The Scallion

Disclaimer: this online political & social satire webzine is not suitable for the decerebrate (translation: our illustrious bonehead, his benighted administration, neo-ultraconservative Republicans, rabid Catholics, sheep, or their sympathizers) or for readers under age 18. As satirists, we take no responsibility if what we say is dangerously close to the truth. If you're under 18, stop reading this NOW & go turn yourself in to your Mommy for a well-deserved spanking, you no-good little whelp.

Tuesday, July 04, 2006

Greetings, fellow Freedom FightersTM and Defenders of DemocracyTM!

We of The Scallion realize that this is one ginormous post, but we felt compelled to voice our objections to America's new regime of fascism and OILigarchy on Independence Day, our nation's birthday.

We ask your patience in advance: there was so much to post that we chose to post everything as-is rather than edit. As a result, you will see some formatting oddities as you read down. Even so, we ask you please to take your time and read through this post. If each and every item hadn't stricken us as dead-on important, it wouldn't be here. You won't want to miss a word.

Your patience will be rewarded: we have hidden a few pearls of humor among all these articles and links.

Keep the faith and keep fighting; together, we WILL win our nation back!

Today's AlterNet headlines

PATRIOTISM AND THE FOURTH OF JULY
Howard Zinn, AlterNet
The Declaration of Independence gives us the true meaning of
a patriot, someone who supports a country's ideals, not
necessarily its government.
http://www.alternet.org/story/38463/

PROGRESSIVES: STOP WAITING FOR A HERO
Rev. Jim Rigby, HuffingtonPost.com
Leaders can only take you so far. At some point it's up to
the people to govern themselves.
http://www.alternet.org/story/38266/

ISRAEL'S GAZA PROBLEM
Marjorie Cohn, AlterNet
Israel's devastating invasion of Gaza threatens to cripple
the densely populated area, and may drive legions of
Palestians to jihad.
http://www.alternet.org/story/38488/

MEXICAN ELECTION IN LIMBO
Chuck Collins, AlterNet
In an emotional election too close to call, the two leading
candidates are each declaring confidence in their victory.
http://www.alternet.org/story/38461/

LET'S DECLARE INDEPENDENCE FROM OIL ADDICTION
Mike Hudema, AlterNet
Even the president recognizes our oil addiction -- now it's
time to get serious about kicking the habit.
http://www.alternet.org/envirohealth/38379/

Here's a giggle from The Scallion's maibag

A reader sent us this link to a Schoolhouse Rock-style spoof titled "Shock and Awe"

http://youtube.com/watch?v=qSN-tpucRRU&search=school%20house%20rock

From today's Huffington Post

National Journal: Bush Told Prosecutors He "Directed" Cheney To Discredit Joe Wilson...

From smh.com.au

Having already engulfed numerous high-ranking Bush administration officials, today the Valerie Plame CIA leak case produced perhaps its most damning expose. A National Review article by Murray Waas cites a number of sources with knowledge that President Bush told the special prosecutor, during a 2004 Oval Office interview, that he himself directed Vice President Dick Cheney to personally spearhead an effort to counter allegations made by former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV.

According to sources, Bush told Cheney to disclose classified intelligence that would defend the administration and discredit Wilson. The President claimed he did not tell anyone specifically to expose the identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame, nor did he know that Cheney instructed his chief of staff to leak Plame's identity to the press. However, a source with direct knowledge of conversations between Bush and Cheney said that Bush told Cheney, regarding information that would discredit Wilson, to "get it out." Another person with knowledge of Bush's interview with the special prosecutor did not confirm the President's words, but said that the "get it out" account was consistent with what Bush told the prosecutor.
Click here to read the whole story.

Click here to discuss it on HuffPost.


ON THE BLOG TODAY

Chris Durang: July 4th -- Now and in the '50s

John Kerry: How to Love Your Country

Jesse Kornbluth: I Salute the Flag. But I Pledge Allegiance to the Planet.

Corinne Marshall: A Fourth of July Carol

Dispatch from Mexico City:



STEALING IT IN FRONT OF YOUR EYES

Matt Pascarella in Mexico City
Greg Palast in London

Monday, 3 July


Gore v. Bush. Kerry v. Bush. Obrador v. Calderon.

As in Florida in 2000, as in Ohio in 2004, the exit polls show the voters voted for the progressive candidate, but the race is "officially" too close to call.

But they will call it -- after they steal it. Reuters News agency reports that, as of 8pm Eastern time, as voting concluded in Mexico, exit polls show Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador of the "left-wing" Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD) leading in exit polls over Felipe Calderon of the ruling conservative National Action Party (PAN).

We've told you again and again: Exit polls tell us how voters say they voted, but the voters can't tell pollsters if their vote will be counted. In Mexico, counting the vote is an art, not a science -- and Calderon's ruling crew is very artful indeed. The PAN-controlled
official electoral commission, not surprisingly, has announced that the presidential tally is too close to call.

Calderon's election is openly supported by the Bush Administration.

On the ground in Mexico City, our news team reports accusations from inside the Obrador campaign that operatives of the PAN had access to voter files which are supposed to be the sole property of the nation's electoral commission.

We are not surprised.

This past Friday, we reported that the US Federal Bureau of Investigation had obtained Mexico's voter files under a secret "counterterrorism" contract with database company ChoicePoint of Alpharetta, Georgia. (See BUSH TEAM HELPS RULING PARTY FLORIDIZE MEXICAN PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION)

The FBI's contractor states that, following the arrest of ChoicePoint agents by the Mexican
government, the company returned or destroyed its files. The firm claims not to have known collecting this information violated Mexican law. Such files can be useful in challenging a voter's right to cast a ballot or in preventing that vote from counting.

It is, of course, impossible to know if the FBI destroyed its own copy of the files of Mexico's voter rolls obtained by Choicepoint or if these were then used to illegally assist the Calderon candidacy.
But we can see the results: as in the US, first in Florida then in Ohio, the exit polls are at odds with "official" polls.

In November 2004, US Republican Senator Richard Lugar, in Kiev, cited the divergence of exit polls and official polls as solid evidence of "blatant fraud in the vote count in Ukraine. As a result, the Bush Administration refused to recognize the Ukraine government's official vote tally ... which proves once again that Republicans are incapable
of irony.

The foreign mainstream press has already announced, despite the polling discrepancies, that Mexico's elections were fair and clean -- which would be a first for that country where Obrador's party has seen its candidates defeated by "blatant fraud" before. The change
this time is that the fraud is simply less blatant.

********

Watch for our video reports from Mexico City at www.GregPalast.com to be carried on Democracy Now!, with Amy Goodman, this Wednesday, July 5. Rick Rowley, in Mexico City, contributed to this report.

Matt Pascarella is North American producer for GregPalast.com. Greg Palast is the author of the New York Times bestseller, "ARMED MADHOUSE: Who's Afraid of Osama Wolf?, China Floats Bush Sinks, the Scheme to Steal '08, No Child's Behind Left and other Dispatches from the Front Lines of the Class War."

This older story by Greg Palast shows that the newCONs have already practiced their vote-stealing tactics on America's Black voters:

June 16, 2004

African-American Voters Scrubbed by Secret GOP Hit List
by Greg Palast
As reported for Democracy Now!

Palast, who first reported this story for BBC Television Newsnight (UK) and Democracy Now! (USA), is author of the New York Times bestseller, Armed Madhouse.

The Republican National Committee has a special offer for African-American soldiers: Go to Baghdad, lose your vote.

A confidential campaign directed by GOP party chiefs in October 2004 sought to challenge the ballots of tens of thousands of voters in the last presidential election, virtually all of them cast by residents of Black-majority precincts.
Files from the secret vote-blocking campaign were obtained by BBC Television Newsnight, London. They were attached to emails accidentally sent by Republican operatives to a non-party website.

One group of voters wrongly identified by the Republicans as registering to vote from false addresses: servicemen and women sent overseas.

*******
For Greg Palast's discussion with broadcaster Amy Goodman on the Black soldier purge of 2004, go to http://gregpalast.com/armedmadhouse/palastDN6-14-06.mp3

*******

Here's how the scheme worked: The RNC mailed these voters letters in envelopes marked, Do not forward , to be returned to the sender. These letters were mailed to servicemen and women, some stationed overseas, to their US home addresses. The letters then returned to the Bush-Cheney campaign as "undeliverable."

The lists of soldiers of "undeliverable" letters were transmitted from state headquarters, in this case Florida, to the RNC in Washington. The party could then challenge the voters' registration and thereby prevent their absentee ballot being counted.

One target list was comprised exclusively of voters registered at the Jacksonville, Florida, Naval Air Station. Jacksonville is third largest naval installation in the US, best known as home of the Blue Angels fighting squandron.



[See this scrub sheet at http://flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=160156893&context=set-72157594155273706&size=o ]

Our team contacted the homes of several on the caging list, such as Randall Prausa, a serviceman, whose wife said he had been ordered overseas.

A soldier returning home in time to vote in November 2004 could also be challenged on the basis of the returned envelope. Soldiers challenged would be required to vote by "provisional" ballot.

Over one million provisional ballots cast in the 2004 race were never counted; over half a million absentee ballots were also rejected. The extraordinary rise in the number of rejected ballots was the result of the widespread multi-state voter challenge campaign by the Republican Party. The operation, of which the purge of Black soldiers was a small part, was the first mass challenge to voting America had seen in two decades.

The BBC obtained several dozen confidential emails sent by the Republican's national Research Director and Deputy Communications chief, Tim Griffin to GOP Florida campaign chairman Brett Doster and other party leaders. Attached were spreadsheets marked, "Caging.xls." Each of these contained several hundred to a few thousand voters and their addresses.

A check of the demographics of the addresses on the "caging lists," as the GOP leaders called them indicated that most were in African-American majority zip codes.

Ion Sanco, the non-partisan elections supervisor of Leon County (Tallahassee) when shown the lists by this reporter said: The only thing I can think of - African American voters listed like this these might be individuals that will be challenged if they attempted to vote on Election Day.

These GOP caging lists were obtained by the same BBC team that first exposed the wrongful purge of African-American "felon" voters in 2000 by then-Secretary of State Katherine Harris. Eliminating the voting rights of those voters -- 94,000 were targeted -- likely caused Al Gore's defeat in that race.


The Republican National Committee in Washington refused our several requests to respond to the BBC discovery. However, in Tallahassee, the Florida Bush campaign's spokespeople offered several explanations for the list.

Joseph Agostini, speaking for the GOP, suggested the lists were of potential donors to the Bush campaign. Oddly, the supposed donor list included residents of the Sulzbacher Center a shelter for homeless families.

Another spokesperson for the Bush campaign, Mindy Tucker Fletcher, ultimately changed the official response, acknowledging that these were voters, "we mailed to, where the letter came back bad addresses.

The party has refused to say why it would mark soldiers as having "bad addresses" subject to challenge when they had been assigned abroad.

The apparent challenge campaign was not inexpensive. The GOP mailed the letters first class, at a total cost likely exceeding millions of dollars, so that the addresses would be returned to "cage" workers.

This is not a challenge list," insisted the Republican spokesmistress. However, she modified that assertion by adding, That s not what it s set up to be.
Setting up such a challenge list would be a crime under federal law. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 outlaws mass challenges of voters where race is a factor in choosing the targeted group.

While the party insisted the lists were not created for the purpose to challenge Black voters, the GOP ultimately offered no other explanation for the mailings. However, Tucker Fletcher asserted Republicans could still employ the list to deny ballots to those they considered suspect voters. When asked if Republicans would use the list to block voters, Tucker Fletcher replied, Where it s stated in the law, yeah.

It is not possible at this time to determine how many on the potential blacklist were ultimately challenged and lost their vote. Soldiers sending in their ballot from abroad would not know their vote was lost because of a challenge.


__________________________________

For the full story of caging lists and voter purges of 2004, plus the documents, read Greg Palast's New York Times bestseller, ARMED MADHOUSE: Who's Afraid of Osama Wolf?, Armed Madhouse: Who's Afraid of Osama Wolf?, China Floats Bush Sinks, the Scheme to Steal '08, No Child's Behind Left and other Dispatches from the Front Lines of the Class War.

Huffington Post: calling it like it is in an election year

"Beating Up On The NY Times Is Red Meat For The Conservative Base"...

AP/Akira Ono

New York Times executive editor Bill Keller dismissed recent criticism leveled at the Times over its disclosure of a Bush administration bank data monitoring program as part political tactic. "I mean, it's an election year," Keller said. "Beating up on the New York Times is red meat for the conservative base."

Keller also pushed back against the charge that reporting on the program damaged efforts to pursue terrorists. Keller asserted, "it's not news to the terrorists." "This was a case where clearly the terrorists or the people who finance them know quite well," he said, "because the Treasury Department and the White House have talked openly about it -- that they monitor international banking transactions."
Click here to read the whole story.

Click here to discuss it on HuffPost.

STEALING MEXICO: Bush Team Helps Ruling Party "Floridize" Mexican Presidential Election

By Greg Palast

Greg Palast is the author of the New York Times bestseller, "ARMED MADHOUSE: Who's Afraid of Osama Wolf?, China Floats Bush Sinks, the Scheme to Steal '08, No Child's Behind Left and other Dispatches from the Front Lines of the Class War."


