portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary united states

imperialism & war

Contributors to Kucinich website: put up or shut up

Kucinich still hasn't signed the UFPJ Voter Peace Pledge which would bind him to support only pro-peace candidates. Why do you think that is?
Here are some of the many rightfully skeptical comments regarding Kucinich's cynical response to those who have called for him to disassociate himself from Democratic hawks.  http://www.kucinich.us/node/1033#comment-661

More Than a One-Man Show?
Submitted by shopathonic on December 20, 2006 - 10:30.
The problem with this Captain Puget's logic is that building an effective antiwar movement is more than a matter of one man getting some air time to talk about withdrawal. It's a matter of building a strong, independent mass antiwar movement with real staying power--one that will not be tethered so thoroughly to the fortunes of one man who will probably support a prowar candidate at the Democratic convention and thus undo all the supposed good he had done in the previous months. We cannot afford increased air time for the antiwar Kucinich through the summer of 2008 at the expense of the dissolution of ALL our efforts at that time if he chooses once again to mount the podium in support of a prowar Democrat, as he did in 2004. We need to find a way to build a movement with staying power, for the distance.

People have to make a choice about the best strategic option for investing their time, energy, and dollars over the coming months. Hitching up to a wagon that will suddenly convert into a prowar conveyance at the Democratic convention is NOT the way to sustain a powerful, independent movement against the war--until and unless Dennis Kucinich is willing and able to assure his followers that there will be no letup and no compromise in his antiwar position after the Democratic convention--and that includes a promise not to lend his personal endorsement--and by implication that of his supporters--to a Democratic presidential nominee who is not forthrightly antiwar. Barring such a promise from Kucinich, all the volunteer efforts invested in his campaign point to a sudden dissolution of antiwar momentum in the summer of 2008. We must think about building a movement that is stronger and larger than the fortunes and political whims of one man. I mean, ferchrissake, he is not even willing to sign on to the United for Peace and Justices Voter Peace Pledge, which states the following: "I will not vote for or support any candidate for Congress or President who does not make a speedy end to the war in Iraq, and preventing any future war of aggression, a public position in his or her campaign."

Given Kucinich's caginess about his long-term intentions, I think his supporters must press him hard to sign the UFPJ peace pledge before jumping in with both feet into his campaign--otherwise they risk the same kind of disillusionment they experienced in 2004, when he folded up his tent and gave a ringing endorsement to the prowar Kerry. The only way to pressure Kucinich in that direction is to withhold full support--whether volunteer time or dollars--until and unless he signs the UFPJ Voter Peace Pledge.

Until then, the most productive thing antiwar activists can do is to build the January 27 mass march on Washington, D.C. against the war. More information on that march is available at the following Web site:


a principled position
Submitted by notchomsky on December 20, 2006 - 16:36.
Kucinich: "Because if John Kerry had openly opposed the war in his bid for the Presidency, he would have won the election. The Democrats can't say I did not warn them."

notc: And if you had opposed John Kerry, we would be well on our way to creating a viable alternative to the two-headed corporatist/hegemonist beast.

Kucinich: "When you run in party primary elections, you commit yourself to supporting the nominee."

notc: So you must then leave the party if you cannot morally support the candidate chosen. This is elementary moral logic. If Hitler beats you in a primary, you do not support Hitler because running in the primary binds you ethically to do so.

In other words, there is at least one higher principle than partisan politics.

Supporting whatever pro-war candidate the DLC chooses is not a principled position.

notchomsky, nor are you

Kucinich Should Break Free
Submitted by liesoftimes on December 20, 2006 - 12:37.
This whole idea of "Changing the establishment from within the establishment" was attractive in 2003-2004, but I don't think I can stomach another up-close look at watching a people's candidate get swallowed up by corporate politics. The Democratic Party is compromised. They know they can't hold up in a truly open, public forum. Watch how vigorously they try to remove 3rd party candidates. The epitomy of hypocracy for me was when Democrats in Arizona sued to get Nader off the ballot in 2004.

My favorite philosophy professor described to me at one time the definition of a perversion. It is "something that, by its very nature, does not achieve its goal".

The Democratic Party, by its very nature, does not achieve its goal. To put it another way, the Democratic Party's "stated" goals are not the goals of their contolling interests.

It's unfortunate that such a great candidate like Kucinich will only serve as a "catcher's mit" for the popular struggle that deserves an uncomprised political pathway. Kucinich should re-examine the 10 key values of the Green Party and re-energize the move to get Green ballot status nation-wide.

