It was day 26 of the hunger strike at the White House and I decided last night to keep it up and go again. I talked to some young people this time about why they are involved. While I have frequently been asked by the organizers if I “support their cause,” (probably because I have been the only “media” there and they are anxious for attention), I have to quickly answer with this, “I am an advocate of anyone exercising their right to peacefully assemble and address issues with the government. It’s what this democracy is all about.”

I always get a calm smile and an invitation to film whatever I like.

Here is part three of the Hunger Strike series. Each has been considered for, or has been, aired by CNN:

Previous Reports:

Unwelcome at the White House, August 9, 2009 Currently 2, 315 views, 35 comments

Hunger Strike at the White House: Day 19, August 17, 2009 Currently 1, 404 views, 83 comments

I have finally decided what I do. It’s called First Amendment journalism and wherever I can find anyone exercising the right to peacefully assemble, petition the government, establish their religion, or just advocate for freedom of speech or press, I will be there.

Here is the second part of my series on the Hunger Strike at the White House. As I wrote on my Facebook page,

There is a common thread I can’t ignore as I continue to cover this story about a minority group in Iraq that is now a target of violence as the US prepares to pull out: minority groups of all kinds, gays, MEK, Kurds and more – are all likely to… become victims – as the majorities are given arms to establish Iraq as their own.

Here is the video. Let me know what you think.

Last night I went down to the White House on a little walk. It was probably 80 or 90 degrees. Man was it hot. But when I got there, the heat quickly escaped my mind. As I approached the White House, I noticed the same flags, and a mass of people, that I came across in early August. It was a group of Iranian Americans, present now at the White House 24/7, for a duration of six months. You can imagine with this kind of presence, they have something to say.

You might not have heard of Camp Ashraf – so if that’s the case, let me fill you in. In the 1980s, a group of Iranians, the People’s Mojahedeen Organization of Iran (PMOI), rose up against the Iranian regime. They demanded democracy and engaged in armed opposition of the government of Iran.

At the height of the opposition, some 3,400 members of the PMOI, also known as MEK, were placed in Camp Ashraf, just north of Baghdad. In 2003, when the U.S. invaded Iraq, the MEK were all disarmed, in exchange for the U.S.’s protection of the camp. Now, as the U.S. pulls out, the MEK are vulnerable – unarmed, and targets of decades of animosity from the Iranian regime.

Two weeks ago, the Camp was brutally attacked.

“It means that after everything America has done, Iran really has the upper hand in Iraq,” Zahra Amanpour, an Iranian-American, told me.

What is the U.S. going to do? Do we have a responsibility to the MEK?