Friday, June 30, 2006 -- GEORGE Bush's operatives have plans to jigger with the upcoming elections. I'm not talking about the November '06 vote in the USA (though they have plans for that, too). I'm talking about the election this Sunday in Mexico for their Presidency.

It begins with an FBI document marked, "Counterterrorism" and "Foreign Intelligence Collection" and "Secret." Date: "9/17/2001," six days after the attack on the World Trade towers. It's nice to know the feds got right on the ball, if a little late.

What does this have to do with jiggering Mexico's election? Hold that thought.

This document is what's called a "guidance" memo for using a private contractor to provide databases on dangerous foreigners. Good idea. We know the 19 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and the Persian Gulf Emirates. So you'd think the "Intelligence Collection" would be aimed at getting info on the guys in the Gulf.

No so. When we received the document, we obtained as well its classified appendix. The target nations for "foreign counterterrorism investigation" were nowhere near the Persian Gulf. Every one was in Latin America -- Argentina, Venezuela, Mexico and a handful of others. See one of the documents yourself.

Latin America?! Was there a terror cell about to cross into San Diego with exploding enchiladas?

All the target nations had one thing in common besides a lack of terrorists: each had a left-leaning presidential candidate or a left-leaning president in office. In Venezuela, President Hugo Chavez, bete noir of the Bush Administration, was facing a recall vote. In Mexico, the anti-Bush Mayor of Mexico City, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador was (and is) leading the race for the Presidency.

Most provocative is the contractor to whom this no-bid contract was handed: ChoicePoint Inc. of Alpharetta, Georgia. ChoicePoint is the database company that created a list for Governor Jeb Bush of Florida of voters to scrub from voter rolls before the 2000 election. ChoicePoint's list (94,000 names in all) contained few felons. Most of those on the list were guilty of no crime except Voting While Black. The disenfranchisement of these voters cost Al Gore the presidency.

Having chosen our President for us, our President's men chose ChoicePoint for this sweet War on Terror database gathering. The use of the Venezuela's and Mexico's voter registry files to fight terror is not visible -- but the use of the lists to manipulate elections is as obvious as the make-up on Katherine Harris' cheeks.

In Venezuela, leading up to the August 2004 vote on whether to re-call President Chavez, I saw his opposition pouring over the voter rolls in laptops, claiming the right to challenge voters as Jeb's crew did to voters in Florida. It turns out this operation was partly funded by the International Republican Institute of Washington, an arm of the GOP. Where did they get the voter info?

In that case, access to Venezuela's voter rolls didn't help the Republican-assisted drive against Chavez, who won by a crushing plurality.

In Mexico this Sunday, we can expect to see the same: challenges of Obrador voters in a race, the polls say, is too close to call. Not that Mexico's rulers need lessons from the Bush Administration on how to mess with elections.

In 1988, the candidate for Obrador's Party of the Democratic Revolution (PDR), who opinion polls showed as a certain winner, somehow came up short against the incumbent party of the ruling elite. Some of the electoral tricks were far from subtle. In the state of Guerrero, the PDR was leading on official tally sheets by 359,369. Oddly, the official final count was 309,202 for the ruling party, only182,874 for the PDR. Challenging the vote would have been dangerous. Two top officials of Obrador's party were assassinated during the campaign.

Crucial to the surprise victory of the ruling party was the introduction of computer voting machines and the centralization of voter databases. Observer Andrew Reding of the Council on Hemispheric Affairs reported that ruling party operatives had special access codes denied the opposition.

Whether the US "War on Terror" lists will find a use in Sunday's election, we cannot know. But the use of American government resources to interfere in south-of-the-border campaigns is an open secret. The GOP's International Republican Institute has run training sessions for the PAN youth wing, funded by US taxpayers through the "National Endowment for Democracy."

Foreign -- that is, American -- interference in political campaigns is a crime. That didn't stop Team Bush. However, when the theft of its citizen files was discovered, Argentina threatened to arrest ChoicePoint contractors until the company returned the tapes -- and Mexico's attorney general did in fact arrest the ChoicePoint data thieves to avoid his party's looking too much the stooge of its Washington patron. Whether George Bush gave back his copy, no one will say.

Wholesale theft is expected on Sunday in forms both subtle and brutal. How the US' purloined "counterterrorism" lists will be used, we don't know. We are certain however, that the Administration did not siphon off these Latin voter files to fight a War on Terror. It appears, rather, part of the Bush Administration's and GOP's hemispheric War on Democracy -- along a battle line which runs from Florida to Ohio to Juarez.

**********

For as-it-happens reporting on the Mexican election, check www.GregPalast.com for dispatches from our team investigator Special Correspondent Matt Pascarella with video journalist Rick Rowley in Mexico City.

Get your copy of Palast's new book, Armed Madhouse, at www.GregPalast.com

Special thanks to the Electronic Privacy Information Center, Washington DC, which received and passed on to our team the FBI ChoicePoint files and other foreign intelligence documentation.

PLEASE read these AlterNet articles! Don't have time? Then at least read the headlines!

THE 100 WORST CORPORATE CITIZENS
Phil Mattera, Corporate Research Project
There's no point in rewarding companies that play pick and
choose when it comes to business ethics.
http://www.alternet.org/workplace/37824/

NO CHOICE WHEN IT COMES TO LICENSE PLATES
Jennifer Fox, AlterNet
Why are anti-abortion 'Choose Life' license plates legal,
while pro-choice plates keep being struck down?
http://www.alternet.org/story/38281/

GETTING OFF OUR NUCLEAR POWER FIXATION
J.A. Savage, AlterNet
The vice president would have you believe nuclear power is
clean and safe. Here's everything you need to know about
just how unclean and dangerous it really is.
http://www.alternet.org/envirohealth/38261/

TEN REASONS WHY THE MEXICO ELECTION MATTERS
Joshua Holland, AlterNet
No electronic voting machines! Limits on negative
campaigning! Best of all, George W. Bush hates the leading
candidate.
http://www.alternet.org/story/38225/

ADULTERERS IN CHIEF
Steve Benen, Washington Monthly
The GOP's top three contenders for the 2008 race are the
most maritally challenged crop of presidential hopefuls in
American political history.
http://www.alternet.org/story/38015/

U.S. WATERS DOWN IRAQI PEACE PLAN
Medea Benjamin, Raed Jarrar, AlterNet
Thanks to U.S. meddling, Iraq's new reconciliation plan will
probably not entice many insurgents to lay down their
weapons.
http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/38143/

GOP IGNORES DANGER OF GLOBAL WARMING
The Progress Report
The Republicans and their business donors are stalling any
meaningful attempts to reduce the damage of global warming.
http://www.alternet.org/envirohealth/38199/

PINE RIDGE LEADER FACES BATTLE OVER ABORTION BAN
Kara Briggs, Women's eNews
The South Dakota abortion ban inspired the president of the
Oglala Sioux Nation to call for a clinic to be built on the
reservation. Now she faces impeachment.
http://www.alternet.org/story/38213/

WHY REPUBLICANS RIP THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT
Earl Ofari Hutchinson, New America Media
By stalling in renewal of the hugely important civil rights
legislation, the GOP is throwing a bone to conservative
Southern whites.
http://www.alternet.org/story/38202/

COOPERATIVE VS. COERCIVE POWER
Sean Gonsalves, AlterNet
The ability to make war is power. But is there any other
kind of power more effective than military might?
http://www.alternet.org/columnists/story/38217/

... and, if you have time, here's more from AlterNet:

BUSH IS NOT INCOMPETENT
George Lakoff, AlterNet
Bush's bumbling folksiness causes progressives to disregard
him -- but he has been overwhelmingly competent in
advancing his harmful conservative agenda.
http://www.alternet.org/story/38362/

THE RIGHT'S WAR ON CONTRACEPTION
Gloria Feldt, Women's eNews
What rational person can believe that any but crackpots
could oppose using birth control to prevent pregnancy?
http://www.alternet.org/rights/38285/

CORPORATIONS AREN'T PEOPLE
Joshua Holland, AlterNet
As we celebrate the Fourth, isn't it time to think about
spreading some democracy here at home? Here's a
not-so-modest proposal to start: abolish the concept of
corporate 'personhood.'
http://www.alternet.org/story/38406/

HOW BUSH BREAKS THE TEN COMMANDMENTS
Brooke Allen, Patrick Doyle, TheNation.com
Though he claims to be 'called by God,' the president is
clearly not devoted to following the Bible's most important teachings.
http://www.alternet.org/story/38215/

FALLUJAH'S RESTORATION IS FAR FROM REALITY
Dahr Jamail, Ali Fadhil, IPS News
The people of Fallujah are struggling to survive amidst
skyrocketing unemployment, lack of medical supplies and
ongoing violence in the city.
http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/38357/

BUSH'S SICK VISION OF 'DEMOCRACY'
Larisa Alexandrovna, AlterNet
The president believes our government should work like this:
President Breaks Law, Court says President broke law,
Congress vows to pass law to make President's actions
illegal, President attaches signing statement indicating he
will not follow law.
http://www.alternet.org/story/38397/

... and, if you still have time, here's even more from AlterNet:

AMERICA'S AIR-CONDITIONED NIGHTMARE
Stan Cox, AlterNet
Air-conditioning puts a chill on community spirit, aids the
cause of anti-enviros, and just might have given us
President George W. Bush.
http://www.alternet.org/story/38154/

THE STRUGGLE BETWEEN MOTHERS AND DAUGHTERS
Terrence McNally, AlterNet
Language guru Deborah Tannen explores the turbulent terrain
of the mother-daughter relationship.
http://www.alternet.org/story/37995/

BUSH'S GLOBAL GREEN ZONE
Tom Engelhardt, Tomdispatch.com
The administration has painstakingly created a fictitious
bubble of safety in its Baghdad 'Green Zone.' Now Bush
expects us to buy into the belief that he's made us all
safer, here and abroad.
http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/38221/

A SOLUTION TO THE FLAG DEBATE
David Morris, AlterNet
The prohibition against using the flag for advertising
purposes, as every American will discover on July 4, is
universally ignored. It's time to enforce the Flag Code.
http://www.alternet.org/story/38256/

A CHILDCARE WORKER SPEAKS OUT
Melvina Vandross, Women's Media Center
I take care of your kids 11 hours a day -- here's what you
should know about me.
http://www.alternet.org/workplace/38246/

BUSH VS. NEW YORK TIMES
Robert Scheer, Truthdig
Attacks on the New York Times aren't about national
security, they're about muting criticism.
http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/38251/

AN EPIC WEEK OF CUTTING AND RUNNING
Molly Ivins, AlterNet
In the middle of the GOP's weeklong festival of referring to
Dems as the party of 'retreat,' they abruptly announced
their own cut'n'run program.
http://www.alternet.org/columnists/story/38257/

Assorted headlines and links

IMPEACH BUSH NOW ballot initiative
http://www.impeachbush.tv/impeach/ballot.html

Gitmo win will likely cost Navy attorney his career
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/276109_swift01.html

Lest we forget ... Bush's infamous signing statements
http://www.buzzflash.com/alerts/06/06/ale06076.html

From The Scallion's mailbag

Top Ten Signs You're a Fundamentalist Christian


10 - You vigorously deny the existence of thousands of gods claimed by other
religions, but feel outraged when someone denies the existence of yours.

9 - You feel insulted and "dehumanized" when scientists say that people
evolved from other life forms, but you have no problem with the Biblical
claim that we were created from dirt.

8 - You laugh at polytheists, but you have no problem believing in a Triune
God.

7 - Your face turns purple when you hear of the "atrocities" attributed to
Allah, but you don't even flinch when hearing about how God/Jehovah
slaughtered all the babies of Egypt in "Exodus" and ordered the elimination
of entire ethnic groups in "Joshua" including women, children, and trees!

6 - You laugh at Hindu beliefs that deify humans, and Greek claims about
gods sleeping with women, but you have no problem believing that the Holy
Spirit impregnated Mary, who then gave birth to a man-god who got killed,
came back to life and then ascended into the sky.

5 - You are willing to spend your life looking for little loopholes in the
scientifically established age of Earth (few billion years), but you find
nothing wrong with believing dates recorded by Bronze Age tribesmen sitting
in their tents and guessing that Earth is a few generations old.

4 - You believe that the entire population of this planet with the exception
of those who share your beliefs -- though excluding those in all rival sects
- will spend Eternity in an infinite Hell of Suffering. And yet consider
your religion the most "tolerant" and "loving."

3 - While modern science, history, geology, biology, and physics have failed
to convince you otherwise, some idiot rolling around on the floor speaking
in "tongues" may be all the evidence you need to "prove" Christianity.

2 - You define 0.01% as a "high success rate" when it comes to answered
prayers. You consider that to be evidence that prayer works. And you think
that the remaining 99.99% FAILURE was simply the will of God.

1 - You actually know a lot less than many atheists and agnostics do about
the Bible, Christianity, and church history - but still call yourself a
Christian.

