHEAD. I just can't do it, and today I've submitted to it forever. I have tried to rid myself of it. It keeps coming back like a bad rash.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY, LAURA

TO THE POETS: TO MAKE MUCH OF LIFE

'come up now into
the world' no need to light

the lamps in daylight that passion
that light within

and without ( the old men were dancing

return
the return of the sun ) no need to light


lamps in the daylight working year
after
year the poem

discovered

in the crystal
center of the rock image

and image the transparent

present to we speak of the abyss
of the hungry we see their feet their tired

feet in the news and mountains and valley
and sea as in universal

storm
the fathers said we are old
we are shrivelled

come.



--George Oppen

ANNOUNCEMENT

Monday March 17rd, 7:00 pm

the waxpoetic poetry reading series presents

Anastasios Kozaitis

&

Michael Tyrell

reading their poetry
@
Pete's Candy Store
for free

Monday, March 17rd
7:00 pm



Michael Tyrell
Michael Tyrell's poems have appeared or are forthcoming in Agni, American Letters & Commentary, The New England Review, The Paris Review, Ploughshares, The Yale Review, and other magazines. He wants his epitaph to say something simultaneously meaningful, unanswerable, and hilarious. He lives in Bushwick, but dreams of living in Williamsburg someday.


Directions: Pete's Candy Store / 709 Lorimer St btw Richardson and Frost / Williamsburg, Brooklyn / L train to Lorimer / G train to Metropolitan / 718 302 3770 see www.petescandystore.com for map

Read all about the poets on www.waxpoetic.org

From: Dessima Williams
Subject: Happy March 13th!


Dear sisters, brothers, friends,

Happy March 13th! It is 24 years since the start of Grenada's people's power democracy-- so full of promise.

No matter how many years of state silence pass, let us never forget this day that ushered in a qualitative transformation for the better in the life of Grenada: unprecedented social development that included equal pay for equal work for women and men and a Women's Desk, real revolutionary advancements in the 1970's. I remember as if it were yesterday -- all the exuberance and commitment of the entire country; I remember the hope of tens of thousands. I remeber the leadership of Maurice Bishop, Unison Whiteman and all of NJM.

That the People's Revolution was compromised, blooded and destroyed serve to remind us how important it is to cherish that which is so very valuable --the right of people to own their fate and the responsibility to work for peace with, those close to us and those far away.

Asking you to remember and to continue to work for people's rights and justice with peace in Grenada and in the world. Forward ever!
Dessima

For those of you who don't think this thing is about money, consider this, Joe Brennan ran the numbers on the street value of Iraqi oil reserves. He places the number at $36 trillion. It's not the oil, per se; it's the MONEY. My numbers have Joe's being modest, and I see it at more than $40 trillion.

And for those of us who subscribe to a Modernist pogram, there is more subject matter than there is time to write, right now. But, I know, Modernism is bad or something like that. (There's always been more subject matter than we know what to do with it, tho.)

Okay, I think I might start blogging about that in the future. In the meantime...


US firms set for postwar contracts

Danny Penman and agencies
Tuesday March 11, 2003

The American government is on the verge of awarding construction contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars to rebuild Iraq once Saddam Hussein is deposed.

Halliburton, one of the companies in the running for the deals, was headed by the US vice-president Dick Cheney between 1995 and 2000. Halliburton has already been awarded a lucrative contract, worth hundreds of millions of dollars, to resurrect the Iraqi oilfields if there is a war.

Other companies have strong ties to the US administration, including the construction giant Bechtel, the Fluor Corporation, and the Louis Berger Group, which is presently involved in the reconstruction of Afghanistan. Both Bechtel and the Fluor Corporation undertake construction and project management work for the US government.

Only US companies are on the shortlist of five. The US agency for international development (USAID) defended the narrow shortlist.

A spokeswoman said: "Because of the urgent circumstances and the unique nature of this work, USAID will undertake a limited selection process that expedites the review and selection of contractors for these projects."

The spokeswoman said that it was a policy of USAID to use US companies for projects funded by the American taxpayer. Non-US companies were free, through their governments, to organise their own business, she said.

The winning company would get about $900m to repair Iraqi health services, ports, airports, schools and other educational institutions.