His last campaign slogan, "Fear ends, hope begins" rings truer now that at any previous moment.

Democratic Wasteland
Submitted by caniac4kucinich on December 20, 2006 - 13:31.
I broke from the Democratic Party shortly after hearing both Reid and Pelosi say Impeachment was "off the table".I will support Dennis thoughout the campaign,but if for some reason he doesn't win,I will NOT support the democratic nominee and I hope Dennis will do the same!

Dennis--Sign the "Voters for Peace Pledge"?
Submitted by shopathonic on December 20, 2006 - 00:20.
Here is the Voters for Peace Pledge from United for Peace and Justice, the broad peace coalition that is sponsoring the antiwar march on Washington, D.C. on January 27

We urge you to stand up with other outraged voters and sign the Voters for Peace pledge:

"I will not vote for or support any candidate for Congress or President who does not make a speedy end to the war in Iraq, and preventing any future war of aggression, a public position in his or her campaign."

All participants on this blog should sign the pledge, and, above all, SO SHOULD YOU, DENNIS.

Here's a link where anyone can sign:

 link to www.democracyinaction.org

Simple Statement for Dennis
Submitted by shopathonic on December 18, 2006 - 23:03.
"I, Dennis Kucinich, will under no circumstances endorse a candidate for any office unless he/she supports immediate withdrawal from Iraq."

That's simple enough--Cindy Sheehan and the editors of The Nation magazine have made esssentially that pledge. How about you, Dennis? And if not, why not?
ONE MAN SHOW 20.Dec.2006 15:04


it never is a one man band or observer.

UFPJ is the end all be all? 20.Dec.2006 15:31


I don't really care about this pledge you are demanding from Dennis, and this person 'shopotronic' is a real putz on the Kucinich board so I wouldn't be proud of quoting them. They seem to be logged onto the board all the time, even though then don't like Kucinich.

And since when does signing a petition and protesting on weekends when congress isn't there help anything at all? UFPJ isn't trying to help, and if they are they might try protesting when congress is in session, or on the state of the union January 23, or early January when everyone else is going to be there.

As for Kucinich, I think that he should be answering why he isn't for impeachment.

UFPJ and Selling Out 20.Dec.2006 18:46


I agree with this analysis, obviously.

As for UFPJ, they are sold out tools of the pro-war, pro-corporate Democratic Party.

That my friends, is an "inconvenient truth."

"The more you use it, the more there is left!" 20.Dec.2006 22:45


It's getting pretty thick when GP Mike accuses not so much Kucinich but UFPJ of being "sold out tools of the pro-war, pro-corporate Democratic Party."

Politics: the enemy of my enemy is my friend (for now) -- and all that jazz.

But seeing as how I DO post at kucinich.us, I'll try to respond to 'kucynic'. Understand, however, that I don't speak for Dennis and do not know why he has signed any particular petition or pledge, or not.

Here's the thing: Dennis tossed his hat into the ring ONLY after the House Democrat leaders announced that they would try to push through MORE funding of the war. That happened on December 6. On December 7, Dennis published (via Truthdig) his views on funding:

"A serious test of the Democratic Party"


where he shows IN DETAIL exactly why and how the key to ending the war is cutting off funding completely - and nothing else will work. If some member of congress had signed the UFPJ pledge, he or she could then vote for some resolution urging withdrawal, and so on and so forth, but still vote to fund the war! And still claim not to have broken the pledge!

I know FOR SURE that everyone associated with Dennis started scrambling like crazy only after December 7 -- because until December 6 Dennis did not believe that his level-headed approach to ending the war would be so stupidly opposed by the Democrat leadership, given that the election was clearly a mandate on the war.

Even after December 6, Dennis thought that maybe, just maybe, the mainstream media and mainstream Democrats would see the light and realize the truth of his position. But that wasn't to be. So that left Dennis with no alternative but to throw his hat into the ring for president. Not that he isn't really running, because he is -- but until he announced his candidacy, his campaign on the funding issue was drawing NO attention in Washington, D.C., whereas after announcing his campaign, they were all tuned in!

The point is this:

"Kucinich in 2008" EQUALS "Stop the War Now" -- by the only way that is possible (NOW). That's what it's all about. The rest is real, but it's frosting on the cake. "It's the war, stupid!"