More from The Scallion's mailbag

A Scallion reader sent us this one. If you like "Hang on, Sloopy," you'll love this!

Download the mp3 song that's sweeping the Internet and Supreme Court fan clubs here.

If you can't download the mp3 from the "here" link above, use the link below and click on their "here" link:

http://www.airamerica.com/alfrankenshow/node/4154

Still more from The Scallion's mailbag

A Scallion reader listens to the radio show "Coast to Coast" (available on the net) and found the following story appalling:

http://WWW.fromthewilderness.Com/free/ciadrugs/W_plane.HTML

http://WWW.whatreallyhappened.Com/RANCHO/POLITICS/MENA/TATUM/tatum.HTML

Our reader remarks, "This would suggest that the Bushes AND the Clintons were in cahoots, selling Sandinista cocaine! ... I think we are living in one of the most corrupt countries of the world and that there is no hope left except revolution; otherwise, we are going to go the way the Roman empire did: the Barbarians (read: Muslims) will conquer our arrogant asses and we will have a return to the dark ages."

We of The Scallion can't disagree ... although it just might be the Chinese who conquer us, since they already pretty much own America as it is.

AlterNet Headlines

EDITORIAL: THE WORK AHEAD TO STOP THE OCCUPATION OF IRAQ
AlterNet
It's time to take a serious look at the obscene war
profiteering by Bush cronies, and convince all Americans
that the price of 'staying the course' is disaster.
http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/38157/

IRAQ: A SHOCKING WASTE OF MONEY
Matthew Yglesias, The American Prospect
Forget those early, absurd estimates about the cost of
our failed war in Iraq; the final tally is likely to be
over $1 trillion.
http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/38013/

WHY DO REPUBLICANS HATE AMERICA'S VETERANS?
Bob Geiger, AlterNet
The right-wing smear machine has set upon John Murtha -- a
decorated combat veteran -- for speaking out against the
Iraq war.
http://www.alternet.org/story/38145/

FEMALE BASE FOR HILLARY IN '08 ISN'T A GIMME
Allison Stevens, Women's eNews
Politically active women's groups are already attacking
Hillary Clinton for supporting the Iraq war and backing an
anti-choice Senate candidate.
http://www.alternet.org/story/38144/

OVERTHROW, OVER AND OVER
Laura S. Washington, In These Times
An unnerving new book takes a close look at America's long,
dark history of imperialism.
http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/38009/

Was the Invasion of Iraq A Jewish Conspiracy?

BY GREG PALAST
Tikkun Magazine JULY/AUGUST 2006

June 26, 2006


Did the Jews do it?

The US Congress will open hearings this week on the War in Iraq -- a wee bit late one might think. But one question at the forefront of the minds of many on both the Left and the Right is sure not to be asked: Did the Jews do it? I mean, after killing Jesus, did the Elders of Zion manipulate the government of the United States into invading Babylon as part of a scheme to abet the expansion of Greater Israel?

The question was first posed to me in 2004 when I was speaking at a meeting of Mobilization for Peace in San Jose. A member of the audience asked, Put it together Who s behind this war? Paul Wolfowitz and Elliott Abrams and the Project for a Jew American Century and, and, why don t you talk about that, huh? And ....

But the questioner never had the full opportunity to complete his query because, flushed and red, he began to charge the stage. The peace activists attempted to detain the gentleman whose confederates then grabbed some chairs to swing. As the Peace Center was taking on a somewhat warlike character, I chose to call in the authorities and slip out the back.

Still, his question intrigued me. As an investigative reporter, Who s behind this war? seemed like a reasonable challenge and if it were a plot of Christ-killers and Illuminati, so be it. I just report the facts, ma am.

And frankly, at first, it seemed like the gent had a point, twisted though his spin might be. There was Paul Wolfowitz, before Congress in March 2003, offering Americans the bargain of the century: a free Iraq not free as in freedom and democracy but free in the sense of this won t cost us a penny. Wolfowitz testified: There s a lot of money to pay for this that doesn t have to be U.S. taxpayer money.


A "Free" Iraq

And where would these billions come from? Wolfowitz told us: It starts with the assets of the Iraqi people.... The oil revenues of that country could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the next two or three years.

This was no small matter. The vulpine Deputy Defense Secretary knew that the number one question on the minds of Americans was not, Does Saddam really have the bomb? but What s this little war going to cost us?

However, Wolfowitz left something out of his testimony: the truth. I hunted for weeks for the source of the Pentagon s oil revenue projections and found them. They were wildly different from the Wolfowitz testimony. But this was not perjury. Ever since the conviction of Elliott Abrams for perjury before Congress during the Iran-Contra hearings, neither Wolfowitz nor the other Bush factotums swear an oath before testifying. If you don t raise your hand and promise to tell the truth, so help me, God, you re off the hook with federal prosecutors.

How the Lord will judge that little ploy, we cannot say.

But Wolfowitz s little numbers game can hardly count as a Great Zionist conspiracy. That seemed to come, at first glance, in the form of a confidential 101-page document slipped to our team at BBC's Newsnight. It detailed the economic "recovery" of Iraq's post-conquest economy. This blueprint for occupation, we learned, was first devised in secret in late 2001.

Notably, this program for Iraq's recovery wasn t written by Iraqis; rather, it was promoted by the neo-conservatives of the Defense Department, home of Abrams, Wolfowitz, Harold Rhode and other desktop Napoleons unafraid of moving toy tanks around the Pentagon war room.

Nose-Twist s Hidden Hand

The neo-cons 101-page confidential document, which came to me in a brown envelope in February 2001, just before the tanks rolled, goes boldly where no U.S. invasion plan had gone before: the complete rewrite of the conquered state s policies, law and regulations. A cap on the income taxes of Iraq s wealthiest was included as a matter of course. And this was undoubtedly history s first military assault plan appended to a program for toughening the target nation s copyright laws. Once the 82nd Airborne liberated Iraq, never again would the Ba athist dictatorship threaten America with bootleg dubs of Britney Spears s ...Baby One More Time.

It was more like a corporate takeover, except with Abrams tanks instead of junk bonds. It didn t strike me as the work of a Kosher Cabal for an Imperial Israel. In fact, it smelled of pork Pig Heaven for corporate America looking for a slice of Iraq, and I suspected its porcine source. I gave it a big sniff and, sure enough, I smelled Grover Norquist.

Norquist is the capo di capi of right-wing, big-money influence peddlers in Washington. Those jealous of his inside track to the White House call him "Gopher Nose-Twist."

A devout Christian, Norquist channeled a million dollars to the Christian Coalition to fight the devil s tool, legalized gambling. He didn t tell the Coalition that the loot came from an Indian tribe represented by Norquist s associate, Jack Abramoff. (The tribe didn t want competition for its own casino operations.)

I took a chance and dropped in on Norquist s L Street office, and under a poster of his idol [ NIXON NOW MORE THAN EVER ], Norquist took a look at the "recovery" plan for Iraq and practically jumped over my desk to sign it, filled with pride at seeing his baby. Yes, he promoted the privatizations, the tax limit for the rich, and the change in copyright law, all concerns close to the hearts and wallets of his clients.


The Oil on Page 73

The very un-Jewish Norquist may have framed much of the U.S. occupation grabfest, but there was, without doubt, one notable item in the 101-page plan for Iraq which clearly had the mark of Zion on it. On page seventy-three the plan called for the privatization....[of] the oil and supporting industries, the sell-off of every ounce of Iraq s oil fields and reserves. Its mastermind, I learned, was Ariel Cohen of the Heritage Foundation.

For the neo-cons, this was The Big One. Behind it, no less a goal than to bring down the lynchpin of Arab power, Saudi Arabia.

It would work like this: the Saudi s power rests on control of OPEC, the oil cartel which, as any good monopoly, withholds oil from the market, kicking up prices. Sell-off Iraq s oil fields and private companies will pump oil in their little Iraqi patches to the max. Iraq, the neo-cons hoped, would crank out six million barrels of oil a day, bust its OPEC quota, flood the world market, demolish OPEC and, as the price of oil fell off a cliff, Saudi Arabia would
fall to its knees.

It s a no-brainer, Cohen told me, at his office at Heritage. It was a dim little cubby, in which, in our hour or two together, the phone rang only once. For a guy who was supposed to be The Godfather of a globe-spanning Zionist scheme to destroy the Arab oil monopoly, he seemed kind of, well...pathetic.

And he failed. While the Norquist-promoted sell-offs, flat taxes and copyright laws were dictated into Iraqi law by occupation chief Paul Bremer, the Cohen neo-con oil privatization died an unhappy death. What happened, Ari?

"Arab economists," he hissed, "hired by the State Department the witches brew of the Saudi Royal family and Soviet Ostblock."

Well, the Soviet Ostblock does not exist, but the Arab economists do. I spoke with them in Riyadh, in London, in California, in wry accents mixing desert and Oxford drawls. They speak with confidence, knowing Saudi Arabia's political authority is protected by the royal families -- of Houston petroleum.


"Enhance OPEC"

After two mad years of hunting, I discovered the real plan for Iraq's oil, the one that keeps our troops in Fallujah. Some 323 pages long and deeply confidential, it was drafted at the James A. Baker III Institute in Houston, Texas, under the strict guidance of Big Oil's minions. It was the culmination of a series of planning groups that began in December 2000 with key players from the Baker Institute and Council on Foreign Relations (including one Ken Lay of Enron). This was followed by a State Department invasion-planning session in Walnut Creek, California, in February 2001, only weeks after Bush and Cheney took office. Its concepts received official blessing after a March 2001 gathering of oil chiefs (and Lay) with Dick Cheney where the group reviewed with the Vice-President the map of Iraq's oil fields.

Once I discovered the Big Oil plan, several of the players agreed to speak with me (not, to the chagrin of some, realizing that I rarely hold such conversions without secretly recording them). Most forthright was Philip Carroll, former CEO of Shell Oil USA, who was flown into Baghdad on a C-17 to make sure there would be no neo-con monkey business in America's newest oil fields.

It had been a very good war for Big Oil, with tripled oil prices meaning tripled profits. In Houston, I asked Carroll, a commanding, steel-straight chief executive, about Ari Cohen s oil privatization plan, the anti-Saudi no-brainer.

I would agree with that statement Caroll told me, privatization is a no-brainer. It would only be thought about by someone with no brain.

Bush world is divided in two: neo-cons on one side, and the Establishment (which includes the oil companies and the Saudis) on the other. The plan the Establishment created, crafted by Houston oil men, called for locking up Iraq s oil with agreements between a new state oil company under profit-sharing agreements with IOCs (International Oil Companies). The combine could enhance the [Iraq s] government s relationship with OPEC, it read, by holding the line on quotas and thereby upholding high prices.


Wolfowitz Dammerung: Twilight Of The Neo-Con Gods

So there you have it. Wolfowitz and his neo-con clique bookish, foolish, vainglorious had their asses kicked utterly, finally, and convincingly by the powers of petroleum, the Houston-Riyadh Big Oil axis.

Between the neo-cons and Big Oil, it wasn t much of a contest. The end-game was crushing, final. The Israelites had lost again in the land of Babylon. And to make certain the arriviste neo-cons got the point, public punishment was exacted, from exile to demotion to banishment. In January 2005, neo-con pointman Douglas Feith resigned from the Defense Department; his assistant
Larry Franklin later was busted for passing documents to pro-Israel lobbyists.
The State Department s knuckle-dragging enforcer of neo-con orthodoxies, John Bolton, was booted from Washington to New York to the powerless post of U.N. Ambassador.

Finally, on March 16, 2005, second anniversary of the invasion, neo-con leader of the pack Wolfowitz was cast out of the Pentagon war room and tossed into the World Bank, moving from the testosterone-powered, war-making decision center to the lending office for Bangladeshi chicken farmers.
The realists, crowed the triumphant editor of the journal of the Council on Foreign Relations, have defeated the fantasists!

So much for the Big Zionist Conspiracy that supposedly directed this war. A half- dozen confused Jews, wandering in the policy desert a long distance from mainstream Jewish views, armed only with Leo Strauss silly aphorisms, were no match for Texas oil majors and OPEC potentates with a combined throw weight of half a trillion barrels of oil.

**********

Investigative Reporter Greg Palast is the author of the New York Times bestseller, Armed Madhouse: Who s Afraid of Osama Wolf?, China Floats,
Bush Sinks, the Scheme to Steal 08, No Child s Behind Left and other
Dispatches from the Front Lines of the Class War to be released next week in United Kingdom and Ireland by Penguin UK, from which this essay is adapted

From the Huffington Post

NY GOP Rep.: The "Arrogant," "Left-Wing Elitist" New York Times Should Be Charged With Espionage...

From nytimes.com

Reacting to last Thursday's report in the New York Times revealing a secret Bush administration program examining Americans' bank transactions using a vast international database, Rep. Peter King (R-NY) launched an attack on the paper for its disclosure. Going farther than other conservatives (including Dick Cheney) who have recently criticized the Times and other newspapers for publishing details on the bank data program, King said he would be calling on Alberto Gonzales to bring charges against the paper.