Sources at the companies said the invitation was unusual in that USAID did not ask them to set a price for defined services but rather asked them to say what they could do for $900m. However, the winning company could expect to make a profit of about $80m from the deal.

All five bidders have submitted their proposals or are preparing to do so after USAID "quietly" sent out a detailed request soliciting proposals from the likely bidders.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the Iraq reconstruction plan will require contractors to fulfill various tasks, including reopening at least half of the "economically important roads and bridges" - about 1,500 miles of roadway - within 18 months.

The contractors will also be asked to repair 15% of Iraq's high-voltage electricity grid, renovate several thousand schools and deliver 550 emergency generators within two months.

Construction industry executives said the handful of firms are competing fiercely in part because they believe it could provide an inside track to postwar business opportunities. The most highly sought-after prizes are oil industry contracts.

The US government is believed to be wary of any backlash against an invasion and is preparing plans for a "hearts and minds" operation that will swing into place as soon as the country is occupied. The government is mindful of the long term benefits of feeding hungry Iraqis, delivering clean water, and paying teachers and health workers.

"It's a sensitive topic because we still haven't gone to war," one industry executive told the Wall Street Journal. "But these companies are really in a position to win something out of this geopolitical situation."

It remains unclear whether Iraqis, Americans or an international consortium will manage the oil industry during an early post-conflict period.

Steven Schooner, a George Washington University law professor, said many billions of dollars are at stake. He estimated that $900m would barely last six months given the scope of the projects the administration has sketched out.

"The most sophisticated firms that come in first, and establish good will with the locals obviously will reap huge benefits down the road," said Mr Schooner.

"These are going to become brand names in Iraq. That's huge."

I'll admit it. I haven't read a poetry blog in more than a week, but I've been reading lots of political/news blogs. If anyone is out there, send me a line. Anyway, if you are I've put some new blogs up on my list, but Jack Balkin's First Amendment blog is superb. While I'm at it, take a look at The Bloviator (about US's 42M uninsured), Ted Barlow, and The Volokh Conspiracy. More soon...

Farewell Angelina

Farewell Angelina
The bells of the crown
Are being stolen by bandits
I must follow the sound
The triangle tingles
And the music plays slow
But, farewell Angelina
The night is on fire
And I must go.

There is no use in talking
There's no need for blame
There's nothing to prove
Ev'rything still is the same
The table stands empty
By the edge of the stream
Farewell Angelina
The sky is changing colors
And I must leave.

The jacks and the queens
They forsake the courtyard
Fifty-two gypsies
Now file past the guards
In the space where the deuce
And the ace once ran wild
Farewell Angelina
The sky is folding
I'll see you after a while.

See the cross-eyed pirates sit
Perched in the sun
Shooting tin cans
With a sawed-off shotgun
And the corporals and neighbors clap
And cheer with each blast
Farewell Angelina
The sky it is trembling
And I must leave fast.

King Kong, little elves
On the rooftoops they dance
Valentino-type tangos
While the hero’s clean hands
Shut the eyes of the dead
Not to embarrass anyone
Farewell Angelina
The sky is flooding over
And I must be gone.

The camouflaged parrot
He flutters from fear
When something he doesn’t know about
Suddenly appears
What cannot be imitated perfect
Must die
Farewell Angelina
The sky is flooding over
And I must go where it is dry

Machine guns are roaring
The puppets heave rocks
At misunderstood visions
And at the faces of clocks
Call me any name you like
I will never deny it
But farewell Angelina
The sky is erupting
I must go where it is quiet

--Bob Dylan

Baghdad Snapshot Action

On February 13, 2003, teams of artists and activists began postering New York City with snapshots from Baghdad. Quiet and casual, the snapshots show a part of Baghdad we rarely see: the part with people in it.

The snapshots were taken by a friend of ours who just got back from Baghdad working with the Iraq Peace Team. Yes, he saw Iraqis suffering and struggling. But he also saw Iraqis dancing and laughing. This moved him because laughing under the weight of the UN sanctions and the threat of an absurd war is no easy task. We were moved because the people in the pictures remind us of our friends & family.

Thousands of snapshot posters now pepper Manhattan, Brooklyn, and Queens.

