Jeremy and Reyna on CBS!

Stanford Student Speaks Out On Confronting Rice

http://cbs5.com/politics/condoleezza.rice.confronted.2.999686.html

A follow up to their story from Thursday

Stanford Student Confronts Rice On Interrogations
http://cbs5.com/politics/condoleezza.rice.confronted.2.998771.html

Articles about torture in today's NY Times

In Adopting Harsh Tactics, No Inquiry Into Their Past Use
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/us/politics/22detain.html

Report Gives New Detail on Approval of Brutal Techniques
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/us/politics/22report.html

Obama Won't Bar Inquiry, or Penalty, on Interrogations
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/us/politics/22intel.html

Rose fawns

http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10154

This was a terrible fawning interview by Mr. Rose. I was not impressed. The only thing he appeared to push her on was whether or not to "talk to Iran". This is the "debate" in US doctrine; what goes assumed is that it is right for the US to intervene in Iranian afairs, that it is right to remake the Iranian government however the US government (rather than the Iranian population) sees fit; that the United States has the right to rule the world.

Going unmentioned, unspeakable, unthinkable, as usual in standard US doctrine, was the long-standing bipartisan US policy of intervening in Iranian affairs, overthrowing the democratically elected government in 1953; installing the vicious and repressive Shah; sending commandos in in 1979 or so for which it was condemned by the International Court of Justice; and the repeated threats of force, including nuclear weapons, against Iran throughout the Bush administration; the threat of force alone in international relations is itself a breach of the UN Charter.

Not to mention that this interview seemed to involve a pretty clear distortion of the historical record, disregarding numerous assessments by the IAEA as to the status of Iran's nuclear program, and the obvious point about this program --- it is something developed *because* Iran feels threatened, and threatened primarily by the US. And Iran's efforts to assure a "grand bargain" for regional security has been wiped from the historical record: Rice just doesn't remember it , in this interview. And of course, in general, repressive tendencies in the Iranian government are only enhanced by US threats.

So, international criminality is the assumed position, and then Rose and Rice can discuss the best standover tactics; and in the process, the journalist can prostrate himself as "the naive journalist", looking up to the great statesperson for advice and direction. Journalism on its knees, and authority being worshipped, even when thrown out of office in disgrace.

An unpublished letter to the editor of the Stanford Daily

To the editor:

Thank you for reporting on the community meeting held Wednesday night to discuss courses of action in response to the return of Condoleezza Rice. It is welcome to hear the voices of Stanford students and community who are are concerned about Condoleezza Rice's actions while in high government office, including actions which have given rise to extremely serious allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity, in this newspaper.

We would, however, like to point out some inaccuracies in this article.

First, there is a clear misquote of Professor Todd Davies. As a faculty member, Professor Davies is always careful in his language in regard to fellow faculty members. It is no light matter to raise concerns about criminal behavior by colleagues. Not only do none of us recall Todd making the attributed quote, we know that Davies does not speak in that way. Therefore, we are certain it is a misquote or misattribution.

Second, there is an open letter to the Stanford community in response to the return of Condoleezza Rice, which Stanford Says No to War has prepared and circulated. It is, however, not a petition. A petition was one of many courses of action raised at the meeting on Wednesday, but this letter is not one.

Third, the coalition that met Wednesday night does not yet have an official name. A working title of "Condi Un-Welcoming Committee" was used on the proposed agenda, but no decision has been made on a name yet.

In any case, we look forward to reading more articles in the Daily which raise these extremely serious concerns that many Stanford students, faculty and community members have with regard to Condoleezza Rice. We invite people to read our open letter, which is available at Stanford Says No to War's website, antiwar.stanford.edu. We invite people who share our concerns to join an email list such as iraq_coalition@ or action_condi@lists.stanford.edu for notifications
and information.

We also invite the Daily and other publications to publish the letter,
or an abridged version of it.

Yours sincerely,

Adam Hudson
Daniel Mathews
Ekin Kocabas
Daniel Weissman

on behalf of Stanford Says No to War

Our new intelligence agency

From the Ultimate File, press clippings over the course of many years.

We are promulgating this knowledge, through the wiki.

http://www.stanford.edu/group/antiwar/cgi-bin/mediawiki/index.php?title=Condoleezza_Rice.

Edits welcome, wikis are the way of the future. There is no mistake on a wiki that can't be reversed, so don't worry!

Except by a big multinational corporation... or a court order... nope, even a court order can be reversed and a multinational corporation can be defeated, heh heh heh.