"I am asking the Attorney General to begin an investigation and prosecution of the New York Times -- the reporters, the editors and the publisher," he said. "We're at war, and for the Times to release information about secret operations and methods is treasonous." King claimed the Times "violated the Espionage Act, the Comint Act," and that the paper was "pompous, arrogant, and more concerned about a left-wing elitist agenda than it is about the security of the American people." King added, "for the editor of the New York Times to say that he decides it's in the national interest -- no one elected them to anything." (The transcript can be read here.)
Click here to read the whole story.

Click here to discuss it on HuffPost.

Yet another reason to adopt a non-violent diet ...

The meatpacking industry treats its workers like slaves. Don't believe us? See for yourself at http://www.smithfieldjustice.com/index-real.html

AlterNet Headlines

FILL 'ER UP -- WITH FOOD
Stephen Pizzo, News for Real
Is turning food into fuel as millions starve to death really
the ethical answer to our oil addiction?
http://www.alternet.org/story/37938/

CAMPUS PAPERS CAN SAVE JOURNALISM
Sara Gruen, WireTap
As media mergers and budget cuts squeeze local papers ever
tighter, indy campus journalism is breaking news that the
mainstream outlets miss.
http://www.alternet.org/wiretap/37830/

ARE THE DEMS COMMITTING VOTE FRAUD?
Joshua Holland, AlterNet, The Mix
It's troubling when big-'D' Dems stand against small-'d'
democracy -- but they seem to be trying to keep a peace
candidate off the ballot.
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/themix/38043/

BARACK OBAMA: THE END OF SMALL POLITICS
Barack Obama, AlterNet
In an impassioned speech, the Illinois senator explains
Bush's ongoing failures, why the 'ownership society'
doesn't work, and why we must -- somehow -- hold on to
hope.
http://www.alternet.org/story/37695/

RAPPERS AREN'T FEELING OPRAH'S LOVE
Yvonne Bynoe, AlterNet
Oprah has refused to bring Ice Cube and Ludacris on her
show. But it's not their music she hates -- it's their
message of contempt for black women.
http://www.alternet.org/story/37815/

AIR CONDITIONING: OUR CROSS TO BEAR
Stan Cox, AlterNet
Those air conditioners that keep things cool and comfortable
inside are helping make the outside world even nastier.
http://www.alternet.org/envirohealth/37882/

CONNIE CHUNG'S FAREWELL: OH MY G-D
Evan Derkacz, AlterNet, The Mix
When a person is willing to make a complete ass of themselves
on TV, I can't help but have a little respect.
http://alternet.org/blogs/peek/37775/

ANTI-CHOICE LEGISLATORS HAVE GONE TOO FAR
Nancy Keenan, TomPaine.com
Let's be honest. Anti-choice legislators have gone too far
-- and on June 6th, most Americans seemed to agree.
http://www.alternet.org/rights/37877/

PEAK OIL = URBAN RUIN
George Orwel, AlterNet
Our economy depends so much on fossil fuel that a lack of
oil without any alternative fuel sources would lead to
total chaos.
http://www.alternet.org/story/37541/

GOP KILLS BILL TO POLICE HALLIBURTON
Bob Geiger, AlterNet
Republicans in Congress have made it clear they're willing
to fight for military contractors' right to lie, cheat and
defraud taxpayers.
http://www.alternet.org/story/37849/

HOW TO FIX OUR HEALTH CARE MESS
Jim Hightower, Hightower Lowdown
Bush's prescription-drug program is a boondoggle for
America's fraud-ridden health-industrial complex. A better
choice is available, and it's time to fight for it.
http://www.alternet.org/envirohealth/37624/

Go See An Inconvenient Truth on a Big Screen Near You

Global climate change is the most challenging environmental crisis
we've ever had to face. Scientists are done discussing whether or not
it is occurring -- it is.

It is easy to feel like this issue is too big -- too depressing -- to do
anything about. And you might be thinking that the last thing you want
to do is spend a couple hours listening to a washed up politician
lecture you about global warming. But Al Gore's new movie, An
Inconvenient Truth, delivers an unexpected amount of hope. I thought
this movie was so important that we shut down the office for a couple
hours and took everyone at Working Assets to see it. I'd like to take
this opportunity to encourage you to go see it too, along with your
friends and neighbors.

For more information about the movie and where it is playing, please
go to:
http://act.actforchange.com/cgi-bin7/DM/y/en5f0FA7wb0COb0BHIn0E7

A Scallion reader sent us this from a fellow blogger:

1. The Republican "hawks" love to boast of how quickly and efficiently the Iraqi security forces are getting trained and deployed to defeat the terrorists inside their country. They promise that "as the Iraqis stand up, we'll stand down."

2. The Republicans also love to boast that invading Iraq made America safer because we're "fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them over here."

3. Yesterday, Dick Cheney blew #1 and #2 all to hell with this jaw-dropping admission that we can never, ever pull our troops out:

"If we pull out, [the terrorists in Iraq] will follow us. It doesn't matter where we go. ... And it will continue---whether we complete the job or not in Iraq---only it'll get worse. Iraq will become a safe haven for terrorists."

Who's undermining the morale of our troops now by admitting the mission will never be accomplished? Who *could* that be, Dick?

Read it and weep: the death of American democracy one black vote at a time

VOTING RIGHTS ACT NAILED TO BURNING CROSS

Behind the Delay in Renewing Law is Scheme for Theft of 08
White Sheets Changed for Spreadsheets

by Greg Palast
For The Guardian
June 23, 2006

[New York] Don t kid yourself. The Republican Party s decision yesterday to delay the renewal of the Voting Rights Act has not a darn thing to do with objections of the Republican s White Sheets Caucus.

Complaints by a couple of Good Ol' Boys to legislation has never stopped the GOP leadership from rolling over dissenters.

This is a strategic stall meant to de-criminalize the Republican Party's new game of challenging voters of color by the hundreds of thousands.

In the 2004 Presidential race, the GOP ran a massive multi-state, multi-million-dollar operation to challenge the legitimacy of Black, Hispanic and Native-American voters. The methods used broke the law -- the Voting Rights Act. And while the Bush Administration's Civil Rights Division grinned and looked the other way, civil rights lawyers are circling, preparing to sue to stop the violations of the Act before the 2008 race.

Therefore, Republicans have promised to no longer break the law -- not by going legit but by eliminating the law.

The Act was passed in 1965 after the Ku Klux Klan and other upright citizens found they could use procedural tricks -- "literacy tests," poll taxes and more -- to block citizens of color from casting ballots.

De-criminalizing the "caging" lists

Here's what happened in '04 -- and what's in store for '08.

In the 2004 election, over THREE MILLION voters were challenged at the polls. No one had seen anything like it since the era of Jim Crow and burning crosses. In 2004, voters were told their registrations had been purged or that their addresses were "suspect."

Denied the right to the regular voting booths, these challenged voters were given "provisional" ballots. Over a million of these provisional ballots (1,090,729 of them) were tossed in the electoral dumpster uncounted.

Funny thing about those ballots. About 88% were cast by minority voters.

This isn't a number dropped on me from a black helicopter. They come from the raw data of the US Election Assistance Commission in Washington, DC.

At the heart of the GOP's mass challenge of voters were what the party's top brass called, "caging lists" -- secret files of hundreds of thousands of voters, almost every one from a Black-majority voting precinct.

When our investigations team, working for BBC TV, got our hands on these confidential files in October 2004, the Republicans told us the voters listed were their potential "donors." Really? The sheets included pages of men from homeless shelters in Florida.

Donor lists, my ass. Every expert told us, these were "challenge lists," meant to stop these Black voters from casting ballots.

When these "caged" voters arrived at the polls in November 2004, they found their registrations missing, their right to vote blocked or their absentee ballots rejected because their addresses were supposedly "fraudulent."

Why didn't the GOP honchos 'fess up to challenging these allegedly illegal voters? Because targeting voters of color is AGAINST THE LAW. The law in question is the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

The Act says you can't go after groups of voters if you choose your targets based on race. Given that almost all the voters on the GOP hit list are Black, the illegal racial profiling is beyond even Karl Rove's ability to come up with an alibi.

The Republicans target Black folk not because they don't like the color of their skin. They don't like the color of their vote: Democrat. For that reason, the GOP included on its hit list Jewish retirement homes in Florida. Apparently, the GOP was also gunning for the Elderly of Zion.

These so-called "fraudulent" voters, in fact, were not fraudulent at all. Page after page, as we've previously reported, are Black soldiers sent overseas. The Bush campaign used their absence from their US homes to accuse them of voting from false addresses.

Now that the GOP has been caught breaking the Voting Rights law, they have found a way to keep using their expensively obtained "caging" lists: let the law expire next year. If the Voting Rights Act dies in 2007, the 2008 race will be open season on dark-skinned voters. Only the renewal of the Voting Rights Act can prevent the planned racial wrecking of democracy.

"Pre-clearance" and the Great Blackout of 2000

Before the 2000 presidential balloting, then Jeb Bush's Secretary of State purged thousands of Black citizens' registrations on the grounds that they were "felons" not entitled to vote. Our review of the files determined that the crimes of most on the list was nothing more than VWB -- Voting While Black.

That "felon scrub," as the state called it, had to be "pre-cleared" under the Voting Rights Act. That is, "scrubs" and other changes in procedures must first be approved by the US Justice Department.

The Florida felon scrub slipped through this "pre-clearance" provision because Katherine Harris' assistant assured the government the scrub was just a clerical matter. Civil rights lawyers are now on the alert for such mendacity.

The Burning Cross Caucus of the Republican Party is bitching that "pre-clearance" of voting changes applies only to Southern states. I have to agree that singling out the Old Confederacy is a bit unfair. But the solution is not to smother the Voting Rights law but to spread its safeguards to all fifty of these United States.


White Sheets to Spread Sheets

Republicans argue that the racial voting games and the threats of the white-hooded Klansmen that kept African-Americans from the ballot box before the 1965 passage of the Voting Rights Act no longer threaten Black voters.

That's true. When I look over the "caging lists" and the "scrub sheets," it's clear to me that the GOP has traded in white sheets for spreadsheets.


Greg Palast is the author of Armed Madhouse: Who's Afraid of Osama Wolf?, China Floats Bush Sinks, the Scheme to Steal '08, No Child's Behind Left and other Dispatches from the Front Lines of the Class War. Order it here.

We of The Scallion think this Huffington Post story is so important that we're not even sizing down the headline:


Bank Data Secretly Reviewed By Bush Admin. Without Warrants Or Subpoenas...

AP

A major New York Times article first published last night exposes another secret program installed by the Bush administration after 9/11. Initially set up to trace funding for terrorist groups, the program tracks the financial records of thousands of people, using a vast international database.

Although government officials claim the program is only used to investigate those with ties to Al Qaeda, one former senior counterterrorism official said "the potential for abuse is enormous."

The program relies on a Belgian cooperative known as Swift, a company exempt from American laws restricting government access to private information because it is considered a messenger, not a financial institution.

The government's access to the information has stirred privacy concerns among some inside the Bush administration, and even some Swift executives raised questions about the legality of the program. The New York Times reports that Swift was ready to terminate the arrangement in 2003, but several major government officials, including Federal Reserve chair Alan Greenspan, intervened and persuaded the company to continue providing information.
Click here to read the whole story.

Click here to discuss it on HuffPost.