We want to show New York the people who will get both liberty and death in one fatal stroke if this war begins. We want you to show them in your city. The entire snapshot collection is online as pdfs. Print them out and poster them anywhere and everywhere.

Dulce et Decorum Est

Bent double, like old beggars under sacks,
Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge,
Till on the haunting flares we turned our backs
And towards our distant rest began to trudge.
Men marched asleep. Many had lost their boots
But limped on, blood-shod. All went lame; all blind;
Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots
Of tired, outstripped Five-Nines that dropped behind.

Gas! Gas! Quick, boys!--An ecstasy of fumbling,
Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time;
But someone still was yelling out and stumbling,
And flound'ring like a man in fire or lime . . .
Dim, through the misty panes and thick green light,
As under a green sea, I saw him drowning.

In all my dreams, before my helpless sight,
He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning.

If in some smothering dreams you too could pace
Behind the wagon that we flung him in,
And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,
His hanging face, like a devil's sick of sin;
If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood
Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,
Obscene as cancer, bitter as cud
Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues,--
My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
To children ardent for some desperate glory,
The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est
Pro patria mori.


--Wilfred Owen


This poem was originally dedicated to Jessie Pope, author of children's books and of books such as *Jessie Pope's War Poems* and *Simple Rhymes for Stirring Times*. Title: Horace, Odes, 3.2.13. "The famous Latin tag means of course 'It is sweet and meet to die for one's country. Sweet! and decorous!'" (letter from Owen to his mother)

US Senator Robert Byrd, D-West Virginia

Senate Floor Speech
Wednesday, February 12, 2003


To contemplate war is to think about the most horrible of human experiences.On this February day, as this nation stands at the brink of battle, every American on some level must be contemplating the horrors of war.


Yet, this Chamber is, for the most part, silent -- ominously, dreadfully silent. There is no debate, no discussion, no attempt to lay out for the nation the pros and cons of this particular war. There is nothing.


We stand passively mute in the United States Senate, paralyzed by our own uncertainty, seemingly stunned by the sheer turmoil of events. Only on the
editorial pages of our newspapers is there much substantive discussion of the prudence or imprudence of engaging in this particular war.


And this is no small conflagration we contemplate. This is no simple attempt to defang a villain. No. This coming battle, if it materializes, represents a turning point in U.S. foreign policy and possibly a turning point in the recent history of the world.


This nation is about to embark upon the first test of a revolutionary doctrine applied in an extraordinary way at an unfortunate time. The doctrine of preemption -- the idea that the United States or any other nation can legitimately attack a nation that is not imminently threatening but may be threatening in the future -- is a radical new twist on the traditional idea of self defense. It appears to be in contravention of international law and the UN Charter. And it is being tested at a time of world-wide terrorism, making many countries around the globe wonder if they will soon be on our -- or some other nation's -- hit list. High level Administration figures recently refused to take nuclear weapons off of the table when discussing a possible attack against Iraq. What could be more destabilizing and unwise than this type of uncertainty, particularly in a world where globalism has tied the vital economic and security interests of many nations so closely together? There are huge cracks emerging in our time-honored alliances, and U.S. intentions are suddenly subject to damaging worldwide speculation. Anti-Americanism based on mistrust, misinformation, suspicion, and alarming rhetoric from U.S. leaders is fracturing the once solid alliance against global terrorism which existed after September 11.


Here at home, people are warned of imminent terrorist attacks with little guidance as to when or where such attacks might occur. Family members are
being called to active military duty, with no idea of the duration of their stay or what horrors they may face. Communities are being left with less than adequate police and fire protection. Other essential services are also short-staffed. The mood of the nation is grim. The economy is stumbling. Fuel prices are rising and may soon spike higher.


This Administration, now in power for a little over two years, must be judged on its record. I believe that that record is dismal.

In that scant two years, this Administration has squandered a large projected surplus of some $5.6 trillion over the next decade and taken us to projected deficits as far as the eye can see. This Administration's domestic policy has put many of our states in dire financial condition, under funding scores of essential programs for our people. This Administration has fostered policies which have slowed economic growth. This Administration has ignored urgent matters such as the crisis in health care for our elderly. This Administration has been slow to provide adequate funding for homeland security. This Administration has been reluctant to better protect our long and porous borders.