So the only thing that is "one man" about this is that Dennis is the one person in the Congress who is totally focused on the one and only realistic approach to ending the war. He is the leader of the real anti-war movement IN CONGRESS. There are many leaders of the anti-war movement outside of Congress. Dennis' campaign for president takes nothing from any of those anti-war leaders -- nor from any other like-minded anti-war members of Congress. Nor does his campaign take anything away from any anti-war movement or organization or demonstration.

The idea that if Dennis lends his personal endorsement to any nominee, that is "by implication [the personal endorsement] of his supporters" IS LUDICROUS! IT'S NOT TRUE! That premise of 'kucynic' is beyond cynical -- it's just blatantly ridiculous. Dennis is like, maybe, Abraham Lincoln -- NOT like Joe Stalin. He's a democratic leader, not a party boss!

As for getting GP ballot access, etc., Dennis has long been a supporter of IRV and other election/ballot reforms. We are working to get the entire Democratic Party to realization of the wisdom of such measures.

One of the comments posted by kucynic says this: "We cannot afford increased air time for the antiwar Kucinich through the summer of 2008 at the expense of the dissolution of ALL our efforts" -- that is, when Dennis ultimately loses the nomination to a pro-war Democrat. But, you see, we do not believe that it is a foregone conclusion that Dennis will NOT win big in the primaries in 2008! We do not find it credible that 2008 will be a rerun of 2004. Of course, that's the "conventional wisdom" -- but we think that you can take your "conventional wisdom" and put it where the sun don't shine.

As for "air time": Dennis doesn't get any more corporate air time than the Green Party -- that is, practically zero. The air time we progressives get is strictly the air time that results from the people becoming the media. That kind of air time, the people's air time, isn't artificially limited -- it's expandable. The kucinich website is part of the people's air time, and the Green Party and the Socialist Equality Party are welcome to make use of it just as much as Democrats are!

It's like somebody said about spreading enlightenment: the more you spread it, the more of it you have. Or, as has been said about the sacred Way: "The more you use it, the more there is left!"

There is nothing about Dennis' campaign or his position on the war that in any way detracts from the importance of the January 27 mass march on Washington, D.C. or from the importance of Cindy Sheehan's sit-in at the Capital starting January 3 -- or any other peace action or activism.

Get together, people! Don't get hung up on did this or that organization get their pledge or whatever endorsed. If you blow it up into a huge thing, all it serves is to divide us. You know where Dennis stands on the issues. You can see it plainly in his voting record.

"No other Democratic Presidential candidate who is or was a member of the House or Senate during this war has a 100% record of voting against funding the war in Iraq." -- Dennis Kucinich

What I Know 20.Dec.2006 22:58

Fool Me Once...

Dennis sold out to the party in the last national elections. Did we expect less? He is a democrat first and foremost. While I respect many of his views, I take them with a huge grain of sea salt knowing full well that in the end he will toe the democratic line.
I changed my party affiliation to be able to vote for Kucinich last time around in the primaries but I refused to follow in his footsteps once he dropped out. I also spoke with Dennis when he was here promoting his "peace dept" and agree with so much of what he stands for. But.....I know where his loyalties will fall in the end.
Encouraging Dennis to not support a war candidate I believe is a great idea. We should encourage every voter to do the same!

one obvious fact 21.Dec.2006 00:44


The Democrats are the Party (along with the Republicans) of the ruling class.

They have helped bury every radical and semi-radical movement of the US in the last 100 years.

So the question is: why is Mr Dennis a Democrat?

Has he not read is history? Does he not know the evilness his party continues to support?
Or does he know exactly what he's doing -- all that crap about the 'department of peace' set aside.

Dennis and the War 21.Dec.2006 02:07

Some Peace Dude

OK people, leeetss all get behind Jooohnn Kerrryyyyyyyyyy

Your warmongering President. I approve of this message.

"Toeing the line"? 21.Dec.2006 08:55


Critics say: "While I respect many of his views, I take them with a huge grain of sea salt knowing full well that in the end he will toe the democratic line."

Right now Dennis is working to stir up as much opposition to the Democrat leadership in Congress as possible. He is exposing their scheme to look like they are anti-war - and garner the anti-war vote - while funding the war enough to assure hat it lasts until the end of Bush's term in office.

Dennis is leading the anti-war Democrats in Congress in open OPPOSITION TO THE PARTY LEADERSHIP -- while assuring that anti-war Democrats understand the importance of cutting off funding for the war.

Is that "toeing the line"?

2008 is a long way off. All Dennis is asking for is this:

1. Be aware - and make others aware - of what a vote to fund the war means (as compared with signing some pledge or voting for some toothless resolution).