From the Hightower Lowdown

THE ARTFUL DODGER STRIKES AGAIN

Friday, June 16, 2006Posted by Jim Hightower

In the first grade or earlier, most of us are told a morality story about young George Washington. As a tyke, he cut down his father's favorite cherry tree. Confronted by papa, George said manfully: "I cannot tell... [read more]

ALITO STRIKES

Monday, June 19, 2006Posted by Jim Hightower

I hate to say, "I told you so," but let me just say one name to you: Sam Alito.
When he was nominated by Bush last year to replace Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court,... [read more]

CORPORATIZING THE BORDER

Tuesday, June 20, 2006Posted by Jim Hightower

What a surprise. George W wants to turn the illegal immigration issue into another multibillion-dollar boondoggle for giant corporations.
Such military contractors as Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Boeing, and Northrop Grumman are lined up at... [read more]

THE NARDELLI MODEL

Wednesday, June 21, 2006Posted by Jim Hightower

One of George W's most favorite corporate honchos is Bob Nardelli, CEO of the big box megachain, Home Depot. George touts Nardelli as a perfect model of America's corporate management.
Several of Home... [read more]

ATTACK BY THE CORPORATE FOXES

Thursday, June 22, 2006Posted by Jim Hightower

While George W, the congress, and the media have us all looking south to what they call the "invasion" of America by impoverished illegal immigrants, or looking east to what they call an "endless threat" to America from hordes of... [read more]

Headlines from AlterNet

PREGNANT AND UNHAPPY ABOUT IT
Chrisse France, Women's Media Center
Many women don't identify with either the pro-choice or the
anti-abortion movements. They're pregnant -- and they don't
want to be.
http://www.alternet.org/rights/37924/

AIR CONDITIONING: OUR CROSS TO BEAR
Stan Cox, AlterNet
Those air conditioners that keep things cool and comfortable
inside are helping make the outside world even nastier.
http://www.alternet.org/story/37882/

______________________________

FACES FROM GUANTANAMO
Anthony Kaufman, AlterNet
'The Road to Guantanamo,' a powerful new docudrama, reveals
how easy it is for innocent civilians to be swept up -- not
to mention cruelly interrogated and tortured -- in America's
'war on terror.'
http://www.alternet.org/movies/37940/

EXCLUSIVE VIDEO: Don't miss AlterNet's exclusive clip from the
powerful new film "The Road to Guantanamo." The film, which
opens June 23rd , chronicles the experience of three innocent
British detainees who are kidnapped and tortured at the prison.
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/37910/

______________________________

STOSSEL'S SINS OF OMISSION
Melissa McEwan, AlterNet
Considering his disdain for injury lawsuits, '20/20' anchor
John Stossel should give away a free whiplash collar with
every purchase of his new book.
http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/37802/

DICK CHENEY'S LAST THROES
Stephen Elliott, AlterNet
What, exactly, do Republicans mean by 'victory' in Iraq, and
how will we know when we have won?
http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/37874/

A CONGRESSIONAL DOUBLE STANDARD ON PAYCHECKS
The Progress Report
Paying working folks a livable wage helps everyone, but it's
been nine years -- and nine Congressional pay raises --
since the minimum wage was last increased.
http://www.alternet.org/workplace/37935/

HILLARY'S SHAMEFUL STRADDLING ON IRAQ
Robert Scheer, AlterNet
Sen. Clinton seems determined to revive the Cold War
liberalism that gave us the Vietnam War.
http://www.alternet.org/columnists/story/37928/

VIDEO: Daily Show - STEWART NAILS BUSH PROPAGANDA
Jon Stewart slices through Bush's latest propaganda effort in
Baghdad's Green Zone and his 'Commander in Hilarious' press
conference at the White House Rose Garden.
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/37607/

RIGHT-WING GROUP CALLING IT QUITS?
Jim Lobe, Inter Press Service
It looks like the Project for the New American Century, the
neocon group that promoted the invasion of Iraq, is closing
down.
http://www.alternet.org/story/37590/

We heard it through the grapevine ... The Scallion offers this excellent article arguing the separation of church and state written by R.G. Ingersoll

For many years priests have attempted to give to our Government a religious form. Zealots have succeeded in putting the legend upon our money: "In God We Trust;" and we have chaplains in the army and navy, and legislative proceedings are usually opened with prayer. All this is contrary to the genius of the Republic, contrary to the Declaration of Independence, and contrary really to the Constitution of the United States.

The Feudal system was supposed to be in accordance with the divine plan. The people were not governed by intelligence, but by threats and promises, by rewards and punishments. No effort was made to enlighten the common people; no one thought of educating a peasant -- of developing the mind of a laborer. The people were created to support thrones and altars. Their destiny was to toil and obey -- to work and want. They were to be satisfied with huts and hovels, with ignorance and rags, and their children must expect no more. In the presence of the king they fell upon their knees, and before the priest they groveled in the very dust. The poor peasant divided his earnings with the state, because he imagined it protected his body; he divided his crust with the church, believing that it protected his soul. He was the prey of Throne and Altar -- one deformed his body, the other his mind -- and these two vultures fed upon his toil. He was taught by the king to hate the people of other nations, and by the priest to despise the believers in all other religions. He was made the enemy of all people except his own. He had no sympathy with the peasants of other lands, enslaved and plundered like himself. He was kept in ignorance, because education is the enemy of superstition, and because education is the foe of that egotism often mistaken for patriotism.

Through all the ages of superstition, each nation has insisted that it was the peculiar care of the true God, and that it alone had the true religion -- that the gods of other nations were false and fraudulent, and that other religions were wicked, ignorant and absurd. In this way the seeds of hatred had been sown, and in this way have been kindled the flames of war. Men have had no sympathy with those of a different complexion, with those who knelt at other altars and expressed their thoughts in other words -- and even a difference in garments placed them beyond the sympathy of others. Every peculiarity was the food of prejudice and the excuse for hatred.

The government of God has been tried. It was tried in Palestine several thousand years ago, and the God of the Jews was a monster of cruelty and ignorance, and the people governed by this God lost their nationality. Theocracy was tried through the Middle Ages. God was the Governor -- the pope was his agent, and every priest and bishop and cardinal was armed with credentials from the Most High -- and the result was that the noblest and best were in prisons, the greatest and grandest perished at the stake. The result was that vices were crowned with honor, and virtues whipped naked through the streets. The result was that hypocrisy swayed the sceptre of authority, while honesty languished in the dungeons of the Inquisition.

We have tried the government of priests, and we know that such governments are without mercy. In the administration of theocracy, all the instruments of torture have been invented. If any man wishes to have God recognized in the Constitution of our country, let him read the history of the Inquisition, and let him remember that hundreds of millions of men, women and children have been sacrificed to placate the wrath, or win the approbation of this God.

If there be an infinite Being, he does not need our help -- we need not waste our energies in his defence. It is enough for us to give to every other human being the liberty we claim for ourselves.

- Robert Green Ingersoll, "God in the Constitution
"

This headline from MediaChannel.org is not actually knocking Move On, one of The Scallion's favorite organizations ... but it does demand a smarter usage of donor dollars. Makes sense to us!

HOW MOVEON WASTES ITS DONORS' MONEY

A follow-up of Vermont-based moviemaker John Scagliotti's second letter to MoveOn's Matzzle.

By John Scagliotti, Counterpunch

http://www.counterpunch.org/scagliotti06162006.html

This letter to the thief in chief from an irate Scallion staffer is followed by the Washington Post article that inspired it:

To: comments@whitehouse.gov
Subject: Read it and weep.

Mr. Bush,

I'm sure you clap your hands with glee when you read articles like the one below. After all, soldiers are expendable, right? They should feel honored to die ensuring that Exxon gets its billions and your rich fascist friends get their tax cuts, right? I wonder how many soldiers' lives could have been saved if 1% of Exxon's billions and the tax cuts for the rich had been spent buying proper armor and equipment for our military men and women who are now risking and losing their lives in the Middle East so that America's oil men can charge skyrocketing prices for oil. I'm sure the same question never crossed your mind. Frankly, I wonder how you sleep at night, and I wonder how you face yourself in the mirror without vomiting. And I pray for your soul.

-----
Private 1st Class John Hart whispered into the phone so he wouldn't be overheard. It was just a matter of time, he said, before his buddies and he bumped down some back road in Iraq right into an ambush. They were so exposed, the somber young soldier told his dad, back home in Bedford, Mass. They were riding around in unarmored Humvees with canvas tops and gaping openings on the sides where doors should be. That seemed pretty stupid now that people were shooting at them and lobbing rockets. John, a 20-year-old gunner whose job it was to keep his head up and return fire, felt hung out in the breeze.

As John's father, Brian Hart, remembers the conversation, he listened with growing alarm, then stepped into his home office so his wife, Alma, wouldn't hear. It was October 11, 2003.

The Harts couldn't have been prouder of their only son for answering the president's call to fight the war against terror in Iraq. That very day, the Harts had accepted a contract to sell their clapboard house in historic Bedford, in part because they felt out of step with anti-war sentiments in town. Seven months earlier, on the eve of war, the congregation of First Parish Unitarian Church had unfurled a big blue banner emblazoned: "Speak Out For Peace." The Harts were offended. The banner loomed over the town common, hallowed ground where Bedford minutemen had gathered before the first battles of the Revolutionary War in nearby Lexington and Concord. The normally soft-spoken Brian Hart told town selectmen that if the banner didn't come down, he'd sue the town. The day the war began, the Unitarians rolled up their peace banner voluntarily. Still, the skirmish left the Harts feeling so out of sorts with Bedford, their home of 14 years, that they planned to move away.

Now, talking on the phone with his young warrior, Brian tried to understand what he was hearing. Don't believe spinmeisters on TV, Brian recalls his son saying; the Iraqi insurgency is real and building. John and his buddies in Charlie Company of the 508th Infantry Regiment of the 173rd Airborne Brigade were patrolling ever longer distances in thin-skinned Humvees suited for hauling cargo, not for carrying soldiers under fire.

This was not the first time John had confided that the U.S. military was failing to provide him with essential equipment. In previous calls home, Brian recalls, John recounted a bewildering array of shortages and snafus. Before landing in Iraq that scorching July, John told his father, he'd been issued a winter-weight camouflage suit, body armor with protective plates too small to shield his broad chest, and a broken rifle. An expert marksman and former co-captain of the Bedford High School shooting team, John had been told to conserve scarce bullets by not taking practice shots to sight his weapon, he said. Summertime water rations were so inadequate that guys were passing out in the Iraqi heat.

John endured these hardships gamely. He had wanted to be a soldier as long as anyone could remember. In high school he joined the JROTC and daydreamed of military life, filling his notebooks with sketches of tanks. Now he was living his dream. During this call home, however, John seemed unusually concerned. He asked his dad to do something to get his buddies the equipment they needed to try to survive. "He said anything I could do would be greatly appreciated," Brian recalled.

Brian hung up, haunted by the grim fatalism in his son's voice. "This is how it's going to be," John had told him. "We're going to be riding down some road when we're ambushed from the side . . ." One week later, fatalism would prove to be prophecy.

PFC. CHRIS WILLIAMS, 19, remembers thinking: Why us?

Williams and John Hart were sitting in the back of an M998 cargo Humvee. It was late, nearly 9 p.m. on October 18, 2003. They were hot and tired. After an exhausting day escorting their commanding officer, Capt. John Kilbride, between "safe houses" where elements of his command were encamped, their vehicle and two other Humvees were to ride together to Kirkuk Air Base: hot chow, hot showers, phone banks and Internet access. "We were happy the day was going to end," Williams recalls. Then the plan changed.

Insurgents had just fired rockets at Kirkuk. The Air Force had coordinates for the enemy firing position, and this convoy had been ordered to hunt for the rocket-lobbers.

"I'm like, uh, why are they sending us?" Williams recalls. "We were returning kitchen equipment. We were not combat-effective . . . You are going to investigate a rocket attack. So you know they have rockets. Why send guys in a rickety Humvee to chase guys who have rockets?"

Williams didn't ask his questions aloud. "I was a private," recalls Williams, now a clerk at a Blockbuster Video in Washington state. "I wasn't supposed to ask questions."

The convoy rolled away from the safe house into the dark. There were 14 men among the three vehicles. Kilbride, one of at least four members of his extended family to graduate from West Point, rode in the lead Humvee. His second in command, 1st Lt. David Bernstein, 24, was in the last Humvee with Williams and Hart. Spec. Joshua Sams, 20, was at the wheel. Bernstein was valedictorian of his suburban Philadelphia high school. He graduated fifth in his class at West Point. He was so fit and gung-ho about physical training that his men affectionately called him Super Dave behind his back. Everyone liked Super Dave. He was known for listening to the concerns of his men and trying to help. "I respected him not because he was an officer but because of who he was as a person," Sams says.

It was pitch-black as the convoy followed a back road through open agricultural fields. Sitting on makeshift benches in the open back bed of the Humvee the two privates were not just exposed -- their only protection some Kevlar blankets draped over the benches -- they couldn't see much. Roughly 33 yards to the right, a large earthen berm paralleled the road. Up ahead, the road took a 90-degree turn to the left, and the berm turned with it.

It was about 9:15 p.m. when six to eight insurgents, dug in along the berm, opened fire on the convoy with rocket-propelled grenades, medium machine guns and AK-47 assault rifles, according to combatant interviews and available military documents. Kilbride's Humvee sped through the left turn in the road and kept going. It was standard procedure for ambushed convoys to speed through the kill zone, then regroup down the road for possible counterattack.

As the second Humvee accelerated, a chaplain who'd been hitching a ride back to base when the convoy mission changed took cover, lying flat on the floor; a soldier used the clergyman's back as a firing platform to steady his light machine gun. The third Humvee was taking the brunt of the enemy attack. Sams killed the headlights and hit the gas. He crouched low and leaned as far as he could out the open left side of the Humvee -- away from the enemy fire -- while still driving more than 50 miles an hour. Sams saw Bernstein next to him firing at the insurgents with his M4 rifle, he says. Behind him, he heard Hart open fire, too.

In the back bed of the Humvee next to Hart, Williams says, he believed his rifle had jammed. So he "went for cover," trying to shield himself behind the Kevlar blankets. "I was waiting to die," he says. He heard Hart's machine gun fall silent, then felt him drop to the floor of the Humvee beside him. He yelled at Hart to keep firing. Hart didn't answer or move. "That's when I knew he was dead," Williams says.

At the wheel, Sams recalls, he maneuvered to avoid being blown up by a rocket-propelled grenade that missed the Humvee by a yard and a half. Instead of following the left turn in the road, Sams drove straight onto a field. As the Humvee hurtled forward, Sams fell out the left side opening where a door should have been. As he tumbled, his armored vest snagged on the front left wheel well. He was dragged, still conscious, 25 yards, until the driverless Humvee struck the berm, then rolled backward, pinning Sams's left arm beneath the wheel.