In foreign policy, this Administration has failed to find Osama bin Laden. In fact, just yesterday we heard from him again marshaling his forces and urging them to kill. This Administration has split traditional alliances, possibly crippling, for all time, International order-keeping entities like the United Nations and NATO. This Administration has called into question the traditional worldwide perception of the United States as well-intentioned, peacekeeper. This Administration has turned the patient art of diplomacy into threats, labeling, and name calling of the sort that reflects quite poorly on the intelligence and sensitivity of our leaders, and which will have consequences for years to come.


Calling heads of state pygmies, labeling whole countries as evil, denigrating powerful European allies as irrelevant -- these types of crude insensitivities can do our great nation no good. We may have massive military might, but we cannot fight a global war on terrorism alone. We need the cooperation and friendship of our time-honored allies as well as the newer found friends whom we can attract with our wealth. Our awesome military machine will do us little good if we suffer another devastating attack on our homeland which severely damages our economy. Our military manpower is already stretched thin and we will need the augmenting support of those nations who can supply troop strength, not just sign letters cheering us on.


The war in Afghanistan has cost us $37 billion so far, yet there is evidence that terrorism may already be starting to regain its hold in that region. We have not found bin Laden, and unless we secure the peace in Afghanistan, the dark dens of terrorism may yet again flourish in that remote and devastated
land.


Pakistan as well is at risk of destabilizing forces. This Administration has not finished the first war against terrorism and yet it is eager to embark on another conflict with perils much greater than those in Afghanistan. Is our attention span that short? Have we not learned that after winning the war one must always secure the peace?


And yet we hear little about the aftermath of war in Iraq. In the absence of plans, speculation abroad is rife. Will we seize Iraq's oil fields, becoming an occupying power which controls the price and supply of that nation's oil for the foreseeable future? To whom do we propose to hand the reigns of power after Saddam Hussein?


Will our war inflame the Muslim world resulting in devastating attacks on Israel? Will Israel retaliate with its own nuclear arsenal? Will the Jordanian and Saudi Arabian governments be toppled by radicals, bolstered by Iran which has much closer ties to terrorism than Iraq?


Could a disruption of the world's oil supply lead to a world-wide recession? Has our senselessly bellicose language and our callous disregard of the interests and opinions of other nations increased the global race to join the nuclear club and made proliferation an even more lucrative practice for
nations which need the income?


In only the space of two short years this reckless and arrogant Administration has initiated policies which may reap disastrous consequences for years.


One can understand the anger and shock of any President after the savage attacks of September 11. One can appreciate the frustration of having only a shadow to chase and an amorphous, fleeting enemy on which it is nearly impossible to exact retribution.


But to turn one's frustration and anger into the kind of extremely destabilizing and dangerous foreign policy debacle that the world is currently witnessing is inexcusable from any Administration charged with the awesome power and responsibility of guiding the destiny of the greatest superpower on the planet. Frankly many of the pronouncements made by this Administration are outrageous. There is no other word.


Yet this chamber is hauntingly silent. On what is possibly the eve of horrific infliction of death and destruction on the population of the nation of Iraq -- a population, I might add, of which over 50% is under age 15 -- this chamber is silent. On what is possibly only days before we send thousands of our own citizens to face unimagined horrors of chemical and biological warfare -- this chamber is silent. On the eve of what could possibly be a vicious terrorist attack in retaliation for our attack on Iraq, it is business as usual in the United States Senate.


We are truly "sleepwalking through history." In my heart of hearts I pray that this great nation and its good and trusting citizens are not in for a rudest of awakenings.

To engage in war is always to pick a wild card. And war must always be a last resort, not a first choice. I truly must question the judgment of any President who can say that a massive unprovoked military attack on a nation which is over 50% children is "in the highest moral traditions of our country". This war is not necessary at this time. Pressure appears to be having a good result in Iraq. Our mistake was to put ourselves in a corner
so quickly. Our challenge is to now find a graceful way out of a box of our own making. Perhaps there is still a way if we allow more time.

http://truthout.org/docs_02/021303A.htm


Osama Rallies Muslims, Condemns Hussein
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Perspective

Wednesday 12 February 2003

Osama bin Laden rose from the dead yet again on Tuesday to prophesy doom and death for America. This is nothing new; he has been clawing his way out of various burial holes for seventeen months now, and always manages to strike fear into the American heart by way of the American media and the Bush administration at exactly the moment when incredibly important shifts in history are in the offing.