2. In protesting the war, be sure to pressure Congress to CUT THE FUNDING!

democrat-supporter denial 21.Dec.2006 11:18


sorry kucitizen, but your denial will do nothing to end the war in Iraq. The 2party dragon will not assist in our cause.

Only We the People can bring the Iraq war to and end, and if we so choose, the U.S. government to an end.

Unfortunately, the American populace has been so thoroughly brainwashed that even the semi-awoken aren't privy to how power operates (as much as they incessantly claim otherwise). The electoral process is dead to the average American. We now live in a caste system of patricians and plebeans.

Physical Resistance (as non-violent as the police and military will allow it) is the only remaining solution. So either come out of your dark corners and fight, or accept defeat in the form of global dictatorship. If Revolution is to take place, the average Revolutionary will have to become aware of the false left-right paradigm that enslaves most of our minds. BOTH parties operate outside the paradigm when they are behind closed doors. Knowledge of this is the key to true Resistance.

Time is running out. Don't say you weren't forewarned.

Dennis Kucinich is against impeachment 21.Dec.2006 11:45


what does that tell you?

and another petition?? what the hell? It will end up the same place as the dsm petitions,the kucinich petitions from 2004 campaign etc....the round file.

Interesting group name...democracy inaction....

On UFPJ 21.Dec.2006 17:41


To Green Party Mike:
Your assertions about United for Peace and Justice are WAY off the mark. UFPJ insists on the princpled demand of unconditional and immediate withdrawal from Iraq--almost no Democrats support that demand. UFPJ's main strategy is independent mass action in the streets against the war--hardly any Democrats support that strategy. UFPJ has turned out up to 500,000 people in the streets to protest the war while the Dems in Washington like Reid line up to support sending more troops to Iraq. UFPJ does not endorse candidates and takes no money from corporations. UFPJ circulates the Voters Peace Pledge, which encourages people to vote only for those candidates who support a speedy end to the war in Iraq--which excludes most Democrats. So you have no clue about what you're talking about here. If you're a real progressive, you would be cheering on a group that wants to mobilize hundreds of thousands in the streets to demand that the U.S. get out of Iraq now.

To Whatever:
You advocate demonstrating on weekday when everyone has to work so no one would be able to show up? That would make a HUGE impression. You write and think like an imbecile.

dear anon 21.Dec.2006 23:38


Reducing your argument to name calling illustrates who really has the mental deficiency.

Does congress hear a protest on Saturday? Do they read petitions?

I do not trust UFPJ for the simple reason that people like you push them on us.

I Stand Corrected on UFPJ 22.Dec.2006 02:39


I stand corrected on UFPJ and I apologize for that. While they have stood against Direct Action, CD etc, they will at least condemn the pro-war Democrats. I had heard otherwise but am now corrected.

Sorry, my bad.

The Democrats are still sell-outs and a critical part of the war machine. That I will never take back.

interesting 22.Dec.2006 10:16


I have seen many freeper types demanding we attend the UPFJ protest,could this have something to do with it?

On September 24, six bioweapons air sensors around the Mall in Washington, D.C., registered positive for airborne traces of francisella tularensis, bacteria with flu-like symptoms that can be deadly if untreated. At the same time, 300,000 people were on the Mall protesting the Iraq war. So far as anyone can tell, nobody died. Was it a terrorist attack gone wrong, the government running some kind of test, or something else?

First, what we do know.

On Sep. 24, a large anti-war protest took place on the Mall in Washington, D.C. The march was organized by United for Peace and Justice, a group the FBI has previously placed under surveillance when it protested the 2004 Republican National Convention in New York City.

That same day, and no other day before or since, six biohazard sensors around the Mall detected "low levels" of the tularemia bacteria.
 link to www.homelandstupidity.us

Complete Article Shows that Larry is Liar, Police Agent 22.Dec.2006 14:58


Just found this on the Kucinich Web site, where "Larry/Nadia" is posting the same police-agent lies about the antiwar movement that he is posting here:

Here's the complete article from the Washington Post, which shows that

1. No one who participated in the march that day became ill and that
2. This is probably a bacteria that just lives in the environment.
3. There was no police suspicion of any nefarious activity.

Beware of cranks who quote out of context to distort and lie:

Health Officials Vigilant for Illness After Sensors Detect Bacteria on Mall
Agent Found as Protests Drew Thousands of Visitors

By Petula Dvorak
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, October 2, 2005; C13

A week after six bioterrorism sensors detected the presence of a dangerous bacterium on the Mall, health officials said there are no reports that any of the thousands of people in the nation's capital Sept. 24 have tularemia, the illness that results from exposure to the bacteria.