Silence. Deep silence. Nobody was firing, Sams recalls. Not his guys. Not the other guys. The rest of the convoy was long gone. Sams wondered if anyone else was alive in his Humvee. He wondered if he was alone out there.

Sams tried to pull his arm free. It wouldn't budge. He swung his legs around, placed both feet in the wheel well and pushed, trying to lift the 1 1/4-ton vehicle off his arm. No go. Sams rolled on to his side and stretched out his legs, testing to see if he could reach one foot inside the Humvee and hit the gas. "Stuff you basically know you can't do," Sams recalls. "I was trying to save my arm."

Desperate, Sams called out in the dark that his arm was pinned and he needed someone to drive the Humvee off him. A lone figure appeared around the back of the Humvee. It was too dark for Sams to make out who it was. Maybe an insurgent, in which case he was dead. Sams watched the large silent figure lurch around the truck, struggle to climb in the driver's side opening, fail and fall down. Again, the figure tried to climb into the Humvee, and again he fell. Four times he tried and fell, Sams recalls. On the fifth attempt, the figure climbed into the driver's seat and reversed the Humvee off Sams's arm. Then the man collapsed and tumbled out of the Humvee onto the dirt field.

Sams tried to stand to go to his rescuer but fell forward; that's when he realized he had broken his ankle. He fell close enough to his rescuer to recognize him at last. It was Bernstein: Super Dave. "I asked him where he was hit," Sams recalls. "He said, 'My leg.'" Sams, who had taken a 2 1/2-day course in basic combat first aid, patted Bernstein's left leg until he felt dampness. "I found his entrance and exit wound," Sams says. "My fingers went in as I was patting him up." The insurgents' machine-gun fire had easily pierced the thin skin of their unarmored vehicle and struck Bernstein above the left knee.

Sams, like most soldiers, kept field dressings, gauze pads with strings attached, tucked in the webbing of his armored vest. He tied the dressing around Bernstein's leg. "That's when it dawned on me I have two privates in the back of the vehicle I haven't heard a word from," Sams recalls.

Steadying himself against the Humvee, Sams hopped back to the rear of the vehicle. There he found Hart dead with a bullet hole in his neck and Williams sitting unharmed, head down, arms wrapped around his legs. Sams thought Williams might be in shock; Williams said he wasn't. Sams told Williams to pick up Hart's machine gun, reload and stand guard. Williams searched Hart's body for more ammo. In the dark, Williams couldn't figure out how to remove Hart's ammo case, so he tore the bullets out in strips, hurrying in case they were attacked again.

Sams went back to kneel beside his lieutenant. "My pants legs were instantly covered, drenched in blood," Sams says. The bullet had severed Bernstein's femoral artery. The lieutenant was going to bleed to death if they didn't tie a tourniquet around his leg fast. But they hadn't been issued tourniquets.

Eight months earlier, a committee of military medical experts had urged the Pentagon to give every soldier in the war a tourniquet. Bleeding to death from an arm or leg wound is the most common cause of preventable death in combat, the Committee on Tactical Combat Casualty Care reported. Quick access to a cheap, simple modern tourniquet could save many lives, military doctors had concluded. Yet it would be two more years before the U.S. Central Command, which runs combat operations in Iraq, adopted a policy saying all soldiers in combat should carry a tourniquet. Even then, the policy was moot because the Army didn't widely distribute tourniquets for several more months. An investigation by the Baltimore Sun spurred that distribution and documented one reason for the delay: Military procurement specialists were studying what kind of pouch to carry the new first aid kits with tourniquets in.

That left Sams, in October 2003, in much the same position as a soldier on a Revolutionary War battlefield: trying to improvise a tourniquet with a length of cloth and a stick. Only Sams couldn't find a stick in the Iraqi field.

"I was looking for anything hard," Sams recalls. He and Williams found a fuel-can nozzle in the Humvee. Sams wrapped a fresh field dressing around Bernstein's leg and used the gas nozzle to try to twist the dressing tightly enough to staunch the arterial bleed. As Sams twisted, the strings on the field dressing broke.

Desperate, Sams cut the strap off an M4 rifle and tried again. The strap didn't break, but it was too short. It kept coming untwisted, Sams says. So he tied a dressing on top of his improvised tourniquet to keep it in place. Bernstein still had a pulse, but he'd stopped moaning, Sams says.

Sams didn't have time to feel relieved when he finally spied his platoon leader and a few other soldiers -- a scouting party from the convoy -- walking toward their crash site. He checked the lieutenant's neck and could no longer find a pulse, he says. He tried to perform CPR, but with his wounded arm couldn't apply much pressure. He let one of the newly arrived soldiers take over. Sams leaned against the Humvee, exhausted, and watched a sad succession of privates and officers pound Bernstein's chest long past knowing their efforts were futile. Roughly an hour after the attack on the convoy, a Blackhawk helicopter arrived to evacuate Bernstein and Sams, according to interviews and records.

Sams, now a long-haul truck driver, never regained the feeling in his left arm. Bernstein, one of West Point's finest, a genuine hero educated for military brilliance at a cost of more than $400,000 to taxpayers, died without a $20 tourniquet.

John Hart -- who loved the celebratory soldiers' anthem "When Johnny Comes Marching Home" -- never would.

THE NEXT MORNING in a tan clapboard house in Bedford, Brian Hart knew even before he saw the Army officer, policeman and Catholic priest standing stone-faced on his front stoop. He could hear Alma screaming, "N-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o!"

It wasn't long before the Harts' house was jammed with mourners. Camera crews camped out front. Brian and Alma knew scant details about how John and Bernstein had died. They knew their son and the lieutenant had the sad distinction of being the 103rd and 104th soldiers to die in Iraq after President George W. Bush declared an end to major combat. Brian and Alma didn't draw the drapes on their grief. They held impromptu news conferences on the lawn. They still believed in the war, Alma, then 45, told the Boston Globe. "You know, it's just a dirty job that's got to be done." John understood the risk when he enlisted, and went to Iraq "eyes open," Brian, then 44, told the Associated Press.

The Unitarian church pastor, the Rev. John Gibbons, arrived to offer condolences to the family that had opposed his congregation's peace banner; he found them, he remembers, looking dazed at the center of a chaotic throng. Earlier that morning, Gibbons had taken the pulpit to say that issues of war were no longer abstract for Bedford. The town of just over 12,000 had suffered its first battlefield casualty since World War II.

Bedford mourned John's loss along with his parents and two younger sisters. The first snow of the season had blanketed the town commons, where hundreds of residents gathered for a candlelight vigil in John's memory. A former classmate of John's made a huge magenta wreath, festooned it with a photograph of John in his uniform and laid it against a granite boulder on the commons. A few days later, at a more formal memorial service, Gibbons read a poem by Archibald MacLeish:

"The young dead soldiers do not speak. Nevertheless, they are heard in the still houses . . . They say: Our deaths are not ours; they are yours, they will mean what you make them."

John's body was en route from Iraq to be buried at Arlington National Cemetery. Brian and Alma spent all week unsure exactly where their dead son was.

Brian felt lost, too. It was almost impossible to believe that a young man so tenderhearted that he once tried to save a sick skunk -- and ended up getting 10 weeks of rabies shots for his troubles -- died so violently. One week after John's death, Brian walked alone to the town commons. It was nearly midnight. The only motion in the square was a stoplight flashing yellow. Brian sat on a bench next to John's photo, smiling at him from the magenta wreath -- so sweet and handsome -- and sobbed.

On October 31, 2003, the Harts went to West Point for Bernstein's funeral. After the service, Brian says, he asked the sergeant who had escorted Bernstein's body back from Iraq if it was true that the lieutenant and his son had been riding in an unarmored Humvee. The sergeant said yes and that he thought there were only five fully factory-armored M114 Humvees in all of northeastern Iraq. What else, Brian wanted to know, did our soldiers in Iraq need but not have. The sergeant introduced Brian to an Army officer, and they talked for an hour. "I learned that these boys didn't even have the right bandages," Brian recalls.

It is on the battlefield that some men find their moment of truth. They shoot or duck, kill or hesitate, save or sacrifice themselves. Brian Hart, who never donned a uniform or raised a gun at any enemy, experienced his moment of truth in a graveyard for soldiers.

ONCE BRIAN STARTED asking questions, he couldn't stop.

He flew to Washington two days before John's funeral at Arlington to question the soldier escorting his son's body home -- Chris Williams, who'd been riding next to John during the fatal ambush. Williams told him that the bullet that killed Bernstein went right through the thin metal skin of the unarmored Humvee and that the vehicle had not even a simple gun shield for John to take cover behind when he returned fire.

Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) was planning to attend John's November 4 funeral. Brian contacted his office and asked if he and Kennedy could meet before the service to talk. Some of Brian's relatives were aghast. Brian grew up in a family of fundamentalist Christians who vote Republican. At the University of Texas, Brian was president of the campus Republicans. Now some of his Texas relatives warned Brian not to be seen with Kennedy, he recalls. Brian didn't care. To get answers, he needed allies. He even called John Kerry's presidential campaign; but nobody called back, he says. Kerry did send an aide to John's funeral.

Standing in an administrative office at Arlington, John Hart's grieving parents and Kennedy talked so long that they delayed the funeral 30 minutes. Kennedy promised that he would try to get the Senate Armed Services Committee to hold a hearing on equipment shortages.

During the service, taps sounded in the distance seven or eight times for other soldiers being laid to rest. The Harts flew home, where Brian, a business executive, began spending hours at his computer and on the phone, searching for an explanation of how the world's greatest military could have let his son and Bernstein die the way they did.

"I needed to know," he says. "I just needed to know what was going on. John asked me to do something, then he was dead.''

"WE HAVE WHAT WE HAVE," Army Chief of Staff Peter Schoomaker said as he sat at the witness table in a meeting room of the Hart Senate Office Building. "We have as much body armor as we have, because that's what we invested in. We have the amount of Humvees because that's what we invested in."

On November 19, 2003, the Senate Armed Services Committee held a hearing at which senators questioned Schoomaker and acting secretary of the Army Les Brownlee about shortages in body armor and armored Humvees.

Brownlee acknowledged that in some places in Iraq the U.S. military could provide only one Interceptor vest with protective plates for every three U.S. soldiers. The military was so short of fully factory-armored Humvees that it would take two years for the manufacturer to produce enough to meet current needs, he said. To try to protect troops sooner than that, the military was "testing and examining" ways to add armor to existing thin-skinned Humvees.

Kennedy retorted that waiting until 2005 for an adequate supply of factory-armored Humvees was unacceptable; he invoked Brian and Alma Hart to explain why: "When I was out at Arlington for Private First Class Hart's burial, the parents said, 'If you can do anything to make sure that other soldiers who are over there are not put in the kind of danger that my son was put in, and lost, that would be the best thing that we could ever think of in terms of our son.'" Kennedy pressed Brownlee on whether the military could speed production of new fully factory-armored Humvees.

"I've been assured we're buying everything they can produce," Brownlee said.

"I mean, are they running their plant 24 hours a day?" Kennedy asked.

"My understanding is, sir, they're operating at maximum capacity. . ."

That night, some television news reports on the hearing mentioned John's death. The Harts had become the poster family for preventable deaths in unarmored Humvees. Brian was a natural spokesman for the cause. He had the soft voice and gentle, optimistic demeanor of a Jimmy Stewart character. He had boundless faith that now that the equipment problems had been acknowledged, the nation would solve them. He even started to feel a little bit like "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington."

"I thought it was all a mistake that would be corrected once people found out," he says.

SOLDIERS HAVE BEEN DYING over equipment failures for as long as nations have made war. As the traditional nursery rhyme, meant to teach children the consequences of failing to prepare, goes:

For want of a nail the shoe was lost.

For want of a shoe the horse was lost.

For want of a horse the rider was lost

For want of a rider the battle was lost.

For want of a battle the kingdom was lost.

And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.

Some equipment shortages in the Iraq war were both as tragic and as easy as the rhyme to understand. The Pentagon prepared to fight the wrong war: a short war over weapons of mass destruction that would end with Iraqis celebrating their liberation. One month before the war, for example, the Army had on hand at least two chemical-bio protective suits for every soldier it would send into Iraq, the Government Accountability Office later documented. They sat unneeded. The WMD never materialized, while the insurgency flourished without the benefit of any chemical or biological weapons.

Meanwhile, nearly 50,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, more than one-third of the total force there, still lacked modern body armor eight months after the war began, an Army spokesman said at the time. The U.S. military had expected that only "forward combat elements" would need body armor, not "the rear troops, the logistics forces," Brownlee explained to the Senate Armed Services Committee on November 19. They hadn't expected an insurgency that placed all the troops at risk of coming into close contact with the enemy.

"There is no rear area," Sen. John Warner (R-Va.), the committee chairman, said.

Some equipment problems and shortages that plagued the troops in Iraq were more baffling, Brian Hart discovered as he began networking with politicians, soldiers, private contractors and relatives of soldiers eager to get troops whatever they needed to survive. In December, Brian corresponded with people in Missouri volunteering time and money to privately armor vehicles for a company of Army Reservists about to go to Iraq.

"The town mortician paid the bill," Brian recalls. "A local steel company shut down for a week. A crew armored the vehicles with high-grade commercial steel."

Brian delighted in the can-do spirit of his fellow Americans -- but only briefly. The Army threatened not to let the reservists use their freshly cut 13,000 pounds of donated armor because the steel hadn't been tested for conformity to military specifications. The reservists left for Iraq with armor for their vehicles only after irate Missouri congressmen intervened at the last minute.

Brian was dumbfounded.

ON THE EVE OF WAR -- eight months before Pfc. John Hart and 1st Lt. David Bernstein took their final ride in an ill-equipped convoy -- some of the nation's most powerful members of Congress asked top military and defense officials to testify about Bush's defense budget. The hearing room was packed on February 13, 2003, as Gen. Richard Myers, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld faced their legislative overseer, the Senate Armed Services Committee. An invasion of Iraq seemed imminent. Tensions with North Korea were mounting.

Sen. Warner asked Myers the obvious question: Was the military prepared? "So, I start with you, General," Warner said. "The armed forces, which are under your super-vision: Is it your professional judgment that they are prepared to meet any contingency for the use of force as may be required in Iraq . . . and to continue the high level of activity against the worldwide terrorism?"

Myers responded: "I'll give you a real short answer: absolutely."

Neither Warner nor the other senators present asked follow-up questions about preparedness. The senators didn't ask about what the nation's fighting men and women might need that they didn't have. The general didn't tell.

They would have had plenty to talk about.

Gen. Eric K. Shinseki, then Army chief of staff, wrote to Congress a few weeks later, saying that the administration budget left the Army alone $3.2 billion short of what the service needed for "sustainment of war-fighting readiness." Shinseki's wish list of unfunded requests included items as basic as guns, bullets and armor.

Once the nation went to war, soldiers and Marines on the ground soon found themselves short of even water and food. According to the GAO, the military lacked more than 1 million cases of Meals Ready to Eat. Soldiers ran short of the non-rechargeable lithium batteries needed to operate 60 different communication and electronic systems, systems that are critical to tracking targets or allowing soldiers under fire talk to one another. Many soldiers and Marines not only didn't have armor on trucks or Humvees, they didn't even have spare tires. The tire shortage was so severe that some soldiers and Marines were forced to strip and abandon expensive, and otherwise perfectly good, vehicles because they had no way to replace flats, the GAO later documented.

Soldiers lacking body armor and riding in unarmored vehicles with no spare tires were not unfortunate flukes. They were evidence of what the GAO, in a 2005 report, called systemic problems with how the military prepares for war. Among them: failing to maintain adequate reserves of crucial items; inaccurately forecasting supply; inadequate funding; and delayed purchasing.

"All of us had certain imperfections, whether it's the military branch or the Congress," Warner says now. Both military decision-makers and their congressional overseers drew on their experiences of the Gulf War, which was over "in 100 hours," he says.

"This problem was entirely foreseeable," says Winslow Wheeler, who published a 2004 book on the subject titled Wastrals of Defense. Wheeler spent 30 years as a congressional staff member before joining a privately funded research institute, the Center for Defense Information, as head of its military reform project. "It is the inevitable consequence of what we've been doing for the last 30 years . . . Pedestrian items are not sexy inside the Pentagon, and certainly not on Capitol Hill. They only become sexy when you go to war and they are missing."

Since the mid-1970s, would-be reformers have lamented that the military, in its efforts to modernize, tends to make its equipment and weapons systems more complicated, which makes them more expensive -- but not necessarily more effective. In 1983, a Pentagon analyst named Franklin C. Spinney made the cover of Time magazine for his efforts, deeply unpopular inside the Pentagon, to debunk the assumptions driving that trend. When new weapons systems were being developed, Spinney observed, Pentagon planners tended to promise they would be cheaper, better and easier to maintain than the old system. Rosy predictions helped get the new system approved, Spinney argued. So did what he called political engineering, in which the contractor chosen to build the system would seek subcontractors in as many congressional districts as possible. Inevitably, Spinney found, as the program evolved, the Pentagon would be forced to acknowledge continual cost increases while curtailing performance r equirements.

Astronomically expensive ventures such as the $72 billion F/A-22 Raptor program -- in which the cost of each fighter jet has soared to more than $350 million -- leave relative scraps for more mundane Pentagon programs that provide soldiers with boots, bullets and beans, Spinney said. "The problem has only gotten worse since I first started talking about it," Spinney says now.

As costs for new systems strain the budget, Defense Department managers look for accounts to raid. "They raid two places particularly: the operating budget and the personnel budget," says Wheeler, who worked on defense budgeting during his decades on the Hill. "The operating budget buys spare parts, clothing, ammunition, gas, food, all that un-sexy, pedestrian stuff." Congress, rather than force the Pentagon to reorder its priorities and buy servicemen and women what they'll need most should they have to go to war, "gets these budget requests and makes the problem worse," Wheeler says. "Congress adds pork." Members of Congress salt defense budgets with pet projects like a jogging track, snake eradication programs or a parade ground maintenance contract for a long-closed military base -- all actual examples from recent budgets, Wheeler says.

"Congress has been doing this for decades," he says. "The aspect that is new is that the amount of pork has been accelerating since 9/11. There's cover for defense spending in that we're now at war. Nobody has paid much attention."

Once the Iraq war began, members of Congress were flooded with calls and letters from constituents who were angry and scared that their loved ones were under-equipped. "When soldiers have Internet access and get to phone home, you can't hide the truth for long," Brian Hart says. Congress demanded that the military correct the problem and authorized the Pentagon to spend $5 billion more for body and vehicular armor than the president requested, Warner says. But it was too late for many soldiers.

The U.S. military bureaucracy is like a giant overloaded ship that turns excruciatingly slowly -- even under fire. In May 2003 the first U.S. soldier in Iraq was killed by an improvised explosive device (IED). "It was about a week later before the second one showed up and about another week before the third one," Maj. Gen. Buford C. Blount, who led U.S. troops into Iraq from Kuwait at the start of the war, later told Congress. By mid-June it was clear "a pattern started to develop for IED usage," Blount testified. Yet it wasn't until November 2003 -- nearly five months later -- that the Army said it needed 3,780 armor kits to retrofit five types of trucks to protect the troops from IEDs. The Army did not produce all the kits until February 2005 and did not install them fully until May 2005 -- 18 months after it formally identified the need, the GAO found. By that time, however, the number of unarmored trucks in Iraq that needed retrofitting kits had skyrocketed, outstripping the supply.

Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, expressed outrage when he visited Iraq in 2004 and found still-desperate troops hanging plywood around open-bedded vehicles. Back in Washington he called three generals and an undersecretary of defense before the committee to excoriate them. "We've got an acquisition system that absolutely has a case of the slows," Hunter said. "You guys can't tie your shoelaces."

"Thank God for the inventiveness of the American soldier," Michael Wynne, then acting undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics, responded. "I'd like to also say, sir, that there are some things that you are, I think, highlighting today that we could do better."

Jim Magee, a retired Marine colonel who experienced the military acquisition system as both a soldier and a contractor, agrees. He says that while serving in Beirut in 1982, he was disgusted to see French soldiers wearing expensive, state-of-the-art body armor while his men were wearing "junk that wouldn't stop a rumor." Magee vowed to change that. In the mid-1990s, he became president of Point Blank Body Armor, where he helped develop the Interceptor body armor system now issued to every U.S. soldier in Iraq. The Interceptor consists of an outer vest, designed primarily to stop shrapnel; front and back ceramic inserts to stop small arms fire; and attachments to protect areas such as the throat and groin.

Working on the project, Magee says, he was frustrated by what he viewed as the low priority the military seemed to place on getting troops the best body armor possible. As military officials reviewed prototypes of the Interceptor, they asked Point Blank to reduce the areas of the body to be covered by the outer vest, change the configuration of the ceramic plates and limit the available sizes of those plates, Magee says. "The reason was money," Magee says. An Army spokesman, Lt. Col. William Wiggins, says he was unable to locate any military procurement official who recalled suggesting that "they wanted less coverage or smaller plates based on budget objectives."

Once Point Blank and the military agreed on what body armor to produce, Magee expected that the military might contract with several companies to make it, ensuring that all U.S. troops received them as soon as possible, he says. Instead, Point Blank won an exclusive contract to make the outer vests through "very effective lobbying," Magee says. Magee, who left Point Blank in 1999, was a salaried employee, and the exclusive contract with the military didn't increase his paycheck, he says. But it was a good deal for David Brooks, the chief executive and largest shareholder of Point Blank's parent company, DHB Industries Inc. His compensation went from $525,000 in 2001 to more than $70 million in 2004.

It was a considerably less good deal for soldiers and Marines, Magee says. Roughly 20 companies in the country were qualified to make the Interceptor's outer vest, Magee says: "It's not rocket science. It's sewing."

By initially hiring just Point Blank, and spreading body armor purchases from the company out over several years, the military created a bottleneck that kept many soldiers and Marines wearing outdated vests unnecessarily for years, Magee says.

At the start of the Iraq War, Point Blank was producing just 1,200 Interceptor vests a month, Army spokesman Wiggins says. Once the Iraq war began and the body armor shortage became obvious, the Pentagon hired additional contractors to make the vests and protective plate inserts, which sped up production to a peak of 25,000 outer vests a month. Still, the GAO documented that not all troops in Iraq had Interceptor vests and plates until January 2004 -- eight months after combat operations were declared over. Wiggins called the Army's production ramp-up a "tremendous success story . . . The requirements kept changing. We needed more and more and more. It was quite a feat."

The Army recently announced that it wants to replace the Interceptor system with improved body armor and will hold an open design competition. The announcement came as the Justice and Defense departments opened a joint investigation into possible fraud and insider trading at DHB.

BRIAN HART STRUGGLED TO WAKE. He heard someone weeping. Panicked that one of his daughters down the hall was in trouble, Brian shook himself fully awake. Only then, he says, did he realize that it was he who was crying.

December 2003 was bleak. Before John was killed in an ambushed convoy, Brian had accepted a new job in Illinois with the company that had taken over the small pharmacy automation firm he'd co-founded. Brian and Alma had contracted to sell their house in Bedford and buy one in Illinois.

After John's death, they scuttled the move. Their daughters, then 13 and 17, couldn't stand to leave Bedford, where schoolmates not only knew their loss, they shared it. John, a former camp counselor, had taught a lot of kids in the small town how to swim.

Brian negotiated a buyout with his employer. But there was nothing he could do to stop his house sale. The day the movers packed up their old house, Brian and Alma had no idea where to send the boxes. They put their dog in a kennel and prepared to spend Christmas in a hotel. At the last minute, the wife of a Bedford selectman -- a member of the council Brian had threatened to sue over the Unitarians' peace banner -- found the Harts a house to rent. A friend showed up on their new front porch with a fully decorated Christmas tree. The Unitarians' pastor invited the Harts to join them for Sunday worship, but Brian resisted. "If I still had religious faith, I'd use it," Brian says. "I guess life's just kicked it out of me. What I have faith in is good people and the power of individual good works."

He also believes in systems that work. Brian's father had died years before because of a medication error, Brian says. So Brian helped invent a system for bar-coding medications to reduce mistakes. A natural problem-solver, he shared in more than a dozen patents. With no job to go to, Brian devoted himself to trying to make sure that the Pentagon sped armored Humvees to Iraq. "I thought: 'It'll take six weeks, maybe two months, of working to fix this armor thing. How hard can it be?'" Brian recalls.

When he sat in the living room of his rented home to listen to Bush's State of the Union address in January 2004, Brian was sure he was right. The president promised to get the troops the resources they needed.

It wasn't long before Brian stopped believing.

The Pentagon blamed production delays for the slow pace of getting armored Humvees to Iraq. Brian met with a representative of the manufacturer who told him they could produce hundreds of additional armored Humvees each month -- if only the Pentagon would issue purchase orders, Brian recalls. Then he learned that the administration's budget request for the next fiscal year didn't include any money for armoring existing Humvees or trucks.

"While we're in a state of combat, how could force protection be an unfunded Army requirement and not in the president's original budget submission?" Rep. Rob Simmons (R-Conn.) asked Pentagon officials during a House Armed Services Committee hearing in June 2004.

"We are executing the missions that have been given to us, and the requirements have continued to escalate," Lt. Gen. Joseph Yakovac Jr., of the Army Acquisition Corps, responded.

Hunter, the committee chair, asked Brig. Gen. William Catto of the Marine Corps Systems Command the same question. "When you're in a war fight and you've got these IEDs blowing up, and we're taking fairly substantial casualties, why would force protection, such as up-armor, ever be an unfunded requirement?" Hunter wanted to know. "We've got military construction programs for things like gymnasiums, and yet that money continues to flow into those programs, which are peripheral to the war fight, and it doesn't go to the fight. That seems, to me, to be a major defect in this system. Would you agree with that?"

"Yes, sir," Catto said.

Brian came up with his own answer. He decided that the Bush administration, which he had helped elect, was trying to hide the cost of war in an election year. "I felt there was a huge betrayal of the public trust -- my trust," Brian says. "I decided that I was going to raise holy hell until people understood what was going on."

In March 2004, Brian held a news conference with Rep. Martin T. Meehan (D-Mass.) to insist that the Army spend all funds already set aside for vehicular armor immediately, rather than over months.

At First Parish Unitarian in Bedford hundreds of people showed up for forums on the Iraq war where Brian and Massachusetts politicians spoke. "Brian and Alma researched the issue of armor procurement in a very dispassionate way," Gibbons, the congregation's pastor, says. "They did not seek out information in order to posture or bolster any preconceived notion. They simply wanted to know the truth."

Brian learned so much about armor that he sometimes spoke in more detail than people could take. Once, when the Harts were being interviewed on CNN and wearing earpieces to receive off-camera direction from the segment producer, they heard the producer pleading with their interviewer to shut Brian up. "He kept saying: 'Get him off! Get him off! . . . Pul-leeeeeze get him off!'" Alma recalls, laughing.

In July 2004, Congress passed legislation giving the administration $25 billion in emergency war funds -- more than $1 billion of that to buy new armored vehicles, primarily M114 Humvees. The Harts went out to dinner to celebrate. Exhilaration proved fleeting. Soon, they were receiving panicked calls and e-mails from relatives of National Guardsmen: The military was finally going to pay to systematically armor Humvees -- but not trucks. Surfing the Web, Brian found grainy videos posted by insurgents displaying their successful attacks on U.S. convoys in Iraq. "The insurgents were just letting the armored Humvees pass and then blowing up some unarmored truck right behind them," Brian says.

>From the time the Harts buried their son, Brian and Alma had reassured each other with the same refrain: We'll tackle this problem, then we'll get on with our life; we'll tackle that problem, then we'll get on with our life.

Standing in their kitchen one night, Brian looked at Alma, she recalls, and said, "Maybe this is our life."

"YOU GO TO WAR with the Army you have, not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time," Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said in Kuwait on December 8, 2004. John Hart and David Bernstein had been dead more than one year.

The defense secretary's remarks to guardsman and soldiers who wanted to know why they were riding around in old, unarmored vehicles vulnerable to roadside bombs made headlines. One National Guardsman from Tennessee told Rumsfeld that he and his buddies had been left scrap metal and bulletproof glass from landfills to rig "hillbilly armor." Rumsfeld responded that the military was producing extra armor for Humvees and trucks as fast as possible, but in the meantime, soldiers would just have to cope with shortages.

Three weeks later, Sgt. Nicholas Pulliam, 42, a National Guardsman who lived near the Harts in Chelmsford, Mass., arrived in Kuwait. Publicity back home over Rumsfeld's remarks made little difference on the ground, from what Pulliam could see. A machinist readying his unit's unarmored vehicles for the long convoy into Iraq, Pulliam did the best he could. He and his buddies found a crate of vintage flak jackets and stacked them atop Humvees to try to shield the gunners who would be protecting the convoys. "We tied them up with rope and duct tape," Pulliam recalls. "We had no way to make anything better."

Once in Iraq, at Al Taqaddum Air Base in Anbar province, Pulliam found ample stocks of steel to weld real turrets but no direction from the brass on how to armor any vehicles but Humvees, he says. "We were on our own."

Back in Bedford, Brian started a blog, which Pulliam read whenever he got Internet access. One of Brian's first postings was his analysis of casualties for the first five weeks of 2005. Of the deaths for which Brian could find the cause, 74 percent had been killed by IEDs.

Brian heard that the radio jammers the U.S. military used to try to stop insurgents from using cell phones and garage-door openers to set off IEDs were in short supply. He posted a quote from Rep. Gene Taylor (D-Miss.), chiding Rumsfeld because the military insisted that the number of jammers it had in Iraq was classified information. "That number remains classified, Mr. Secretary, not because the insurgents don't know how few are protected, but because -- I'm of the opinion -- the American people would be appalled if they knew how few are protected."

Brian had a terrible thought: "We're spending $225,000 for each fully armored M114 Humvee, and we're going to lose this war to guys with garage-door openers."

He decided to use his son's death benefit from the U.S. government to try to develop a robotic device to help soldiers push IEDs off the road safely. He and his brother, a former Marine, set up a workshop in borrowed space in an industrial park. Their prototypes won them meetings with military procurement officials in Washington, but no contracts. Brian began investing his savings into improving their robots, betting that his activism wouldn't hurt his chances of eventually selling them to the Pentagon. "You have to believe that people will do the right thing in the end," he says. "If you don't . . . Well, that's not a world I want to live in."

Working furiously, Brian felt out of step with a seemingly complacent American public. He reread Martin Luther King's Letters from a Birmingham Jail and identified with the civil rights leader's frustration at "the silence of good people."

Brian started making antiwar speeches. "Is it treason to state the obvious: that occupiers stay and liberators leave?" he said June 5, 2005, at a forum at First Parish Unitarian. "In America we seem afraid to ask the president where Osama bin Laden is, why intelligence analysts can lie with impunity, why we were sent to Iraq on half-truths . . . and how will we ever get out? . . . We must hold our leaders and ourselves accountable."

It would be two months before another grieving parent, Cindy Sheehan, would go to Crawford, Tex., to try to confront the president. Brian's speech was unusual enough at the time that it received coverage in the Boston Globe. His activism alienated relatives in Texas who remain staunch Bush Republicans, he says.

"There's virtually no communication anymore," he says, choking up as he speaks. "The president says one thing, and I am telling them that's not the truth. It's unresolvable."

But Brian had his fans. Pulliam was riding in a convoy one day when a fully armored Humvee some distance ahead hit an IED. The engine was destroyed, but the armor did its job. The men inside were bruised, but in one piece. Pulliam knelt by the Humvee, holding a sign, and had a buddy take a photo so he could e-mail it to the Harts. "Thanks To: Brian + Alma Hart, Senator Kennedy and everybody who cares for our wellbeing and makes an effort," his sign said. "You have saved lives."

" COURAGE. I do not know if this quality exists in me. But I hope when the time comes I will respond."

Sgt. Steve Hines, a Massachusetts state trooper, sits in his living room in Newburyport and reads aloud from his dead son's war diary. Army 1st Lt. Derek Hines -- a star hockey player and West Point graduate -- was killed in Afghanistan on September 1. The trooper stops reading to blow his nose.

"We cry every day," his wife, Sue, says, rocking herself while clutching a throw emblazoned: West Point. "It doesn't get better. It really doesn't. He was just a love."

"Like I tell people," her husband says, "a good day is when I don't break down completely."

On this recent visit, Brian, who has made it a point to contact other local families who have lost children in Iraq, sits on the sofa next to Steve Hines. He asks the Hineses about their son's body armor. Derek wasn't wearing protective side plates in his armor when he was shot under one arm. He hadn't been issued side plates.

A study by the military's top medical examiner, Craig T. Mallak, has suggested that many soldiers and Marines killed in Iraq might have survived if they had been wearing more body armor than the Pentagon provided. During the first 27 months of the war, 93 Marines died with a primary lethal wound to the torso. Eighty percent of those -- or 74 Marines -- were wounded in unprotected areas of the chest, side, upper arm or shoulder that might be "potentially impacted by armor redesign," according to an August 2005 preliminary report on the medical examiner's study.

Mallak had been collecting lethal wound data from the start of the war. But the Marines did not commission the $107,000 study analyzing that data until December 2004. Mallak testified before Congress that he completed his first preliminary report on the study -- intended for the Pentagon only -- in March 2005, and a second one in August. Yet it wasn't until after the New York Times published a story on Mallak's findings last January that the Army awarded a $70 million contract to produce additional plates to better protect soldiers' sides.

"They basically found that they needed to have side plates," Brian says, offering his take on the study to Hines.

Steve Hines, who wears body armor in his job with an anti-terrorist unit at Boston's Logan International Airport, is unconvinced. "You have to be able to move," the trooper says. "You can't be in a coat of armor . . . [soldiers] will take them out. They won't wear them. It's 105 degrees over there." Questioning whether their son might still be alive if he'd had better body armor is something Steve Hines says he doesn't do. "We don't do much," Hines says. "We just try to get through."

He turns his attention back to his son's war diary. He flips through its pages tenderly. He reads aloud a passage in which Derek wrote that he had been lying in his bunk reading Gen. Tommy Franks's memoir, American Soldier .

"It started with a quote Franks wrote: I hope America never forgets the power of will. The soldiers I am serving with have some will and it has manifested itself daily."

The Harts leave emotionally wrung out. "Welcome to my world," Brian says.

The next morning, Brian visits the only other Bedford father who had lost a son in Iraq. On November 15, 2004, 19-year-old Marine Lance Cpl. Travis R. Desiato, who grew up with John Hart, was searching for insurgents in a row of houses in Fallujah. He went through the door at the end of a hallway. Six insurgents opened fire. For the next several hours, fellow Marines fought room to room, sometimes face to face with insurgents, to recover his body and send it home to Bedford.

Travis's father, Joe Desiato, meets with Brian in a small examining room of his pediatric practice. Brian wants to know whether the protective plates of Travis's body armor had shattered when fired upon. One of Travis's plates did shatter, his father says; but given the ferocity of the attack he doesn't believe better body armor could have saved him.

The pediatrician says he respects Brian's efforts to get the troops better armor, but prefers to deal with his own grief by reflecting on the valor of young soldiers willing to die for their country and one another. "I think Brian, in forcing the armor to the vehicles, has saved a number of people's lives," he says. "But it becomes a very delicate tightrope of how to be an activist without making it political and using your son's death as a tool to espouse your views and have anyone listen."

As the doctor speaks, he sits beneath a print depicting Don Quixote, literature's secular saint of worthy lost causes.

Brian, looking around the room, asks the doctor if the kids he examines there ever remind him of Travis.

"All the time," he answers. "I see kids, 20-year-olds, getting in a car who have some mannerism like Travis, and I think, my God! Then I have to think for a second, you know, that's not Travis."

"Do you think it will always be like this, Joe?" Brian asks.

"I sure hope so," Desiato says. "I think as the years go by memories start to fade. When little things come up, you say Travis would have said this, or John would have done that. Or that's John's mannerism. Or that's Travis's mannerism. It brings back the memory. And, to be honest, sometimes it's a funny memory . . . I don't want to lose that. So I'll take some pain for some joy."

"THIS IS THE ACTUAL FLAG that covered John's casket," Alma says, lifting a triangular flag box from its permanent perch in a bay window of the Harts' living room, which is decorated as a shrine to their dead son. "This is John's Bronze Star."

Why, Brian wanted to know, didn't the military award John a Bronze Star with a V. for valor? He disappeared into his cluttered home office and returned with a letter from one of John's commanding officer's saying that their son had emptied his machine gun before he died.

While some grieving parents don't find it helpful to examine and reexamine the circumstances of their child's death, Brian doesn't want to stop asking. He concedes that he might spend less time searching for answers and more time making money to help support his family. Yet Brian says that nothing seems as important to him as his unpaid work. To stop questioning, stop trying to prevent the next casualties, would feel in some way like he was leaving John behind. So the Harts live primarily off savings and Alma's work at a temp agency while Brian keeps jousting at windmills. "When it's man against machine, man usually loses when he runs out of money," Brian says.

After one of Brian's public appearances, a military officer who had been stationed at Kirkuk Air Base when John died e-mailed that Brian should file a Freedom of Information Act asking for the military records on his son's death. The officer had heard that there was to be a formal inquiry into the fatally ill-equipped convoy; but the inquiry had never taken place.

Brian says the military's written response to his request stunned him. The key records relating to his son's death -- sworn statements given by survivors of the convoy, the official after-action report and photographs of the crash scene -- had gone missing, the government told Brian in November.

"So many guys died needlessly because of delays in getting them the right equipment, and not one general has been fired over it," Brian says. "No one has been held accountable. Why?" On this day, Brian's questions stretch on until dusk turns to dark outside the bay window where his son's medals rest, and heads around the Hart living room nod.

"Brian, it is 11 o'clock," Alma says, exasperated. "People need to go to sleep."

"I LOVE THIS GREEN," Brian says. He and Alma are walking hand in hand on Lexington Green. It is dusk the next evening. Brian points to the statue of John Parker, who led the town's minutemen. "I love that statue."

"Over there is where Paul Revere rode," he says, pointing out Battle Road, which leads to Concord. John, when he was preparing for basic training, used to run that road carrying 20 pounds of books in a rucksack.

"This is where the Revolution started," Brian says. "Forty Minutemen against 700 British. Twenty-to-one, just facing off. The farmers didn't give up."

Brian comes often to the green. He thinks about what it must have felt like to be one of those farmers. "You know you can only last so long, and then somebody's got to come and help you," he says.

Brian thinks John must have known, in his final moment, how those farmers felt. "I think courage is fighting a battle that you know you are probably going to lose," Brian says. "I think that's what John did. You realize you are going to lose that fight, but you fight it anyway."

April Witt is a staff writer for the Magazine. She and Brian Hart will be fielding questions and comments about this article Monday at noon at washingtonpost.com/liveonline.