At this moment, George W. Bush stands almost completely alone in his desire to make pre-emptive war on the nation of Iraq. Several key NATO allies - France, Germany and Belgium among them - have thrown sand into the gears of battle by refusing to prepare Turkey for an immediate war they do not support nor deem necessary. As this incredible state of affairs unfolded, Americans found their ears ringing with orange-hued warnings of imminent death. Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge went so far as to tell people to load up on plastic sheeting and duct tape so as to bar their windows from chemical attack, but the administration he calls home made sure to tell people to live their lives normally and continue shopping.

And so it goes. This is fairly standard stuff within the American echo chamber. Let there be one important piece of legislation, or one highly embarrassing turn of events for the administration, and the word goes forth that the sky is falling. We have been dealing with this politically manufactured low-grade hysteria for many months now. Most Americans have reached a suspended state of disbelief about it all, and won't be taking these warnings seriously unless they see Osama bin Laden on their doorstep in a black cassock with scythe in hand. Bush and Ashcroft will soon run out of colors on the warning chart if this keeps up; the shade after red likely exists somewhere in the fourth dimension, visible only to ultraconservative war-hawks and media talking heads.

When the voice of Osama comes out of the television, however, things suddenly become much more serious. The Bush administration may have forgotten him entirely, but every single American still sleeps with visions of burning towers and plummeting bodies projected on the backs of their eyelids. Peter Bergen, noted terrorism expert, stated on CNN that such messages from bin Laden usually herald new attacks. If the Orange Alert was dubious on Monday, it was given new importance on Tuesday.

Secretary of State Colin Powell set the stage for this new bin Laden statement early on Tuesday, much to the surprise of CIA Director George Tenet. Powell, during testimony at a Senate Budget Committee meeting, let it drop that the Middle East news network Al Jazeera had in hand a tape of Osama bin Laden. Tenet, seated with the Intelligence Committee, had not heard of this tape. One is left wondering at Powell's sources, especially after the story unfolded.

Powell used the existence of this tape, and the words he claimed bin Laden had said on it, to further tie Saddam Hussein to international terrorism. He claimed bin Laden was clearly establishing a connection between himself and Hussein on the tape, beyond all question. "This nexus between terrorists and states that are developing weapons of mass destruction," said Powell, "can no longer be looked away from and ignored."

The actual tape, played and translated live on every major cable news channel, told a very different story. Osama bin Laden swore vengeance against America if Iraq was attacked, and demanded that the Muslim world stand in solidarity with the Muslim people of Iraq. In very clear words, Osama bin Laden told the people of Iraq to rise up against both American aggression and against "socialist" Saddam Hussein. If the translations that were provided were reliable, there is no ambiguity in bin Laden's words on the matter. So much, it seems, for Powell's case that Hussein and bin Laden are working together.

And this is where it gets interesting.

An MSNBC.com report on the bin Laden tape carried the following sentence: "At the same time, the message also called on Iraqis to rise up and oust Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, who is a secular leader." This clearly confirms the clarity of mind Osama bin Laden displayed in regard to Saddam Hussein, and conforms to the recorded message heard by millions and millions of people around the world.

Less than twenty minutes after this report appeared on MSNBC, that sentence was deleted from the report. A few intrepid Internet news junkies, including myself, preserved what is called a 'screen-grab' of the original article before it was scrubbed. The version of the article currently in existence has replaced the text above with this far more benign text: "The taped statement reflected Saddam, a secular leader, but made it clear that Saddam was not the immediate target." A similar story line, bereft of the portions describing bin Laden's wish that Hussein be killed, has appeared in virtually every mainstream news media report on the matter.

The manner in which this story unfolded brings forth a number of serious questions.

First of all, questions must be asked regarding Colin Powell's motives in this. The recording heard by the world diverged significantly from the spin Powell put on it before the Budget Committee. Osama bin Laden did not state an alliance with Saddam Hussein, but with the Muslim civilians in Iraq who will bear the bloody brunt of any American attack. In fact, bin Laden told the Iraqi people to rise up against Hussein. This is not the way allies deal with each other.

Why would Powell go to such lengths to stretch the glaringly obvious truth in this matter? He is already suffering from a deficit of credibility in the aftermath of the plagiarism scandal that is currently rocking Tony Blair's administration. Powell stood before the UN last week and praised a British intelligence dossier that contained cut-and-pasted pages and pages of an essay, with all spelling and grammatical errors intact, written by a postgraduate student from California. The data was years out of date, flat-out contradictory in several key areas, used without the student's awareness, and yet was offered as an up-to-the-minute assessment of Iraqi weapons capabilities.

This, in combination with Powell's obviously skewed interpretation of Tuesday's bin Laden recording, forces us to call into question every single word he and the Bush administration have said on the matter. The question of whether Saddam Hussein has ties to al Qaeda terrorism and Osama bin Laden can be put to bed now, it seems, alongside the tatters and shreds of honor and dignity formerly enjoyed by the Secretary of State.

More ominously, why would a news network like MSNBC so obviously haul water for the failed allegations of the Bush administration? Events happen in seconds on the internet, but merely scrubbing uncomfortable sentences from articles cannot stop the tens of thousands of readers who are wise enough now to save the evidence before it evaporates in a cloud of silicon.

These deletions display a manifest breach of faith on behalf of MSNBC, and call to mind issues surrounding the conflict of interest that are inherent in the ownership of this network. MSNBC, along with NBC and CNBC, are owned by the corporate giant General Electric. GE is one of the largest defense contractors on the face of the earth, and will, bluntly, be paid a king's ransom in the event of a war. Following this line of questioning leads to some dark corners, indeed. How often is the data being manipulated by the corporate-owned media? Are we to rely solely on the nimble fingers of keyboarded citizens to get to the heart of the matter?

A report appearing later on Tuesday on MSNBC.com served to refute the claims of collusion between bin Laden and Hussein. "Although Powell sought to characterize the tape as a concrete link between al-Qaida and the Iraqi government," the MSNBC.com report read, "White House officials acknowledged later to NBC News that it did not. Powell did not know it had not been broadcast when he spoke to the committee and was 'a little on the front of his skis,' a government source said." These lines were buried deep within the report.

By Wednesday morning, this text had been completely removed from the article.

Finally, we must deal with Osama bin Laden himself. In a gross display of celestial irony, there was virtually no ambiguity in his words, as opposed to those of Powell and the members of the journalistic realm. His statement was a call to arms directed at the followers he has across the globe. If the United States attacks Iraq, Osama bin Laden will attack the United States. The Bush administration has done nothing of substance to defend us against such attacks except increase the stock value of companies that manufacture plastic sheeting and duct tape. We are not prepared to defend ourselves in this fight, period.

Virtually the entire global community stands against us today on the subject of this war, with nations willing and able to destroy NATO before allowing it to take place. The Bush administration has cut billions of dollars from street-level homeland defenders like police forces and fire houses, yet has the eagle screaming for a war that will be fought simultaneously in downtown Baghdad and in your utterly undefended neighborhood. They have the gall, simultaneously, to speak of trillion dollar tax cuts for rich people that will further debilitate our budgetary ability to defend ourselves. Links between Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein have proven to be not only false, but laughable. The credibility of the Bush administration has been destroyed.

And yet we go, with the news media whistling 'Onward Christian Soldiers' all the while. The Bush administration is ecstatic, believing they can spin bin Laden's statement of support for Iraqi civilians into a connection between the terrorist and Hussein.

You are being lied to, clumsily.

Pass it on.

-------

William Rivers Pitt is a New York Times bestselling author of two books - "War On Iraq" (with Scott Ritter) available now from Context Books, and "The Greatest Sedition is Silence," available in May 2003 from Pluto Press. He teaches high school in Boston, MA.

Scott Lowery contributed research to this report.

© : t r u t h o u t 2002

"non-subject does this, non-subject does that"

does "non-subject" = I, or does "non-subject" not = I?

just asking...