Federal health officials are still testing the samples from air sensors on the Mall and in downtown Washington that collected a small amount of the tularemia agent, which can cause flulike symptoms and is usually treated with antibiotics.

The bacteria probably was not the result of nefarious activity, according to federal investigators. "There is no known nexus to terror or criminal behavior. We believe this to be environmental," said Russ Knocke, spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security.

The mission for health officials now is to figure out how the bacteria got there, why they were detected that day and whether they are from a strain that doesn't affect humans.

"Our purpose now is to reach into the medical community just to make sure nobody out there has any symptoms," said Von Roebuck, spokesman for the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "There is an incubation window of one to six days, but we still want to get this information into clinicians' hands."

Health officials in the Washington area were notified Friday that the filters on biohazard sensors that make up the BioWatch network detected the bacteria Sept. 24, when tens of thousands of people were on the Mall for antiwar demonstrations and the National Book Festival.

The samples were collected between 10 a.m. Saturday and 10 a.m. Sunday. The naturally-occurring biological agent -- which is on the "A list" of the Department of Homeland Security's biohazards, along with anthrax, plague and smallpox -- was detected in small amounts, said Gregg A. Pane of the D.C. Department of Health.

Detection of the bacteria turned into an incident with nationwide implications, because thousands of protesters had come from throughout the country. The infection is not spread from person to person, but tracking potential patients became a coast-to-coast undertaking. Police said that more than 100,000 people attended the rally; organizers put the figure at 300,000.

After the filters were tested in Washington, further tests were done by CDC laboratories in Atlanta, Knocke said.

Meanwhile, the CDC was using its nationwide tracking system to look for unusual occurrences of pneumonia-like symptoms in every state, Roebuck said.

After seeing no cases and finding that the levels of tularemia in their samples were low, health officials at the CDC decided Friday night to release their findings in the event that there were cases, on the sunset of the incubation period, that weren't being detected, Roebuck said.

Pane said he learned of the biohazard alert that night, when CDC officials told him that sensors at the Lincoln Memorial, Judiciary Square and Fort McNair tested positive for the bacterium.

He immediately put out an alert to hospitals, clinics, doctors and pharmacies in the area to be on the lookout for symptoms, which can resemble pneumonia. "The linchpin is that we're still in the incubation window, so we really don't know that there were no cases," he said.

Pane said one theory is that tularemia bacteria, which occur naturally in soil, might have been kicked up by the thousands of feet stomping on the Mall grounds that day.

Homeland Security and the CDC work together to operate the BioWatch sensors. The $60 million-plus system was created in 2001 to monitor air in more than 30 U.S. cities.

The system recently was criticized in a June report by the Government Accountability Office. It highlighted communication problems within the network and questioned the nation's capabilities in environmental surveillance, an emerging technical field.

A similar incident occurred in Houston in October 2003, when two air sensors detected fragments of tularemia bacteria. There were no human cases of tularemia reported after the incident, and some experts in the bioterror field said they believe the incident was actually spurred by a strain of the bacteria that does not affect humans.

"It's probably something that just lives in the environment," said Tara O'Toole, who is director of the Center for Biosecurity, sponsored by the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. "We forget that microorganisms rule the world. Now we're looking and finding things we didn't know were there."

Tularemia, often called "rabbit fever" because small animals are often carriers in rural areas, was amassed by the U.S. military as a biological weapon in the 1960s.
2005 The Washington Post Company

why 22.Dec.2006 15:18


Why was it found only on the day of the march?
How did Rabbits infiltrate the protest?
I have read that others were sickened actually.
Do you always trust the washington post and the police?

who is the police agent? 22.Dec.2006 15:29

uh huh

Sally is shopotronic who is hounding Kucinich on his message board,and most likely the one who keeps posting rude things about him on portland-indy .

see for yourself

Larry/Nadia/Uh-huh/Anon/Whoever: Dyslexic 22.Dec.2006 15:42

Hates Police Agents

You dyslexic moron--the poster's name on the kucinich blog is shopathonic, not shoptronic.

Is it a mere coincidence that Larry and Nadia and Uh hun and Anon ALL make this same imbecilic, illiterate error? Has anyone seen them all in the same room at the same time?

In the meantime, let's all (all as in noncrank, nonschizophrenic police agents) mobilize for January 27 to make it the biggest outpouring of antiwar sentiment in this country's history: