Politics Attitude

Nov 6, 2009

the pap smear mike papantonio

so the pensacola news journal publishes a bad column by the pap smear, mike papantonio. the colomn is entitled 'gop votes on rape bill were disgusting: 'I checked to make sure that the 30 Republican senators who voted against the Jamie Leigh Jones anti-rape bill two weeks ago had wives and daughters. Most of them did.' now that column was published yesterday.

the pap smear really thinks we're that stupid?

this is ryan grim over at the huffington post:

When thirty Republicans lined up against an amendment that would have required defense contractors to allow their employees access to U.S. courts in cases of rape or sexual assault, Jon Stewart ripped them to pieces.
"I understand we're a divided country, some disagreements on health care. How is ANYONE against this?" he wondered.
It's a question, it turns out, best addressed to the White House.
The vote against the amendment has sparked outrage at the all-male, all-white bloc of thirty Republican senators. HuffPost readers have been particularly infuriated by the GOP opposition and have regularly posted the names of the offending thirty in the comment section of even unrelated stories. A mock website - www.republicansforrape.org -- has sprung up.
The men had an ally in opposition that has so far gone unreported: the Department of Defense.
"The DoD opposes the proposed amendment," reads a message sent from the administration to the Senate on October 6, the day the amendment passed by a 68-30 vote. Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/19/defense-department-oppose_n_326569.html&cp

ryan grim's article was published october 20th.

so, point, if it was bad that 30 republican senators opposed the franken bill, it should be even more so that the defense department opposed it.

but pap smear doesn't want to take them on, does he?

in other words, the pap smear lies.

in other words, the pap smear writes a column where he presents 'facts' and he has deliberately distorted reality.

the pap smear is a liar who wants to run a con on you. don't forget it.

let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

Friday, November 6, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, Democratic senators hear how KBR's greed put everyone in Iraq at risk, some gas bags shouldn't be on radio, the Fort Hood shooting, and more.

Rick Lamberth: As a LOGCAP [Logistics Civil Augmentation Program] Operations Manager, it was my duty to report to KBR management when the company was in violation of guidelines and the contract Statement of Work. I witnessed burn pit violations on a weekly basis. When I tried to report violations, I was told by the head of KBR's Health Safety and Environment division to shut up and keep it to myself. At one point, KBR management threatened to sue me for slander if I spoke out about these violations.
Rick Lamberth was in Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition to being an Iraq War veteran, he worked for KBR and saw "KBR employees dump nuclear, biological, chemical decontamination materials and bio-medical waste, plastics, oil and tires into burn pits" thereby exposing many US and Iraqi citizens to health risks. Rick Lamberth, for example, now has a series of respiratory problems. Last week, Kelly Kennedy (Army Times) reported, "An open-air 'burn pit' at the largest U.S. base in Iraq may have exposed tens of thousands of troops, contractors and Iraqis to cancer-causing dioxins, poisons such as arsenic and carbon monoxide, and hazardous medical waste, documentation gathered by Military Times shows." Kelly was reporting on Joint Base Balad. L. Russel Keith worked for KBR at Joint Base Balad (March 2006 to July 2007) and he explains, "While I was stationed at Balad, I experienced the effects of the massive burn pit that burned 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The ten-acre pit was located in the northwest corner of the base. An acrid, dark black smoke from the pit would accumulate and hang low over the base for weeks at a time. Every spot on the base was touched by smoke from the pit; everyone who served at the base was exposed to the smoke. It was almost impossible to escape, even in our living units."

Rick Lamberth and L. Russell Keith were two of the four witnesses appearing before the Democratic Policy Committee today, for a hearing into burn pits led by Committee Chair Byron Dorgan. Also appearing as witnesses were Lt Col Darrin Curtis and Dr. Anthony Szema. At the start of the hearing, Chair Dorgan explained, "This is the twenty-first in a long series of hearings that we have held in the Policy Committee to examine contracting waste and abuse in Iraq and Afghanistan. A number of these hearings have focused on substantial abuse which have put out troops lives in danger. Some focused just on waste and some on fraud. Today we're going to have a discussion and have a hearing on how, as early as 2002, US military installations in Iraq and Afghanistan began relying on open-air burn pits -- disposing of waste materials in a very dangerous manner. And those burn pits included materials such as hazardous waste, medical waste, virtually all of the waste without segregation of the waste, put in burn pits. We'll hear how there were dire health warnings by Air Force officials about the dangers of burn pit smoke, the toxicity of that smoke, the danger for human health. We'll hear how the Department of Defense regulations in place said that burn pits should be used only in short-term emergency situations -- regulations that have now been codified. And we will hear how, despite all the warnings and all the regulations, the Army and the contractor in charge of this waste disposal, Kellogg Brown & Root, made frequent and unnecessary use of these burn pits and exposed thousands of US troops to toxic smoke."

That's from Chair Dorgan's opening remarks and you can [PDF format hearing warning] click here to read his prepared remarks (the above is what was stated which differs slightly from the prepared remarks). You can also visit the Democratic Policy Committee's home page for more information and streaming video of today's hearing should be up there as well. (If it's not up already, it will be up by Monday.)

The burn pit issue was dismissed and ignored for many years -- despite the fact that the rules weren't being followed. On October 28, 2009, US House Rep Tim Bishop's office released a statement noting: "Today, President [Barack] Obama singed into law the National Defense Authorization Act 9H.R. 2647), which includes important provisions authored by Congressman Tim Bishop (NY-1) to protect the thousands of troops exposed to toxic, open burn pits used in Iraq and Afghanistan. These provisions were based on Bishop's legislation, the Military Personnel War Zone Toxic Exposure Prevention Act, (HR 2419) introduced with Rep. Carol Shea-Porter on May 14, 2009." Hopefully, that signing will result in the press paying a bit more attention to the issue and not, as some have done, treat it as a dispute between political parties -- which is how it was too often treated by the press during the Bush years, with a lot of hedging and a lot of 'some say' type 'reporting.' December 20, 2006, Lt Col Darrin Curtis wrote a memo entitled "Burn Pit Health Hazards" [PDF format warning, click here].

Chair Byron Dorgan: Mr. Curtis, why did you decide to write the 2006 memorandum? And did anyone else at that point share your concerns about the health impact of burn pits?

Lt Col Darrin Curtis: Yes, Senator, they did. The Chief of Air Space Medicine had the same concerns I did. The memo was initially written so that we could expedite the installation of the incinerators. From my understanding, there were spending limits of monies with health issues and not health issues so I wanted to write the report to show that there are health issues associated with burn pits so that we could hopefully accelerate the installation of the incinerators.

Chair Byron Dorgan: Of the type of burn pit you saw in Iraq in 2006 -- that's some while after the war began and infrastructure had been created and so on except without incinerators -- if something of that nature were occurring in a neighborhood here in Washington DC or any American city, what are the consequences to them?

Lt Col Darrin Curtis: At least fines and possibly jail.
Chair Byron Dorgan: Because?

Lt Col Darrin Curtis: Of the regulations that are out there today.

Chair Byron Dorgan: Because it's a serious risk to human health?

Lt Col Darrin Curtis: Yes, sir.

Chair Byron Dorgan: You say that when you arrived in Iraq an inspector for the US Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine -- which is CHPPM -- told you that the Balad burn pit was the worst environmental site that he has seen and that included the ten years he had performed environmental clean up for the Army and Defense's Logistic Agency. And yet in your testimony, you also say that CHPPM has done this study and says adverse health risks are unlikely. So you're talking about an inspector from CHPPM that says 'this is the worst I've seen' and then a report comes out later from CHPPM that says: "Adverse health risks are unlikely. Long-term health effects are not expected to occur from breathing the smoke." Contradiction there and why?

Lt Col Darrin Curtis: I think any organization, you're going to have people with differences of opinion. But at CHPPM, I'm sure that was the same-same outcome there. Cause I don't know if that individual --

Chair Byron Dorgan: (Overlapping) Do you think that CHPPM -- do you think CHPPM assessment that's been relied on now is just wrong?

Lt Col Darrin Curtis: (Overlapping) I think -- I think -- Senator, I think the hard line that there is no health effects is a -- is a very strong comment that we don't have the data to say. Do we have the data to say that it is a health risk? I don't think we have that either. But I do not think we have the data to say there is no health risk.
Chair Byron Dorgan: You are a bio-environmental engineer what is -- what is your own opinion? Without testing or data, you saw the burn pits, you were there, you hear the testimony of what went in the burn pits, you hear Dr. Szema's assessment. What's your assessment?

Lt Col Darrin Curtis: I think we're going to look at a lot of sick people later on.

"I think we're going to look at a lot of sick people later on." And why, the bigger why? Why would anyone -- KBR or anyone -- put people at risk? Rick Lamberth explained during the hearing, "KBR was able to get away with this because the Army never enforced the applicable standards. KBR's Project Controls Department also kept their information hidden. During one visit by a representative from DCMA. I heard someone from Project Controls state that it was her job to keep DCMA away from the books during the inspection. KBR management would brag that they could get away with doing anything they wanted because the army could not function without them. KBR figured that even if they did get caught, they had already made more than enough money to pay any fines and still make a profit."

"Brag that they could get away with doing anything." "Even if they did get caught, they had already made more than enough money to pay any fines and still make a profit." Chair Dorgan noted that one of his greatest disappointments is that there is not "a Truman type committee with subpoena powers" currently "perhaps some day we'll get that." Senator Tom Udall agreed with Dorgan that a Truman type committee was needed. Rick Lamberth told Senator Udall that he did an analysis about how the burn pits could be shifted down wind.

Senator Tom Udall: They didn't want to do that?

Rick Lamberth: Correct, sir.

Senator Tom Udall: Cost them too much?

Rick Lamberth: Correct, sir.

Senator Jon Tester spoke of how Lamberth was told by KBR to keep quiet about violations "because that clean up was future business." He wondered, "How many burn pits there were in Iraq?" L. Russell Keith stated Balad was the biggest one (and the one he was familiar with), that it was ten acres, that "a lot of parts of it were below ground [. . .] there were a lot of things in it that wouldn't burn [. . .] old vehicles [. . .] transit buses". Senator Blanche Lincoln noted that the burn pits continue in Iraq and Afghanistan and we'll include this exchange.

Senator Blanche Lincoln: The comment made about the fact that these [burn pits] were used because there's potential future business, is it the typical business of KBR and others for hazardous waste clean up?

Rick Lamberth: What do you mean, ma'am, by the -- ?

Senator Blanche Lincoln: I mean if there's potential business -- what you're creating? It sounds like what we're creating, to what many of us have lived through up here, which are Super Fund sites and hazardous waste clean up. Is that a business that the current contractors actually have or can facilitate?

Rick Lamberth: Yes, ma'am. They have -- it's currently a contract line item number in the master statement of work. And what they'll do, they don't have the expertise in how, so they'll turn around and they'll contract it out. When I left July 2009, I left Baghdad, they had subcontracted that out to [**]. Yet when you talk to them, they act like they're resolved of all responsibility. And I tell them: "Negative, you are still responsible, you being the prime contractor, you're still responsible for compliance of EPA and DOD regulations and Defense Logistic Agencies regulations which is really in charge of DoD's Hazmat Defense Logistic Agency and they would want to deny that. They say 'No, [**] is doing that now.' I say 'No, you're still, you being the prime, you're still responsible.'

Senator Blanche Lincoln: Well of course that's a whole different issue I suppose in terms of spending our US tax payer dollars to clean up things that the same contractor actually created.

First, "[**]"? Epilogue or Echologue was what Lamberth was saying. I have no idea on subcontractors or whether the subcontractor would get 'fancy' with the name and spell it a different way. So we're just noting it as "[**]" Second, Lincoln went on to note that even more important than the dollars being wasted are the people who've been harmed by exposure. BURN PITS Action Center is a resource and a clearing house of information. Among those sharing their experiences is "Debby:"

I arrived at Joint Base Balad, formerly known as Camp Anaconda in March 2008, and needless to say we all have the same issues as to what we smelled and what we saw. I have been home 11 months now and I want to make a statement about this issue. First off keep a good record of how your feeling. You may not notice anything at first. I started getting shortness of breath and just thought that it was the humidity in our air here in Indiana. I got a respiratory infection once I was home that turned into bronchitis. It took me OVER a month to clear that up. I had a cough from day one from leaving Iraq, and could not understand this or why I was doing this? Blamed it on the weather. My cough got so bad I contacted the VA and said this is not normal and I want to have my lungs tested...pulmonary function test was ordered...I failed it and found out I have COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease). I now use an inhaler and my breathing is worse at night, because I wheeze now. I came home at the end of November by March I had another issue, my colon. I was 47 at the time and had to do a colonoscopy 3 years earlier than I should have. Found out I had polyps and a tear in my colon. It is now November and I cannot seem to understand why I have still a colon issue. Now my esophagus is a problem. I had another cold back a few months ago and lost my voice for 3 full weeks. I had bronchitis again. Could not shake it. I am scheduled for another colon scope since I have this issue and also to have my throat checked out. My esophagus is closing up and I may have to have it stretched back out. NO ONE in my family has ever had an issue like this. I blame this on the effects of the burn pit. My memory and forgetfulness is a REAL problem for me. I can't seem to remember anything. So I guess anyone's secrets are safe with me I would forget easily after a few days. I have other issues I just wanted to list a few. Take photos of the burn pits for your own personal records they would prove very helpful later on. Keep researching all that you can on this issue, there are long lists of what soldiers are reporting that is wrong with them. I have to write mine down or I will forget. Not that a person can but my memory won't allow me anymore to recall things like I once did. Life if going to be challenging and many of us may not live a full life due to our new found health issue. But from one soldier to all you others we fought a good battle and we should keep each other in our prayers. God Bless you all and keep up the good fight and take care of your health.

Back to the hearing, Dr. Szema compared what is being seen to the conditions of fire fighters who were at Ground Zero following 9-11. He noted that he sees young people whom he shouldn't be seeing including ones with asthma -- when asthma would prevent them from being inducted into the military and that even if a few managed to skirt by in the screening process, the rates of asthma shouldn't be as high as it is. We'll note this exchange from early in the hearing.

Chair Byron Dorgan: Dr. Szema, what's your assessment of what you've heard? You've not been in Iraq, you've not seen the burn pits, you've heard them described, you heard Mr. Lambert and Mr. Keith describe what was thrown into the burn pits. What's your assessment of what we might see as a result of this? Is this a potentially serious threat to human health of those who were exposed?

Dr. Szema: Originally, I didn't even know what a burn pit was. So we thought that the higher asthma rates that we were seeing anecdotally were related to the shamal, the dust storms in Iraq, and possibly exposure to inhalational particles of improvised explosive devices. And then we wrote -- we did our study indicating that the rates of asthma were twice that if you were an Iraq deployed versus stateside deployed. And only recently when I learned about the burn pits, I knew that that could potentially, plausibly be one of the explanations. We-we actually did have PM 2.5 data from CHPPM in one of our presentations at the American Thoracic Society Conference and the PM 2.5 levels were in the thousands. Just for an example, in comparison, the Environmental Protection Agency standards in the United States is 35 micrograms per cubic meter. If you're over 35 in the United States, that's air pollution and they were measuring it in the thousands and that's irrespective of what's actually the concentration so, in and of itself, there were clearly particles in the air. That was not included in the 2008 report, that was part of our poster presentation. So my concern is -- what -- you're not supposed to be burning anything. Even if you're burning wood in cooking, we know that in third world countries if we reduce the use of cook stoves and fires, we can reduce respiratory mortality by millions of people worldwide. And, in fact, the American Thoracic Society is coming out with a position statement that even in the United States, if we roll back the EPA pollution standards a little bit, we will save millions of lives in the United States from air pollution. So clearly, I think, when you have uncontrolled burns, there will be a litany of health effects

One more time, Rick Lamberth's statements on how greed was able to trump humanity, "KBR was able to get away with this because the Army never enforced the applicable standards. KBR's Project Controls Department also kept their information hidden. During one visit by a representative from DCMA. I heard someone from Project Controls state that it was her job to keep DCMA away from the books during the inspection. KBR Management would brag that they could get away with doing anything they wanted because the army could not function without them. KBR figured that even if they did get caught, they had already made more than enough money to pay any fines and still make a profit."

Iraq was addressed on NPR's The Diane Rehm Show today during the second hour. Diane's guest host Katty Kay was joined by James Kitfield (National Journal), Paul Richter (Los Angeles Times) and Farah Stockman (Boston Globe).

Katty Kay: On the one hand we had the Iraqi Parliament which failed again this week to approve a law regulating its January election. Uh, Paul, do you think this election is going to take place?

Paul Richter: It sounds like it could be delayed but I notice some Iraqi legislators who are telling the press 'Well maybe it will only be delayed slightly. On the other hand, they've been debating this election law for some time and it has serious consequences for the US if they don't get this settled because, of course, the White House and the Pentagon are thinking about drawing-down those troops further. We need more in Afghanistan probably.

Katty Kay: And at the same time, we have Iraq signing deals to develop its oil fields. There was news this morning in the Washington Post [Ernesto Londono and Qais Mizher's "Exxon-Shell Consortium signs deal to develop Iraqi oil field"] that Exxon and Shell are going to sign a deal with the Iraqi Oil Ministry as well. So sort of some good news on the economic front, perahps James?

James Kitfield: Some good news but you know the prob -- and why we're so in getting these elections behind Iraq -- is so they can then get back to the major issue of reconcilation that are outstanding and one is an oil law. You know, the K- you know, the Kurds are already signing deals, you know, independently of the central government. That's a potential fault line for divisions in Iraq.

Katty Kay: And, of course, the hitch behind signing the current election law is over --

James Kitfield: Kirkuk.

Katty Kay: Kirkuk which is a big oil --

James Kitfield: Right! There is concern among -- ever since Saddam has been ousted -- he had flooded Arabs into Kirkuk area. Since he's been ousted, a lot of the Kurds have been pushing more people into Kirkuk. There's concerns in that tension between the Arabs and the Kurds that the election will sort of uh give one side an advantage over the other and so that's been the sticking point. But I'll take Paul's point a little further, I suspect there's going to be a surge of some tens of thousands of troops to Afghanistan even though Obama hasn't announced that yet. I [su]spect he will. For that to happen, it really -- we have a very aggressive withdrawal from Iraq [. . .]

Okay, point. James Kitfield? Doesn't belong on radio. Potential? "POOOOOO -- tential!" As he stumbles and fumbles his damn words. It's difficult to listen to him. Forget what he's offering (which isn't informed), he can't speak a complete sentence without changing in the middle of it -- usually several times. Do they not get how hard on the ears this is? It's not just the uh-uh (and he does it far more than I note), that's fine. Stumble. Gather your thoughts. But speak the English language. Deciding mid-word that you want a different one? Over and over? I remember oral exams in grad school where highly nervous people came off more assured than Kitfield. It isn't pleasant to listen to and it doesn't make for good radio.

Now that's (A). (B)? Know your damn facts. He maintains (we're not including that section) there are 115,000 troops in Iraq currently. What? 128,000 was August 31st and that's the GAO's estimate that they provided on Monday. Unless someone's done a head count since then, an organization or an individual, that's your number. A friend in the brass in Iraq says the number is "about 123,000" right now. About. The problem with not going with the known is that an "about" X suddenly gets lowered by a James Kitfield. He pimped 115,000 US troops in Iraq. Pimped it today. On NPR and was not corrected. A gas bag with a lot of opinions and few facts is always a problem.

Katty Kay: Give us a quick update, Farah, on the security situation in Baghdad following, of course, last week's truck bombing. Have you heard anything on how security's been changed or boosted? Have they reinstated some of the barriers, for example, in the streets in the Green Zone?

Farah Stockman: I just think that we're hearing a lot of reports about bombings and it's not looking good and it's not looking good -- it's not looking good. But I think James might have a better on that than I do.

Oh, Farah. How you failed the listeners. Instead they got to hear James stumble around yet again and, in the process, pronounce "domestic" three different ways. That's what happens when you don't committ to a word until your half-way done speaking it. Get him off the radio. There's no excuse for this. People have been far too nice to him for far too long. It's not that he's an idiot -- he is one -- it's that he sounds like an idiot on the radio. If it's too difficult for him to speak, don't bring him on the radio. And grasp that as difficult as it is for him to figure out which words to randomnly string together, it's that much harder for the audience to have to listen to him. There's no excuse for that.

Bombings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Mosul roadside bombing which claimed the life of 1 police officer and a second one which left five people wounded.

Shootings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 Sahwa ("Awakening" or "Sons Of Iraq") shot dead last night in Kirkuk. Wang Guanqun (Xinua) reports an attack on a barber shop in al-Sa'adiya in which 1 barber was shot dead and another person was wounded.

Corpses?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 corpse (Peshmerga officer) discovered in Kirkuk last night.

Turning to the US, Frances and Jack Barrios were last noted in the October 30th snapshot. Efforts have been taking place to deport Frances Barrios, the wife of Iraq War veteran Jack Barrios and the mother of their two children. Her 'crime'? Coming to the United States at six-years-old. Teresa Watanabe (Los Angeles Times) reports that yesterday the couple learned she was granted "humanitarian parole" and will be able to apply for a green card and remain in the country. Tony Valdez (Los Angeles' Fox 11 -- link has text and video) was present when Frances Barrios received the news:Tony Valdez: Frances Barrios looked mystified and anxious about her attorneys visit to her Van Nuys apartment in the evening. She usually went to Jessica Dominguez' office whenever there was a development in her bid to stay in the US with her husband and her children. What the attorney told her husband, an Iraq War veteran, was completely unexpected.Jessica Dominguez: The Citizenship and Immigration Services has granted your wife parole which means you can now give her legal permanent resident status without her having to go back to Guatemala.

Yesterday in Texas, there was an attack on Fort Hood. Mary Pat Flaherty, William Wan and Christian Davenport (Washington Post) report that the suspect is US Army Maj Nidal M. Hasan, a 39-year-old psychiatrist whose aunt said he had endured mocking and verbal abuse over the years for being a Muslim and she states that he attempted to get out of the military. Peter Slevin (Washington Post) reported 12 people were killed at the base with thrity-one more left injured. The death toll has risen to at least 13. Julian E. Barnes, Josh Meyer and Kat Linthicum (Los Angeles Times) explain, "Ft. Hood, which sprawls across 339 square miles of central Texas hill country, is the world's largest military installation. It supports two full armored divisions -- the 1st Cavalry Division and the 4th Infantry Division -- and is home to more than 70,000 soldiers, civilian workers and family members. It is the largest single employer in Texas." Ann Scott Tyson (Washington Post) notes, "This year, 117 active-duty Army soldiers were reported to have committed suicide, with 81 of those cases confirmed -- up from 103 suicides during the same period last year. Ten suicides have been reported at Fort Hood this year; more than 75 of its personnel have committed suicide since 2003. Fort Hood's high number of suicides is also linked to the fact that it is the Army's largest base, with more than 53,000 soldiers." Dahr Jamail adds:
#yiv1139127832 , #yiv1139127832 .aolmailheader {font-size:10pt;color:black;font-family:Arial;}#yiv1139127832 a.aolmailheader:link {color:blue;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:normal;}#yiv1139127832 a.aolmailheader:visited {color:magenta;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:normal;}#yiv1139127832 a.aolmailheader:active {color:blue;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:normal;}#yiv1139127832 a.aolmailheader:hover {color:blue;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:normal;}
Fort Hood, located in central Texas, is the largest US military base in the world and contains up to 50,000 soldiers. It is one of the most heavily deployed bases to both Iraq and Afghanistan. In fact, the shooter himself was facing an impending deployment to Iraq. The soldier says that the mood on the base is "very grim," and that even before this incident, troop morale has been very low. "I'd say it's at an all-time low - mostly because of Afghanistan now," he explained. "Nobody knows why we are at either place, and I believe the troops need to know why they are there, or we should pull out, and this is a unanimous feeling, even for folks who are pro-war." In a strikingly similar incident on May 11, 2009, a US soldier gunned down five fellow soldiers at a stress-counseling center at a US base in Baghdad. Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the US military's Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters at a news conference at the Pentagon that the shootings occurred in a place where "individuals were seeking help." "It does speak to me, though, about the need for us to redouble our efforts, the concern in terms of dealing with the stress," Admiral Mullen said. "It also speaks to the issue of multiple deployments." Commenting on that incident in nearly parallel terms, US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said that the Pentagon needs to redouble its efforts to relieve stress caused by repeated deployments in war zones; stress that is further exacerbated by limited time at home in between deployments. Nancy A. Youssef (McClatchy Newspapers) informs the suspect was supposed to deploy to Afghanistan. Kelly Gooch (Tyler Morning Telegraph) reports on some families reactions as they attempted to find out the status on their loved ones at Fort Hood:Spc. Shawntae Hall, 22, is one of the soldiers stationed at the Army base.Her mother, Norma Tompkins, of Tyler, said she called Ms. Hall Thursday and left a message on her cell phone. She also tried all of her daughter's friends and a fellow military mother. "I kind of lost it for a few minutes. When I heard from her it was the biggest relief of my life," she said. During the short phone conversation, Mrs. Tompkins said Ms. Hall told her officials were about to lock down the base and she would not be able to use a cell phone or the Internet. Ann Davies (The Age) notes): that a female police officer "arrived and shot Hasan several times before he went down. She was wounded in the process." That was Sgt Kimberly Munley. Matthew Schofield (Kansas City Star) reports, "Muley also took three bullets, one in each thigh and one in a wrist. By all accounts, she was swift, decisive, and probably saved lives. It was a lucky thing she happened to be nearby when the emergency call came in. She found Hasan four minutes after the first 911 call." In addition, on NBC's Today Show this morning, Matt Lauer spoke with Lt Gen Robert Cone who praised Amber Bahr who assisted other soldiers including carrying one, Grant Moxon, away from the crime scene despite the fact that she herself had been shot: "I think most notable about her is the fact that despite the fact she was shot, she assisted in helping other soldiers, put a tourniquet on a solider, carried him out to medical care -- and only after she had taken care of others did she realize that she herself had been shot." Moni Basu (CNN -- link has text and several videos as well) offers, "Soldiers were dragging bodies away from the shooter. They snatched tablecloths off tables, cut up their own sage-green digital combat uniforms, even their tan undershirts, and turned them into tourniquets and pressure bandages. Everyone tried to render CPR and medical aid. Some were medical personnel. Others were simply friends helping friends." Among the 13 who lost their lives is Francheska Velez. Peter Slevin (Washington Post) reports the 21-year-old Iraq War veteran was set to begin maternity leave. Her cousin Jennifer Arzuaga tells CBS' Derrick Blakley, "She was a very wonderful person, very brave, very kind hearted. She didn't deserve to lose her life. She had a lot to live for." CBS reports Michael Pearson, who was set to deploy to Iraq, died while in surgery after being shot three times and quotes his mother Sheryll Pearson stating, "He was the best son in the whole world; good student, good friend, loyal, hardworker. He was my best friend. I was just shocked because I was getting ready for him, I was preparing for him to come home for Christmas and I knew he would probably be deployed in January and this was just amazing to me, it just doesn't seem real to me." Mark Memmott (NPR) reports on this morning's press briefing at Fort Hood:7:37 a.m. ET: The suspect's condition is "stable." Why was it originally said by Army personnel that suspect Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan was dead? "Confusion," says the briefer, Col. John Rossi.7:39 a.m. ET: One civilian was killed. The other fatally wounded victims were military personnel, Col. John Rossi says.7:40 a.m. ET: The soldiers at the scene were not armed. The "first responder" who wounded the suspect was a female police officer. She was wounded and is now in stable condition.

TV notes, NOW on PBS begins airing on most PBS stations tonight (check local listings) and their focus this week is:Only one year after a historic election rerouted the course of America's political culture, do the 2009 election results show momentum swinging in the opposite direction?This week, NOW's David Brancaccio talks to political author and columnist David Sirota about populist anger, the Obama administration's successes and failures, and how this week's election results foreshadow the state of politics in 2010.Also airing tonight on many PBS stations, Bill Moyers Journal offers a veterans day special. Washington Week finds Gwen sitting around the table with James Barnes (National Journal), Ceci Connolly (Washington Post), John Harris (Politico) and Martha Raddatz (ABC News). Meanwhile Bonnie Erbe will sit down with Sam Bennett, Karen Czarnecki, Cari Dominguez and Avis Jones-DeWeever to discuss the week's events on PBS' To The Contrary. Check local listings, on many stations, it begins airing tonight. And turning to broadcast TV, Sunday CBS' 60 Minutes offers:
Cyber WarCould foreign hackers get into the computer systems that run crucial elements of the world's infrastructure, such as the power grids, water works or even a nation's military arsenal, to create havoc? They already have. Steve Kroft reports.
Andre AgassiKatie Couric interviews the tennis champion about his drug use, the depression that made him use methamphetamine and other aspects of his personal life and tennis career in his first interview about his upcoming book. (This is a double-length segment).
60 Minutes, this Sunday, Nov. 8, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.

iraq
kelly kennedy
npr the diane rehm show
the washington post qais mizher ernesto londono
mcclatchy newspapers sahar issa
the los angeles times teresa watanabe
ann scott tyson mary pat flaherty william wan christian davenport peter slevin julian e. barnes josh meyer kate linthicum dahr jamail
ann davies cnn moni basu
nancy a. youssef
matthew schofield npr mark memmott
60 minutes cbs news pbs to the contrary bonnie erbe

Posted at 09:59 pm by politicsscree
Make a comment Permalink

Nov 5, 2009

sunsara taylor

this is from sunsara taylor's blog:

Cameraman brutally arrested while filming Sunsara Taylor making a statement Sunday 10:30 a.m. at Ethical Humanist Society of Chicago
On Sunday, November 1st, plainclothes and uniformed police who had been called in earlier by officials of the Ethical Humanist Society of Chicago (EHSC) dragged out, maced and arrested a man for videotaping Sunsara Taylor as she stood near her seat and made a statement before the start of that morning’s program about the shameful cancellation of her long planned talk to EHSC that day on the topic “Morality without Gods.”
The shocking incident took place at the insistence of the president of EHSC. About 40 people witnessed the videographer being brutalized by the police in the foyer of the facility. An attorney demanded that the police stop brutalizing him when five officers piled on him as he lay face down on the floor. 6 police cars arrived within minutes.
The day before, during a workshop on the same premises which the president and other board members of the EHS were at, Sunsara explained very clearly that she would be attending the opening of the EHS's Sunday gathering and giving the EHS the opportunity to do the right thing and allow her talk to go forward, up until the last minute. If the EHS still refused to let her give her talk, she explained that she would leave and give her talk in “exile” at the nearby home of one of the EHS members. [this statement can be viewed on http://sunsara.blogspot.com/2009/11/call-for-ethical-humanist-society-of.html]
In her brief statement at the EHS on Sunday morning, Sunsara Taylor challenged the very wrong decision to cancel her speaking engagement and pointed out how this is contributing to a chilling atmosphere in society as a whole and has happened all too frequently to people who challenge the dominant narrative (like Ward Churchill, Noman Finkelstein and the director of Milk who was recently “disinvited” from Hope College, etc.). Taylor stated that while the group had the “bureaucratic right” to disinvite her, it didn’t make it any more “right” than the voters in California passing Prop 8. She also invited those who wanted to hear her speak to come to her “talk in exile” at the home of a member of the EHSC.
At no point during her brief statement was Sunsara asked to stop speaking or to leave the premises. And at no point was anyone who was there to support her, including the photographer, asked to leave. It is telling that the only person singled out by the police, at the request of the president of the Society, was the man documenting what Sunsara was saying.
The videographer was simply trying to document and guard the truth of what Sunsara was saying in her brief statement. Sunsara’s words had been grossly distorted and taken out of context by some members of the EHSC who were the driving forces behind canceling her speech. What kind of ethics and morals is the EHSC upholding and modeling through the great lengths it has gone to in suppressing Sunsara Taylor’s talk on Morality without Gods? A number of their own members expressed disagreement with the cancellation and a number of prominent people from around the country wrote statements in support of Sunsara’s speaking and called on EHSC to rectify its wrong-headed decision. Instead, the board fortified and increasingly defended its decision and created an atmosphere of anti-communist hysteria, fear and rumor-mongering that had no relationship to reality.
The EHS had no legitimate basis to feel the police needed to be there in the first place, except for the rumors and hysteria that they themselves had created. Then, by choosing to set the police upon the person filming they went after the one person who was documenting the truth of Sunsara's words and the fact that Sunsara and others there to support her were acting in no way to disrupt the replacement talk the EHS had planned.
What kind of Ethical Humanist group would create a situation that led directly to the brutal arrest of someone simply for filming Sunsara giving a statement at that point with simply a cell phone? In their zeal to suppress Taylor they went repeatedly against the stated purpose of the Ethical Humanist Society of Chicago which includes “the supreme aim of human life is working to create a more humane society...Our commitment is to the worth and dignity of the individual and to treating each human being so as to bring out the best in her or him.”
This attack was in stark contrast to the day before at the EHSC where Sunsara led a well-attended and lively discussion with much audience participation on "Women’s Liberation and the Emancipation of Humanity." This whole program was videotaped by the same volunteer photographer.
To call upon the EHSC to drop charges against the photographer and to continue to express their disagreement with their decision to dis-invite Sunsara Taylor contact: office@ethicalhuman.org
847-677-3334.
To find out how to make contributions to the legal defense, contact: sunsaratour@yahoo.com.
Link to video of Sunsara's statement on Oct. 31st at EHS-Chicago. http://sunsara.blogspot.com/2009/11/call-for-ethical-humanist-society-of.html

if you're thinking 'what the f**k?', i was too. i had an e-mail on this that i saw early this morning and i couldn't figure out what was going on. reading the above, i still can't.

i don't know what this 'ehs-chicago' is but does it sound like any place you'd want to be? they cancel someone's speaking engagement - and, no, i don't know why so i'll leave that alone except to say their loss - and then attack someone for shooting some video?

who runs 'ehs-chicago'? george w. bush and his twin brother barack?

here's the e-mail i saw this morning:

Call for Ethical Humanist Society of Chicago to Reverse Their Decision to Dis-Invite Sunsara Taylor

sunsara
Donations are needed including for travel expenses. Show your support for Sunsara and help make it possible for her to continue her work and spread her critical and uncompromising voice far and wide: Checks payable to "Sunsara's World" can be sent c/o Revolution Books, 146 West 26th Street, New York, NY 10001.
Joan Hirsch
Assistant to Sunsara Taylor
Tour Coordinator
917-520-6963

Sunsara Taylor campus speaking tour. A Talk on Away With All Gods!
Unchaining the Mind and Radically Changing the World
www.awaywithallgods.com

if you don't know sunsara taylor, she's an incredible speaker and some 1 who is not afraid to call out what needs to be called out. she was calling out guantanamo when most were still afraid to criticize it would mean risking getting tossed in there.

sunsara is a communist and a proud 1. and she should be.

there's nothing wrong with being a communist.

and good for her for being public with it because that's the only way the communist party is ever going to be able to build. so many people spent so many decades hiding. and that accomplished nothing. sunsara doesn't pretend to be a democrat to get on tv or be listened to. (and she does get booked on tv even without hiding who she is.) so when she speaks, people who are new to her can look her up and learn more.

think of ms. x who pretends to be a democrat (i can think of 5 right now off the top of my head) but is a communist or socialist. some 1 sees her on tv and thinks, 'great! i agree with that!' they think she's a democrat so they go learn about democrats or the democratic party. ms. x helps no 1 including herself.

people like sunsara are genuine and deserve to be praised for their courage. deserve to be heard? in a democracy, every point of view should be heard. apparently chicago doesn't know a great deal about democracy.

let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

Thursday, November 5, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, no election law continues, Nouri's attacks on the press continues, a US House Armed Services subcomittee's lack of interest in Iraq continues, and, of course, the war itself continues.

Earlier today Qassim Abdul-Zahra (AP) reports that Parliament finished today's session (Thursday's session) "without agreeing" to any election law. Nothing has been passed. Xiong Tong (Xinhua) reveals, "The Council of Representatives postponed the voting on the elections law to Saturday after the lawmakers agreed on a proposal submitted by the parliament's legal committee." Warren P. Stroble (McClatchy Newspapers) adds, "The standoff is jeopardizing plans for national elections in mid-January, as well as the timetable for an orderly drawdown of the 120,000 U.S. troops here, even as President Barack Obama weighs sending tens of thousands more soldiers and Marines to Afghanistan." I believe the only known count was given by the GAO Monday and that was 128,000. Considering that the press has been lazy asses for months now and tossed around the 120,000 INACCURATELY you'd think now that the GAO has presented a hard number, they'd get off their candy asses and try using the correct number. In addition, there's no "drawdown of the 120,000" -- the White House and press ran with 50,000 since the November 2008 election and we stated here the number would be 70,000. The number the White House uses now is 70,000. Gina Chon (Wall St. Journal) reports, "Lawmakers said they would meet again on Saturday, but big differences over the legislation remained. After a meeting Thursday evening, the country's election commission decided it would wait until Saturday to make a final decision on whether the polls should be delayed, commission chairman Faraj al-Haideri said. He added that even if a law is passed on Saturday, the commission could still recommend that the elections be delayed depending on which voting system the parliament ends up choosing." Oliver August (Times of London) explains that the Iraqi Constitution mandates the elections be held no later than January 31st and, in addition "[a]n important Shia religious holiday in early February makes it difficult to push back the poll by only a few weeks." Timothy Williams and Sa'ad Izzi (New York Times) report, "Hamdia al-Hussaini, a member of the Independent High Electoral Commission, the government agency that organizes elections here, said she would wait until Parliament met on Sunday to decide whether to postpone the election. Earlier in the week, Faraj al-Haideri, the head of the electoral commission, warned that if a law was not passed by Thursday, he would recommend a delay because there would be insufficient time to print ballots and perform other prepatory work." Sammy Ketz (AFP) quotes election commission head Faraj al-Haidari stating, "We can no longer organise elections on January 16 -- that would have been difficult even if we had received the law today. Whether they retain the old electoral law, amend it or adopt an entirely new one is a matter for members of parliament but we are the ones who will have to implement their decisions according to the timetable. We hope that MPs will resolve their dilemma but we are not going to sacrifice international norms and criteria -- we're obliged to respect the rules so that these elections are transparent." Iraqi MP Ayad Jamal Aldin wrote a letter to the editors of the Guardian on the issue of the elections:

I have written to the head of the UN expressing concern over the possibility of "free and fair" elections taking place in Iraq next January. Repeating the much-publicised vote-rigging seen in Afghanistan, since the last national Iraqi election in 2005, political factions have placed supporters on the Iraqi Electoral Commission to assist them in manipulating the result in the upcoming election. This self-interested action must be defused now, and I am calling on the UN to replace Iraq's Electoral Commission with fresh faces, unaligned and unbeholden to the factions in Baghdad. This could take place immediately, with no disruption to the political process, and would give the best possible chance of a fair vote in January. A free, fair and properly supervised election in January is absolutely vital for our country's young democracy and the wider region. As has been witnessed in Afghanistan, failure to ensure a free vote is too damaging to imagine.
Ayad Jamal Aldin is running for re-election and promises, at his website, "A better life for Iraqi families" via three steps: "1 million new jobs, especially for our young, Make the electricity system work within 2 years, Major upgrades to deliver running water."

While the election's at a stand-still, the greed factor keeps corporations lusting Iraqi oil. David Gauvey Herbert (National Journal) notes the foreign monies being thrown at Iraqi oil in a long thing piece whose observations include: "Even with more investment, Iraq still doesn't have enough engineers or institutional experience. While Saudi Arabia has half a century of oil expertise under its belt, brain-drain robbed Iraq of plenty of talent under Saddam Hussein and scared off more talent during the turbulent aftermath of the 2003 invasion." This morning AFP reported that the Iraqi Oil Ministry announced today the awarding of a contract to Exxon Mobil for West Qurna 1 field: "West Qurna 1 currently produces about 279,000 bpd and has reserves of around 8.5 billion barrels, according to oil ministry figures." Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) observes, "Major oil companies have been eyeing Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, but the Iraqi government has acted slowly to encourage them. That changed earlier this year as falling oil prices and lagging exports put a squeeze on the national budget. But the June auction fizzled after it emerged that Iraq wasn't willing to pay the fees demanded by the oil companies." Ernesto Londono and Qais Mizher (Washington Post) note the next auction is scheduled for December and that today's contract and the BP-CNPC one indicate "that foreign companies that initially balked at the terms the ministry offered at a public auction in June now think the prospect of eventually tapping into Iraq's vast oil reserves outweighs the risks." Away from the big dollar figures tossed around -- 'oh, so impressive' -- what's it like? Owen Fay (Al Jazeera) investigates (link is video, transcript to video follows):Owen Fay: Children play on a street filled with sewage, live in homes surrounded by rubbish and grow up in villages displaying all of the signs of abject poverty. This is southern Iraq, just outside Basra and, by any measure, one of the wealthiest pieces of land on earth. Iraq has the world's third largest reserves of oil and the bulk of it is located right here. The government in Baghdad is in the middle of signing a series of deals with major oil companies from around the world worth billions and billions of dollars but people here have seen none of it. Female Resident of Basra: We have not benefited from anything, we have nothing to show for it at all. Own Fay: Instead, what they do have is widespread unemployment, intermittent electricity and wells filled with septic water. Male Resident of Basra: Is this Iraq? This is an oil rich country? It is true that there is security now and that's much improved. Security is there but what's the use of that? It is true this is an oil country but as you can see can anyone live in this sewage water? Owen Fay: Local government officials are circumspect about the major new deals being announced in Baghdad. They say they're not opposed to the oil companies coming here but they do have conditions. Jabaar Amin (Head of Basra Provincial Council): If the contracts are beneficial to Iraq, we welcome them. If they subjugate us and take Iraq's oil wealth, we do not. Owen Fay: Another set of oil auctions is due to take place next month. Big names like Exxon will get a chance to invest billions and right now assurances are being made that one of the conditions for any successful bid will be local and regional investment. Shiltag Aboud (Governor of Basra): These companies will not only be contributing to the oil sector but will contribute to the economic, cultural and environmental situation in Basra too. They're not just going to be based at the fields far from everyday life. The impact on the city will be felt. Owen Fay: If that does happen, it will be warmly welcomed but people here say they'll believe it when they see it. For now, they're deeply skeptical because as they look around what they see are international companies far more interested in what lies beneath this land than in the people who have to live on it. Owen Fay, Al Jazeera.

Friday's snapshot noted Nouri's latest attack on the press: "On the latter, Azzaman reports he has 'banned movement by press vehicles with equipment to broadcast live. [. . . ] The order has been issued by the military command of Baghdad operations which specificially denies television broadcasters the right of live coverage'." And it never ends. Martin Chulov (Guardian) reports today that there are "journalists cliaming to have been beaten by security forces and ministers issuing warnings about media coverage" while Farqu Abd al-Qadir, the Communications Minister, is insisting that all broadcast media apply for a $5,000 permit: "Observers say the move appears to have been prompted by official anger at recent coverage of a string of devastating bomb attacks on government ministries, which caused about 250 deaths and seriously eroded the government's security credentials." And the coverage may have hurt installed thug Nouri al-Maliki's chances at re-election. Meanwhile journalist Mohammed Jabar explains he was attempting to report on a bombing but instead was attacked by Iraqi forces who "attacked me with the butts of their rifles. They saw I had all the right badges and knew I was entitled to be there. They beat me till I was unconscious. I am sure they didn't behave like this on their own. It's obvious they have orders to block any coverage of explosions."

Turning to some of today's violence which did get coverage . . .

Bombings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing which wounded two people and another one which wounded three people, a Mosul roadside bombing which claimed the life of 1 police officer and wounded three more, a Ramadi sticky bombing which claimed the life of 1 police officer ("in the investigations department") and was followed by a second bombing which claimed 2 lives and wounded seven people, and a Kirkuk "assassination attempt" by roadside bombing on Brig Gen Adnan Khairu.

Shootings?

Reuters notes US and Kurdish forces killed 1 'suspect' and "freed three child hostages".

Today the Oversight and Ivenstigations Subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee held a hearing entitled Iraq and Afghanistan: Perspectives on US Strategy, Part II. It certainly lived up to Part I and, no, that wasn't a good thing. That October 22nd hearing was covered in the October 23rd snapshot and, as we asked then, "Where the hell was Iraq?"

Let's go with a big moment which raised no eyebrows. This is US House Rep Duncan Hunter (elected for the first time last year, fills his father's seat) opening remarks. He supports sending more troops to Afghanistan, just FYI.

Duncan Hunter: We're not at the ground floor of this debate anymore. We'we're kind of talking like we are. And my question, one is, we're over there, we're committed, we're on the 50th floor, so what now? And I don't think that our commanders over there are ignorant of anything you are saying. I think they all -- they all -- Do you think they're ignorant of this? I think that they have heard probably every point of view and-and the State Department involved -- I was stationed in Afghanistan for my third deployment in 2007. I just went back this last weekend, it was fun. The State Department involvement and the civilian and Smart Person involvement now with the military in Afghanistan is unprecedented. Never happened before. It's quintupled since July -- the State Department, US AID personnel. And there's a two-star civilian for every two-star military person there, there's a whole chain of command for the civilian side along with the military side, everybody's confident, they're asking for a troop surge, I mean that's what everybody's asking for. But my question is: So what now then? I mean they -- there's -- we're talking a lot, we're at the 50th floor, not the ground floor anymore. We're over there. We're committed. Dr. Khan might have us pull out but not on the basis that we can't win, on the basis that you don't think we'll stay

Muqtedar Khan: Yes.

Duncan Hunter: Right?

Muqtedar Khan: Yes, exactly.

Duncan Hunter: Okay. So what now. That's-that's all I got. And that's the big . . . What do you recommend if we do want it stable and we do want it so that we can leave in the next two to five years, leave it relatively stable, not abandon it totally and we'll probably leave troops there like we will in Iraq. But so what now?

Excuse me, "and we'll probably leave troops there like we will in Iraq"? I don't disgree with Hunter but there has been a big effort to deny that was planned. That statement should get attention but don't wait for the press to pick it up. The same press that sold you the illegal war on Iraq really isn't interested in that war ever ending -- as long as they don't have to cover it, they're hap-hap-happy.

There's another obvious moment that should be addressed. It's not Iraq related and Kat's grabbing it for her site and will write about it tonight. So let's move over to US House Rep Mike Coffman and whether he was attempting to spit on Jonathon M. Sylvestre's memory or if he was just damn stupid? We'll go with bulb nose being damn stupid -- and possibly the WC Fields like nose was a tip off? Two days ago, DoD announced: "Spc. Jonathon M. Sylvestre, 21, of Colorado Springs, Colo., died Nov. 2 in Kut, Iraq, of injuries sustained from a non-combat related incident. He was assigned to the 1st Battalion, 10th Field Artillery Regiment, 3rd Heavy Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division, Fort Benning, Ga." Does he not matter to Coffman?

Because Coffman supports the continued war on Iraq? No, Coffman probably still supports that continued war, he supported it back when he could actually remember a war was going on there. But Coffman's lost interest in Iraq long, long ago. And it was disgusting to watch him do an exchange where he cited 'recent' deaths in Afghanistan from his home state and he didn't have a damn thing to say about Jonathon M. Sylvestre who, for the record, is Colorado's most recent service member to die in Iraq or Afghanistan. But Coffman wasn't interested in that. It should be noted US House Rep Susan Davis wasn't interested in Iraq either and our state, California, saw two deaths announced this week in Iraq; Lukas C. Hopper of Merced and Christopher M. Cooper of Oceanside.

The subcomittee heard from retired Maj Gen Paul Eaton, Professor Christine Fair (Georgetown), Professor Muqtedar Khan (University of Delaware) and Marin Strmecki (Smith Richardson Foundation). Eaton and Strmecki were aware of the Iraq War as evidenced by their opening remarks. In his opening remarks, Eaton noted speaking to US President Barack Obama over a year ago, being asked what the army wanted and replying, "Senator, we want your Secretary of Agriculture to be at least as interested in the outcome in Afghanistan and Iraq as is your Secretary of Defense." Does anyone get the idea that this interest is present in the Secretary of Agriculture? That's Tom Vilsack. And, just for example, click on this page (US Agricultural website) and note just what's been 'done' (covered) in 2009 compared to 2008. See an increase? No. And click here for archives and you'll see more efforts noted in every year of the Iraq War except 2004 and 2005. So where's the increase?
Wait, you're saying, Barack had all those problems getting qualified people (and a few tax cheats) confirmed, right?

Wrong. Not with Vilsack. He was nominated December 17, 2008 and he was confirmed by the US Senate January 20th -- the day Barack was sworn in as president. Vilsack did his swearing in January 21st. So let's not pretend like Vilsack showed up late. He was there from the first day of this administration.

Now Eaton told that story in his opening remarks. At any point did any member of the Subcommittee ever ask him, "Do you think what you asked for happened or is happening?" No. And no one ever explored it. Remember, it was about Iraq and the hearing, though including Iraq in the title, really wasn't interested in Iraq. Congress can vote, in 2002, some form of authorization or approval for an impending Iraq War they just don't seem able to focus on it while it continues. That seems to be the tricky part and may be why they've become so lousy about providing oversight on it?

(Or for that matter, pulling the plug on it.)

If there's an exception to that it's been the Senate Democratic Policy Committee. Tomorrow there will be another hearing held by them, this one looking into the burn pits:

Chairman Byron Dorgan (D-ND) announced Wednesday the Senate Democratic Policy Committee (DPC) will conduct a congressional oversight hearing on Friday, November 6, to examine the health risks associated with the continued use of open-air burn pits by the U.S. military and contractor KBR in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The hearing is set for 10:00 AM and will be held in Room 628 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building in Washington, DC.
Although military guidelines allow the use of burn pits to dispose of waste only in emergency situations, most large U.S. military installations have continued to use burn pits for years, despite growing evidence that exposure to burn pit smoke may be causing an increased incidence of chronic lung diseases, respiratory ailments, neurological disorders and cancer.
Hearing witnesses are expected to testify that plastics, paints, solvents, petroleum products, rubber, and medical waste have been burned in the pits.
The hearing will also examine whether military contractor KBR operated the burn pits in a safe and cost-effective manner.
Witnesses will include the Air Force's former Bioenvironemental Flight Commander at Joint Base Balad, who warned three years ago about health hazards associated with burn pit smoke at the base, two KBR whisteblowers, and a medical expert who will describe the adverse health consequences associated with burn pit smoke inhalation.

Details follow:
WHO: Senators: Byron Dorgan (D-ND), Chairman, and others
Witnesses: Lt. Colonel Darrin Curtis, former Air Force Bioenvironmental Flight Commander at Joint Base Balad; Rick Lamberth, former KBR employee; Russell Keith, former KBR medic; Dr. Anthony Szema, MD, expert on health impact of burn pit smoke.
WHAT: Congressional oversight hearing.
WHERE: Room 628 Dirksen Senate Office Building
WHEN: 10:00 AM, Friday, November 6, 2009
WHY: To examine the health impact of burn pit smoke on U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, whether the Army is providing exposed soldiers and veterans with accurate information about the risks, and whether contractor KBR is safely operating burn pits.

We'll try to cover that hearing in tomorrow's snapshot (but we're juggling our schedule because we only just learned of it). In other oversight news, Josh Rogin's "Exclusive: Did the U.S. government buy favorable coverage of Iraq's Anbar Province?" (Foreign Policy) reminds that a lot of money has gone into the sinkhole that is the illegal war and for a lot of questionable activities:U.S. taxpayer money that was supposed to be used for emergency purposes in Iraq was spent to buy a special advertising issue for an Anbar businessman in a British trade magazine, a U.S. government investigation has found. FDI magazine, a bimonthly print publication and website owned by the Financial Times, nearly simultaneously showered Anbar Governor Qasim Abid Muhammad Hammadi Al Fahadawi with positive coverage, praising the dangerous Anbar province as "a hot place to invest in" and giving the businessman an award as "Global Personality of the Year for 2009." FDI's award was announced three days before the "Special Report" on Anbar, entitled, "Bridge to the Future," was published on its website. The award was immediately praised by the U.S. military in Iraq, without mention of the U.S. funds spent on the supplement, and the website makes no mention of it having been paid for by the American government. Then again last month, FDI magazine Editor Courtney Fingar handed the governor another award naming Anbar province one of FDI magazine's "standout regions of the year." Reached by The Cable, Fingar confirmed the U.S. government had spent "in the neighborhood of $50,000" on the special supplement but denied her magazine's content had been bought and paid for, calling the report on Anbar "balanced and accurate." The investigation was disclosed in the October quarterly report of the office of the Special Inspector General for Iraqi Reconstruction (SIGIR), which is tasked with monitoring U.S. expenditures and projects in Iraq, but has so far not been publicly reported. Sources told The Cable that after the report is submitted to Congress, it's up to that body to determine if the payment violated funding rules or the law.

And now . . .

It could playfully be argued that by performing this concert Joni Mitchell was the attending mid wife at the birth of Greenpeace. It is a fact, however, that the music on this CD has been donated and approved by the artists and their publishers for a limited period with all proceeds from sales going to Greenpeace in support of our work.

What is that? Joni Mitchell, Phil Ochs and James Taylor did a 1970 concert to benefit Greenpeace. Starting November 10th, the concert is out on CD for a limited time. Click here for more information. Joni Mitchell is, of course, a legendary, one of kind songwriter and artist. The late Phil Ochs left his mark with "I Ain't Marching Anymore," "Changes" and many others and James Taylor is the name of a man who was once married to the legendary artist Carly Simon and whose intense vanity was documented by both Joni and Carly ("watching your hairline recede my vain darling," as Joni put it in "Just Like This Train"). On the live album, Joni's songs include "For Free," "Woodstock," "Big Yellow Taxi," "My Old Man," "Cactus Tree," "The Gallery," "The Circle Game" and "A Case Of You." Phil Ochs contributions to the live album include "Changes," "Chords of Fame," "I'm Gonna Say It Now," "The Bells" and "I Ain't Marching Anymore." Not having yet begun doing vanilla covers of R&B classics, James offers "Fire and Rain," "Sweet Baby James" and a few other songs he wrote (James last recorded a batch of new songs he'd written on 2002's October Road). Carly Simon's latest album is a reimagining of some of her classics as well as two new songs and is entitled Never Been Gone (an amazing album, Kat praised it here). Yesterday, Carly was a guest on NPR's Soundcheck.

Finally, with Aimee Allison (co-host of KPFA's The Morning Show), David Solnit authored the must read Army Of None. David Solnit has now teamed up with his sister Rebecca Solnit, of Courage to Resist, for a new book and there's a new action.
Two things I'd like to tell you about:
ACTION: A Global Day of Action for Climate Justice on the ten year anniversary of Seattle WTO shutdown, Nov 30, 2009. Yesterday African delegates walked out of pre-Copenhagen trade talks in Barcelona demanding the US and rich countries commit themselves to deeper and faster greenhouse gas emission cuts and European activists blockaded the talks. The key fight over the future of the planet is taking place right now around climate; corporate market solutions are the new WTO and the US and the rich countries are undermining any efforts at climate solutions to avert even more catastrophic impacts. What could shift things right now is people in the US (doing what we did ten years ago) showing mass resistance to the US government and corporate capitalism's obstruction and false solutions. Please join one of the regional actions being planned in SF and around the US (details here soon) and sign up to take or support direct action and get your folks together now!
BOOK: AK Press asked me to make a book reflecting on the Seattle WTO shutdown from an organizers view. With my sister Rebecca Solnit, Kate and the AK Press collective workers, designer Jason Justice and contributions from fellow organizers we did it just in time for the ten year anniversary. Please support by buying a book , get ten at half-off, and pass on the announcement below.
hope and resistance, David Solnit

About the book:

From dawn to dusk on November 30, 1999, tens of thousands of people shut down the World Trade Organization meeting, facing cops firing tear gas and rubber bullets, the National Guard, and the suspension of civil liberties. An unexpected history was launched from the streets of Seattle, one in which popular power would matter as much as corporate power, in which economics assumed center-stage, and people began envisioning who else they could be and what else their economies and societies might look like. The Battle of the Story of the Battle of Seattle explores how that history itself has become a battleground and how our perception of it shapes today's movements against corporate capitalism and for a better world. David Solnit recounts activist efforts to intervene in the Hollywood star-studded movie, Battle in Seattle, and pulls lessons from a decade ago for today. Rebecca Solnit writes of challenging mainstream misrepresentation of the Seattle protests and reflects on official history and popular power. Core organizer Chris Dixon tells the real story of what happened during those five days in the streets of Seattle. Profusely illustrated, with a reprint of the original 1999 Direct Action Network's "Call to Action" broadsheet-- including key articles by Stephanie Guilloud, Chris Borte, and Chris Dixon -- and a powerful introduction from Anuradha Mittal, The Battle of the Story of the Battle of Seattle is a tribute to the scores of activists struggling for a better world around the globe. It's also a highly-charged attack on media mythmaking in all its forms, from Rebecca Solnit's battle with the New York Times to David Solnit's intervention in the Battle in Seattle film, and beyond. Every essay in this book sets the record straight about what really happened in Seattle, and more importantly why it happened. This is the real story.

For more on the book, including ordering it, click here and last night Ann noted the book and the importance of the issues the book is covering.

iraq the associated press qassim abdul-zahra
the wall street journal gina chon
timothy williams the new york times
oliver august the times of london
martin chulov
the guardian
david gauvey herbert the national journal al jazeera owen fay
the washington post qais mizher ernesto londono
the los angeles times liz sly
mcclatchy newspapers sahar issa
foreign policy josh rogin
joni mitchell
carly simon
david solnit aimee allison courage to resist

Posted at 09:37 pm by politicsscree
Make a comment Permalink

Nov 4, 2009

edna hearing in the senate tomorrow

Tomorrow morning at 10 a.m., the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee will hold a hearing on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA). This will be the first Senate hearing on ENDA since 2002. The legislation would help to ensure workplace equality by protecting LGBT workers from employment discrimination.

This will be the first time in the 111th Congress that the Senate has held a hearing on this critical legislation. Especially noteworthy will be the testimony of Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Tom Perez, his first since being confirmed by the Senate for his post. Assistant Attorney General Perez will testify on behalf of the Obama administration in support of the legislation.

Readers can watch the hearing live via webcast. Additionally, we will be providing live, play-by-play tweets from the hearing on our Twitter page at http://twitter.com/aclu.

that's from ian thompson's 'Senate to Hold Landmark ENDA Hearing — ACLU to Tweet LIVE!' (aclu's blog of rights). i had an e-mail from a 14-year-old reader and he reflects a common feeling among my readers who are in high school: why is it such a big deal?

i am so thrilled that the attitude for that age group is reflected in that.

it demonstrates how far society's come.

should it matter?

well if you're a gay man and you're attracted to some other guy, it does matter if he's gay the same way if you're a straight man and you're attracted to some woman, it matters if she's straight. (or if either could be bi.)

sexuality does matter.

let's not go so vanilla that we pretend it doesn't.

most of us like to think about sex and enjoy having sex.

there's nothing wrong with that.

and sometimes i do get bothered by some of the talk from democrats in congress who seem to send a message that confuses the point.

it terms of society, every person should be equal and if i am able to marry the man i love (and i have been able to - several times) then so should everybody. not just me and other women but men as well. and women should be able to marry women they're in love with.

it's good that it's seen as nothing to be ashamed of or to run from today and it's good that we grasp that we should all be equal.

c.i. has a really good of way of discussing this which is far more informed than i am on this subject but part of the reason for the hatred towards gays and lesbians had nothing to do with the 'icky' reaction some people have (generally closet cases) but due to the fact that there was an entire cottage industry telling the world that gays were evil. and that they were sick.

it's really only in the early 70s that the medical community finally moves away from that 'sickness' 'diagnosis' as a whole.

so for older people, a lot of the bias is from years and years of the media 'reporting' that there was something wrong with gay people.

let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

Wednesday, November 4, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces deaths, the tag sale in Iraq continues, the Boston Globe's editorial board begs for the plug to be pulled on the paper, no Iraqi election law still, and more.

Today the US military announced: "Contingency Operating Base Speicher, Iraq -- A Multi-National Division -- North Soldier died Nov. 4 from combat related injuries. The name of the deceased is being withheld pending notification of next of kin and release by the Department of Defense. The names of service members are announced through the U.S. Department of Defense official website [. . .] The announcements are made on the Web site no earlier than 24 hours after notification of the service member's primary next of kin. The incident is under investigation." And they announced: "Contingency Operating Base Speicher, Iraq -- A Multi-National Division -- North Soldier died Nov. 4 from non-combat related injuries. The name of the deceased is being withheld pending notification of next of kin and release by the Department of Defense. [. . .] The incident is under investigation." The announcements bring the number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 4359. In addition, Reuters reported this morning that a Tuesday Baghdad mortar attack left 7 US service members injured.

As the toll of dead and wounded US service members continues to climb, US service members are still being sent to Iraq. The war has not ended just because so much of the press (and the Democratic Party) moved on (or MoveOn-ed). Sig Christenson (San Antonio Express-News) reports on some members Fort Sam Houston's 418th Medical Logistics Company soldiers preparing to deploy like Spc Justin Ralph whose wife Julie states, "It hasn't hit me yet. I've just been kind of stressed-out. I don't want him to leave. I've (tried) to talk him out of it, but he has to. He really wants to." Christenson observes, "They're headed to Iraq for the next year, marking the unit's third deployment there since the invasion, and they won't be the last to go. The Iraq war, contrary to popular opinion, isn't near over, and American troops won't be out until 2011 -- and maybe not for years after that."

Meanwhile Iran's Press TV informs, "Iraq has signed its biggest oil deal since the US 2003 invasion with Britain's BP and China's CNPC to develop the giant Rumaila oilfield. The 20-year contract is expected to triple production at the southern oilfield, from the current one million barrels per day (bpd) to around 2.8 million bpd within a six-year period." British Petroleum and China National Petroleum Company formed a consortium earlier this year during bidding on Iraqi oil fields and, unlike many other oil companies, they didn't bail out on the bidding right before it started. However, now other companies are rushing to get their hands on Iraqi oil despite the fact that the terms are the same ones so many foreign coporations found hard to swallow earlier this year. Stanley Reed (BusinessWeek) explains, "The big oil companies are reconsidering Iraq because they realize this may be among their last opportunities to get large volumes of crude. Britain's BP (BP), for instance, typically turns up its nose at anything below roughly 700 million barrels of reserves; Rumaila, about 30 miles west of Basra, may have 20 billion barrels of recoverable oil, BP estimates. Another field in the same class is West Qurna, located north of Basra, where a group including Exxon Mobil and Shell is competing against a partnership of ConocoPhillips and Russia's Lukoil (LKOH.RTS) for production rights." Meanwhile Khalid al-Ansary, Jack Kimball and Simon Jessop (Reuters) report that the country and Japan's Toyota Tsusho entered into a contract for "1.23 billion yen ($13.60 million)" for which Toyota Tshusho will sell Iraq "eight power transformers and six auxiliary units". But the really big 'growth industry' in Iraq?

Corpses. NPR's Quil Lawrence (All Things Considered) explained it this afternoon.

Quil Lawrence: The cemetery is called the Valley of Peace though, for the living, it's crowded, dusty and almost always echoing with the sounds of grief. The tombs and crypts extend for miles in every direction, large enough that different Shi'ite political factions in Iraq have their own sectors spanning several city blocks. Family members sing prayers over the dead and spill water onto the new graves. As long as there have been funerals here, there has been an industry to receive the dead and their families. Dakhil Shakir has spent his eighty years here in the cemetery of Najaf, he says. His earliest memories are helping his father and his grandfather with the business of funerals and burials. Dakhil can count back his families five generations in the trade. He's nearly blind now and, despite his thick plastic glasses, he calls out to ask which of his sons are in the room with him? They will bury him some day, he says, and then carry on the business. When Dakhil was a boy, he recalls, desert caravans brought the dead to Najaf

Dakhil Shakir [translated]: They used to bring the dead on mules. A mule would carry two bodies with five mules in the caravan. I have seen that with my own eyes. They would stay here for a few days and we used to offer them a place to stay and, later, they would set off back home.

Quil Lawrence: As early as the 16th century, the trafficking of Shi'ite corpses from as far as India was big business. The Ottoman Empire taxed and regulated the trade as did the first governments of modern Iraq. The coffins came especially from Iran -- the majority Shi'ite state that shares hundreds of miles of border with Iraq.

And today smuggling corpses into Iraq continues as a smuggle Lawrence interviews explains the Iran-Iraq transportation continues and that there is considerable money to be made in the 'trade.'

As the corpse trade continues, so does the violence which creates ever more deaths.

Bombings?

Jenan Hussein (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad sticky bombing injured five people, a second Baghdad sticky bombing wounded seven, a Baghdad roadside bombing left four people injured and a Mahmoudiyah car bombing left four injured. Reuters notes a Baghdad home bombing which claimed the life of 1 police officer, his wife and their daughter. Xiong Tong (Xinhua) adds that the police officer was Col Shalal al-Zoubaie and reports an al-Miqdadiyah boming of a generator which left two people injured.

Shootings?

Jenan Hussein (McClatchy Newspapers) reports the US military shot dead 1 person in Mosul while arresting 'suspects' in a house raid. Xiong Tong (Xinhua) reports a Jurf al-Mileh shooting in which one person was injured by unknown assailants and a Diyala Province shooting in which 1 person was shot dead and two more were injured by unknown assailants.

Corpses?

Jenan Hussein (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 corpses were discovered in Mosul.

As the bombings continue, multiple reports have appeared in the last months about the 'bomb detectors' and how they're so very good at detecting perfume and cologne but worthless when it comes to bombs. At the end of October, an Iraqi correspondent for McClatchy was exploring the subject at Inside Iraq:

Before starting telling you what happens in most of the checkpoints you should know about the "explosives detectors". The device is carried by security man who stops your car and walk beside it carrying the device. The device's pointer changes its direction when passed by a car that supposedly carries explosives.
But the main flaw it points also if there is any chemical material like detergents or even medicine.

The correspondent also addresses a multitude of other problems with the checkpoints, but staying on the issue of the 'bomb detectors,' in this morning's New York Times, Rod Nordland reports the 'wands' cost anywhere betweeen $16,500 and $60,000 a piece and quotes US Lt Col Hal Bidlack dismissing them and stating they work "on the same principle as a Ouija board".

While the violence continues, there's still no election law. Today Alsumaria reports, "Iraq High Election Commission gave the parliament a timeline that ends on Thursday in order to enact an elections' law or else it will not be able to hold elections as it is scheduled on January 16. Chief of IHEC Faraj Al Haidari said that the commission and the UN discussed elections' timeline and stressed that if he did not receive the law in the two upcoming days the commission won't be able to hold the elections on the scheduled date." Gina Chon (Wall St. Journal) adds, "The election commission said if parliament doesn't approve a law by the end of Thursday, it will be impossible to hold the polls as scheduled on Jan. 16 because there won't be enough time to organize it. In meetings earlier this week, United Nations officials also told lawmakers if a law isn't passed by Thursday, the U.N. would urge postponement of the elections." The Iraqi Constitution mandates that the elections must be held before the end of January 2010; however, the Iraqi Constitution mandates many things -- such as resolving the issue of Kirkuk or appointing a full cabinet by X date or requiring Parliament's approval to extend a United Nations mandate -- and Nouri's always managed to just ignore it. Ernesto Londono and K.I. Ibrahim (Washington Post) report US Ambassador Chris Hill is scrambling on the ground in Iraq attempting to use his 'influence' to push for a vote. The US' own manic depressive ambassador has little-to-no influence especially if the press wants to continue pushing the-hold-up-is-Kirkuk line. Why is that? Hill offended the KRG with his very late first visit to their region. Chris Hill offended them in his remarks which were based on Hill's gross ignorance regarding the issue of Kirkuk -- ignorance on full display when the Senate held his confirmation hearing. Hill came to Iraq with no knowledge of the KRG or Iraq. He has no pull. US Vice President Joe Biden and the top commander US commander in Iraq Gen Ray Odierno have some pull (whether or not it's enough remains to be seen) with the KRG but Hill has none. He also has no influence over non-Kurdish MPs in the Parliament. So what's he's mainly doing is rushing around in an attempt to look busy. He'll no doubt (as has been his pattern throughout his time at the State Dept) find a group to spill the beans to on whatever's hidden and supposed to be hidden. They'll agree to present whatever he wants them to because he shared secrets and then they'll stab him in the back and he'll shrug and finger-point at others. In other words, his Korean 'leadership' all over again.

Biggest idiot of the week? The editorial board of the Boston Globe -- apparently begging for readers to pull the plug on the finacial crater that is their paper. In an appalling uninformed editorial they praise Nouri al-Maliki and conclude, "In their own nihilistic way, Al Qaeda fanatics are showing their true colors not only to Iraqis but to the rest of the Muslim world. They are massacring children and other innocents in the name of a holy war to replace all existing Arab and Muslim governments with the fantasy of a multinational Islamic caliphate. The less Americans are caught up in this war within the Muslim world, the harder it will be for the regressive forces of Al Qaeda to survive." al Qaeda in Mesopotamia is a home grown group and has always been a group of resistance. The Boston Globe was awfully silent when Steven D. Green and others were discovered to have gang-raped and murdered 14-year-old Abeer, murdered both her parents and murdered her five-year-old sister. The Boston Globe voiced no concern about the US soldiers making it appear the War Crimes were done by 'insurgents.' And the Boston Globe was silent as each soldier entered a plea of guilty except for Green who was a civilian when the crimes were exposed and was tried in civilian court. The Boston Globe couldn't be bothered with Steven D. Green's trial and, even after the verdict (or for that matter, the sentencing), couldn't say one damn word, NOT ONE DAMN WORD, about the War Crimes. So their selective efforts at playing editorial bully goes to the fact that they are the most ignorant and uninformed editorial board in the nation. Praise be to the Boston Globe, doing their part to demonstrate that struggling papers sometimes aren't worth the struggle to save them. It should also be noted that while condemning al Qaeda in Mesopotamia for violence that they have not claimed responsibility for (despite headlines, a splinter group claimed responsibility for the August and October Baghdad bombings that shocked so many, al Qaeda in Mesopotamia did not claim credit), they've refused to condemn their hero and crush Nouri al-Maliki strange choice of political bedfellows -- the ones who have claimed responsibility for invading the US base and killing 5 US soldiers, the ones who have claimed responsibility for kidnapping 5 British citizens -- 3 of whom are known dead, a fourth is assumed dead and the fifth is hoped to be alive (by the British government -- the fourth assumed dead is hoped to be alive by his friends and family but the British government has stated they assume he is dead). The Boston Globe has nothing to say about that and one wonders exactly when they got in the business of covering for those who murder US troops? Those are Nouri's friends. He got 'em released. He may have provided them with the Iraqi security forces uniforms they used in the attack on the US base and in the kidnapping of the 5 British citizens. He certainly provided the group's leader and the leader's brother with a pass out of a US prison this spring. The Boston Globe wasn't at all worried about and they continue to be a beacon for ignorance around the world. What a proud, proud moment.

While the Boston Globe tongue bathes Nouri (aka the new Saddam), UPI reports Nouri's latest planned assault: doing away with minority representation. The quota system for the cabinet exists because Iraq's a diverse country. But Nouri's never liked diversity, Nouri's a radical, fundamentailist Shi'ite who oversaw the genocide of the Sunni population because he loathes Ba'athists and sees every Sunni as a high ranking Ba'athist or at least as one of the big, scary people that forced coward Nouri to flee Iraq for decades until the US invaded and installed him as a 'leader.' Nouri really hates Ba'athists because they remind him all over again what a meek, little, sniveling coward he is. And that's why oversaw the genocide -- gladly oversaw. UPI notes the announcement by one of Nouri's political party (State of Law) spokespersons "brought a wave of criticism from Kurds, independents and Shiite members of the Iraqi National Alliance who complain Maliki is trying to take greater control of the government." UPI also reminds how Nouri's road to strongman has been littered with attacks on those who are supposed to provide security such as his December 2008 assault on the Interior Ministry whom he accused of plotting a coup -- a plan that never had any evidence to back it up then or since but did allow him to push out a Shi'ite rival -- and how his firings in August for 'security reasons' also can be seen as an attack on one of his rivals, Shi'ite Jawad al-Bolani. UPI notes of Nouri:

He has centralized power for himself to the extent that he has formed two paramilitary forces, the Baghdad Brigade -- also known as "the Dirty Squad" for its nocturnal sweeps arresting Maliki's critics, particularly Sunnis -- and the Counter-Terrorism Force. Both report directly to him.

Maliki has cemented his control over the nation's security forces by recruiting tribal militias funded by his office and seizing the power of appointing or dismissing army officers, bypassing the chief of staff who should have that authority.

In the eyes of many, this has transformed the army into a well-armed prime ministerial militia.

And for what? What is Iraq today? After nearly seven years of war, what is Iraq? The University of Pittsburg's Haider Hamoudi visits and shares impressions at The Daily Star:

Appealing as these examples may be, the role of religion must be greater in the view of the Najaf clerics concerning matters of law than merely as a voice of conscience on behalf of the people against the powerful. Are we truly to believe then that Najaf clerics are indifferent to potential reforms of the Personal Status Law that challenge existing religious doctrine, such as, for example, a ban on polygamy? Why did the Shiite Islamist parties who dominated the Constitutional Committee and who were close to Sistani fight so hard for a constitutional provision banning laws that violate the "certain rulings of Islam," which now appears in Article 2 of the Constitution? Is the fact that every woman within 50 miles of Najaf is covered by a headscarf and then a wide black cloak on top of that really just a matter of personal choice, exercised universally in precisely the same fashion, or does some form of public regulation (state law or otherwise) have something to do with it as well?

I put this point to another of the four grand ayatollahs, Mohammad Said al-Hakim, when the question was raised about the relationship of religion to law. We heard again the Najaf mantra. I asked specifically about Article 2 of the Iraqi Constitution and its requirement that law conform to particular certainties in Islam. He described this as a "separate issue," and when I suggested it might mean the marjaaiyya had a role in the legal apparatus of the state, he replied, "we have a role in the clarification of the religion (bayan al-din), not in the administration of the law."

This clarifies the position to some extent, in that it makes Najaf responsible for indicating what the religious position is, and then leaves to the legislator and the judge the determinations that the state is supposed to then make on the basis of Article 2. Even Najaf's commitment to this separation is fuzzy, in that its political allies in Baghdad have fought long and hard to ensure a place for "religious experts" on the Federal Supreme Court for Article 2 questions. In the Constitutional Review Committee, the Shiite Islamist parties have proposed an amendment that indicates that members of the court would be nominated by the "relevant bodies." It is hard to imagine that they did not imagine the marjaaiyya to be the "relevant body" responsible for nominating the religious experts, or at least that number of them who were going to be Shiite.

And that's what Iraq can offer . . . after non-stop war and the US installed puppets. Elections? The US had a few of them yesterday. For the New Jersey governor's race see Mike's post and also be sure to read Betty's which expands on some of the issues Mike touches on but sets aside the race. And for Iraq related coverage in the MSM? Turns out your best chance of discovering the Iraq War is still ongoing comes via "Hints From Heloise" (Washington Post) and not 'reporting' (which long ago lost interest in Iraq):

Dear Heloise: Our church group has decided to start sending baked goods as CARE PACKAGES to military personnel in Iraq. We brainstormed several ideas, such as shoe boxes, etc., but found that the best way to send a cake to anyone overseas is to bake the cake in a small, metal coffee can. After baking, remove the cake to cool. Then repack it in the can, put on the plastic lid the coffee came with and pack the can in a postal box. Soldiers tell us that they love getting cakes this way for two reasons:
1. The cake arrives in one piece
2. The cake can be stored easily, with an airtight lid, if it's not eaten all at once. -- Gwen, via e-mail

How wonderful to hear that your group is sending home-baked goodies to our troops! Nothing beats a treat from the heart and kitchen!
Your group deserves a big Heloise hug, and I know the troops who receive the goodies are appreciative, too.
I'd love to hear hints from other readers who send treats to troops. -- Heloise

Staying with reading, earlier this decade Aimee Allison, David Solnit authored the must read Army Of None. David Solnit has now teamed up with his sister Rebecca Solnit, of Courage to Resist, for a new book and there's a new action.

ACTION: A Global Day of Action for Climate Justice on the ten year anniversary of Seattle WTO shutdown, Nov 30, 2009. Yesterday African delegates walked out of pre-Copenhagen trade talks in Barcelona demanding the US and rich countries commit themselves to deeper and faster greenhouse gas emission cuts and European activists blockaded the talks. The key fight over the future of the planet is taking place right now around climate; corporate market solutions are the new WTO and the US and the rich countries are undermining any efforts at climate solutions to avert even more catastrophic impacts. What could shift things right now is people in the US (doing what we did ten years ago) showing mass resistance to the US government and corporate capitalism's obstruction and false solutions. Please join one of the regional actions being planned in SF and around the US (details here soon) and sign up to take or support direct action and get your folks together now!

BOOK: AK Press asked me to make a book reflecting on the Seattle WTO shutdown from an organizers view. With my sister Rebecca Solnit, Kate and the AK Press collective workers, designer Jason Justice and contributions from fellow organizers we did it just in time for the ten year anniversary. Please support by buying a book , get ten at half-off, and pass on the announcement below.

From dawn to dusk on November 30, 1999, tens of thousands of people shut down the World Trade Organization meeting, facing cops firing tear gas and rubber bullets, the National Guard, and the suspension of civil liberties. An unexpected history was launched from the streets of Seattle, one in which popular power would matter as much as corporate power, in which economics assumed center-stage, and people began envisioning who else they could be and what else their economies and societies might look like.

The Battle of the Story of the Battle of Seattleexplores how that history itself has become a battleground and how our perception of it shapes today's movements against corporate capitalism and for a better world. David Solnit recounts activist efforts to intervene in the Hollywood star-studded movie, Battle in Seattle, and pulls lessons from a decade ago for today. Rebecca Solnit writes of challenging mainstream misrepresentation of the Seattle protests and reflects on official history and popular power. Core organizer Chris Dixon tells the real story of what happened during those five days in the streets of Seattle.

Profusely illustrated, with a reprint of the original 1999 Direct Action Network's "Call to Action" broadsheet -- including key articles by Stephanie Guilloud, Chris Borte, and Chris Dixon -- and a powerful introduction from Anuradha Mittal, The Battle of the Story of the Battle of Seattle is a tribute to the scores of activists struggling for a better world around the globe. It's also a highly-charged attack on media mythmaking in all its forms, from Rebecca Solnit's battle with the New York Times to David Solnit's intervention in the Battle in Seattle film, and beyond. Every essay in this book sets the record straight about what really happened in Seattle, and more importantly why it happened. This is the real story.

David Solnit lived and organized in Seattle in 1999 with the Direct Action Network, a group co-initiated by the Art and Revolution Collective, of which he was a part. He has been a mass direct action organizer since the early '80s, and in the '90s became a puppeteer and arts organizer. He is the editor of Globalize Liberation: How to Uproot the System and Build a Better World and co-author with Aimee Allison ofArmy of None: Strategies to Counter Military Recruitment, End War and Build a Better World. He currently works as a carpenter in Oakland, California and organizes with Courage to Resist, supporting GI resisters, and with the Mobilization for Climate Justice West.

Rebecca Solnit is an activist, historian and writer who lives in San Francisco. Her twelfth book, A Paradise Built in Hell: The Extraordinary Communities that Arise in Disaster, came out this fall. The previous eleven include 2007's Storming the Gates of Paradise; A Field Guide to Getting Lost; Hope in the Dark: Untold Histories, Wild Possibilities;Wanderlust: A History of Walking;As Eve Said to the Serpent: On Landscape, Gender and Art; River of Shadows, Eadweard Muybridge and the Technological Wild West (for which she received a Guggenheim, the National Book Critics Circle Award in criticism, and the Lannan Literary Award). A contributing editor to Harper's, she frequently writes for the political site Tomdispatch.com. She has worked on antinuclear, antiwar, environmental, indigenous land rights and human rights campaigns and movements over the years.

We'll note the book again tomorrow but right now we'll close with this from Sherwood Ross' "CHOMSKY SAYS PRESIDENT OBAMA CONTINUES BUSH POLICY TO CONTROL MIDDLE EAST OIL" (Veterans Today):

Political activist Noam Chomsky says that although President Obama views the Iraq invasion merely as "a mistake" or "strategic blunder," it is, in fact, a "major crime" designed to enable America to control the Middle East oil reserves.
"It's ("strategic blunder") probably what the German general staff was telling Hitler after Stalingrad," Chomsky quipped, referring to the big Nazi defeat by the Soviet army in 1943.
"There is basically no significant change in the fundamental traditional conception that if we can control Middle East energy resources, then we can control the world," he said.
In a lecture at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London Oct. 27th, Chomsky warned against expecting significant foreign policy changes from Obama, according to a report by Mamoon Alabbasi published on MWC News.net. Alabbasi is an editor at Middle East Online.
"As Obama came into office, (former Secretary of State) Condoleezza Rice predicted he would follow the policies of Bush's second term, and that is pretty much what happened, apart from a different rhetorical style," Chomsky said.
Chomsky said the U.S. operates under the "Mafia principle," explaining "the Godfather does not tolerate 'successful defiance" and must be stamped out "so that others understand that disobedience is not an option."
Despite pressure on the U.S. to withdraw from Iraq, Alabbasi reported, Chomsky said the U.S. continues to seek a long-term presence in the country and the huge U.S. embassy in Baghdad is to be expanded under Obama.

iraq

the san antonio express-news
sig chrstienson

the wall street journal
gina chon

npr

all things considered

quil lawrence

the washington post
ernesto londono
k.i. ibrahim
the new york times
rod nordland

jenan hussein
mcclatchy newspapers
sherwood ross
hints from heloise

thomas friedman is a great man
mikey likes it

david solnit
aimee allison
courage to resist

Posted at 08:58 pm by politicsscree
Make a comment Permalink

betty explains political harm

this is betty's post from last night and it's really worth reading.

ObamaGiveAway

"THE SWELLS DON’T CARE! What ever happened to 'affordable?' E. J. Dionne doesn’t care" (Bob Somerby, The Daily Howler):
For the record, those middle-income families would be paying 15-18 percent of their pre-tax income for their health care. Does that sound like “affordable” health care? For various reasons, Pear’s analysis is hard to judge. But note one thing well: In a detailed discussion of health care costs for the average family, not a word is allowed to intrude about the stunning foreign experience, in which universal care is achieved at half (or less) the per-person cost we maintain over here. Once again, Times readers are kept from knowing a basic fact: Everywhere else, average people get health care at a massively lower cost than obtains over here.

Alas! In America, we tried “managed care.” Now, we’re having a “managed discussion.” A real progressive would scream and yell about the looting which seems to plague the system—about the massive, apparently unnecessary cost of health care for average people. But as the health reform project has proceeded, the looting seems to have stayed in the picture. In an unfortunate trade-off, the word “affordable” has largely disappeared.

E. J. Dionne is a Serious Person. On Monday, he kept his trap shut about a very large problem. The prospective bill will approach universal coverage. But what ever happened to affordable coverage? To us, the evidence seems rather strong: In the press corps, the swells just don’t care.

I really don't care about this insurance give-away. It's not going to do a thing to improve my life or my children's lives.

It will make the insurance companies rich.

What else has it done?

It's demonstrated to me how STUPID my own side is. And it's underscored that Communists and Socialists need to self-identify and not present themselves as Democrats. What I see is that the Communists and Socialists gas bags/pundits are as bad as the right-wing ones. They're incapable of having a discussion, incapable of hearing anyone speak.

They're the ones insisting that the right opposed to ObamaGiveAway are evil people, or hateful people or this or that.

No, not all of them.

Many just don't believe the government needs to be involved. Many feel government screws up enough things as it is. And I can disagree with that but understand where they're coming from. As opposed to the liars insisting upon demonizing everyone on the right-wing.

And I'm beginning to get that those liars (you know who they are) really don't get it. They're so committed to a socialist state that they can't understand why anyone would find that bothersome.

They can't grasp why Van Jones needed to leave the administration, after all this time.

The country is in the worst economic crisis and Barack swore up and down he wasn't a Socialist or a Communist and that he'd govern from the center. Then, at a time of economic crisis, he's got a Marxist in the White House.

How much harm could Van Jones have done? I have no idea. Nor do I know that, if given the economy and sticking to a Marxist economic view, he would have done any harm.

But I do understand why people on the right were disturbed and it wasn't just those on the right.

Those who are not Democrats but continue to pose as them to the public need to get honest because they are dangerously screwing up not only the conversation but the Democratic Party. They are (a) screwing up how we (Democrats) are seen and they are (b) ensuring that we will have a hard time getting winning majorities in subsequent elections.

My thoughts.

"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):

Tuesday, Novemer 3, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, IOM releases a study on internal refugees in Iraq who have returned to their former homes, still no election law in Iraq (and the pretense that Kirkuk is the big hold up continues), a man goes to town on a NYT reporter online so we know the reporter must be a woman, and more.

Today the International Organization for Migration [IOM] released their latest report on internal Iraqi refugees [PDF format warning] entitled "Assessment of Return to Iraq:" The report notes the low rate of return (external refugees coming back to Iraq) and focuses on the 1.6 million estimated interal refugees and what the desires of this vulnerable population are. The report notes that IOM spoke with "4,061 families (24,366 individuals)" while assessing needs.

The bulk of the internally displaced hail from Baghdad (nearly 90%). From the report:

* The majority of identified returnees (33,521 families, or 58%) have returned to Baghdad governorate, while a significant proportion has also been identified in Diyala and Anbar.

* 54,451 of the returnees identified (94%) have returned from internal displacement, while the remaining 3,659 identified families (6%) have returned from abroad.

* Almost 90% of IOM-assessed post-Samarra IDPs were displaced from Baghdad, diyala, and Ninewa, and almost 79% of identified returns are also located in these three governorates.

The report notes the top six reasons IDPs give for their displacement are:

Direct threats to life (29.1%)

Left out of fear (21.7%)

Generalized violence (16.5%)

Forced displacement from property (7.6%)

Ethnic/religious/political discrimination (5.9%)

Armed conflict (5.0%)

The report notes that those who are returning often cite "harsh conditions in displacement" as one of the reasons they have returned (exampele include "high rent, lack of employment opportunities, poor shelter and lack of basic services"). The second and third categories can be combined: "Improved security in area of origin and very difficult conditions in displacement" and "Very difficult conditions in displacement". If you combine the two than 45.46% of those who have returned are citing "very difficult conditions in displacement" regions. Those returning to Baghdad cite "former employment, transporation assistance, repair of damaged homes and property, and renewed access to basic services" as their reasons. 38% of those who have returned to their former homes "reported feeling safe only some of the time." In addition, 42.5% of returnees in Anbar, Baghdad, Diyala and Kirkuk report that "their homes are partially or completely destroyed. In addition, 50% of returnees in these governorates no longer have their movable property, such as cars, due to loss or theft."

Of those returning to their former homes across Iraq, Arab Shia Muslims make up the largest percent (49.4%), followed by Arab Sunni Muslim (31.0%), Turkmen Sunni Muslim (9.7%) and Christians (8.9%). (Kurd Shia Muslim, Kurd Sunni Muslim and Other each account for less than one percent.) Of those who remain internally displaced, the highest percent is (again) Arab Shia (58.4%) followed by Arab Sunni Muslim (29.3%) with Christians and Kurd Sunni Muslim next (each at 4.4%), followed by Other (4.0%) and Kurd Shia Muslim (0.7%). IOM's report also provides a gender breakdown for heads of household of returnees: 12% are female-headed households and 88% of returnees are male-headed housholds (and 35% of the 88% cannot find work). The study found, "Among assessed returnee female-headed households, food is consistently identified as a priority need (60% across Iraq) along with non-food itmes (NFIs) and fueld. In Baghdad, health and sanitation are major concerns for interviewed female-headed households. Access to legal help was also a serious issue, particularly in Diyala and Ninewa governorates." Breaking down employment for returnee heads of household; 69.7% of females heading households are unable to work contrasted with 15.4% of the male heads of household; 4.7% of female heads of household are employed contrasted with 50.1% of male heads of household, and 25.7% of female heads of household are able to work but unable to find employment contrasted with 34.5% of male heads of household in the same situation.

Returnees were asked about basic services as well (remember, the bulk live in Baghdad). How many have electricity each day for "More than 18 hours"? Only 2%. Most (34%) report they have only one to two hours of electricity each day. With water, more were able to rely on basic services: 81.8% state they receive "Municipal water/pipe grid" while the next most common response (7.9%) was "Rivers, streams or lakes." Returnees ranked their needs and 61% stated their most pressing need was food.

The report finds:

While the total number of returns in Iraq continues to slowly grow since the end of 2007, it remains a small fraction of the total Iraqi IDP and refugee populations. In the face of uncertain security improvements, the future of return is also unsure. Many IDP families continue to say that they are waiting for security to improve in order to return.

IOM returnee assessments show that 'pull' factors such as improved security in place of origin are more encouraging of return than 'push' factors such as difficult conditions in place of displacement. However, as prolonged displacement makes life difficult for Iraq's internally displaced and refugees, this could change.

Returning home means facing a new set of challenges for Iraqi families. 34% of IOM-assessed returnee families report that they are able to work yet unemployed, 34% returned to partially or completely destroyed property, and 75% have less than 6 hours of electricity per day. In addition, the majority were displaced for more than one year, meaning that they return carrying the stress and financial debilitation of long-term displacement.

UPI reports Nouri al-Maliki and Oscar Fernandez-Taranco met in Baghdad today. Who is Oscar Fernandez-Taranco? The envoy United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon sent "to discuss Baghdad's concerns over foreign meddling following deadly bombings in August and October." Strange that two bombings (and Nouri stomping his feet) gets UN action when the non-stop and ongoing assault on Christians doesn't. Deutsche Presse Agentur reports that Iraqi MP Yonadam Kanna has "petitioned Sunni Muslim parliamentary speaker Iyad al-Samarrai to formally request [. . .] an international investigator to determine who was behind the killing of Iraqi Christians that Iraqi Christians believe are designed to convince them to leave their homes". Mohammad Alef Jamal (Gulf News) adds:

When Iraqi Mandaeans are killed, an international committee is formed to defend their community and when Iraqi Christians are killed or expelled, the Pope appeals to the US President to provide protection for them. This is because these groups follow religions that connect them to other countries.

But when Iraqi scientists and intellectuals are killed, or when border villages are bombed by neighbouring countries and the bodies of Iraqis are torn apart by violent explosions, the only reaction seen is condemnation, calls for immediate investigation, threats and random accusations -- even before an investigation starts.

This is followed by an exchange of accusations between politicians about whose fault it is, and some prominent figures are made scapegoats, solely for electoral reasons.

Violence has created the refugee crisis, the world's largest refugee crisis. Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing which injured two people, a Baquba roadside bombing which claimed the lives of 2 police officers and left three more wounded, a Mosul roadside bombing which claimed 1 life and left two more people injured and a Mosul mortar attack which injured two people.

Shootings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 judge was injured when he was shot not far from his Mosul home.

Ignore the violence, joy for the greedy. BBC News reports, "Iraq's oil ministry has signed an initial agreement with a consortium led by the Italian firm, ENI, to develop the Zubair oilfield in southern Iraq. The deal, which needs cabinet approval, calls for the group to extract 200,000 barrels of oil a day, rising to 1.1 million a day within seven years." Meanwhile AP notes that the consortium of British Petroleum and China National Petroleum Company's successful bid has been finalized. Khalid a-Ansary and Jack Kimball (Reuters) report that the Iraqi Parliament has informed Hussain al-Shahristani, the country's Oil Minister, that he will be testifying before them November 11th on the "distribution of the nation's oil wealth" which has led to Nouri al-Maliki to have another public fit, muttering about "evil supporters of the past regime" and comparing the summons to "the last bombings" (he is a drama queen).

Meanwhile the 163-year-old US daily newspaper the Joplin Globe -- serving the south west sections of Missouri -- offers the editorial "In our view: Time to get out of Iraq:"

In our view, American military force no longer plays a role in Iraq other than "peace-keeping." Someone must contain the violence over time to allow democratic-like institutions to flourish. That should not be the role of American military power; it must be done by Iraqi institutions controlled solely by the Iraqi government.
It is now time for a broad and sustained military withdrawal of American military forces from Iraq. Whatever American forces of any sort that remain should be paid for exclusively by the Iraqi government.
We can argue forever about the wisdom of our invasion and presence in Iraq beginning in 2003. For sure, Iraq cannot be allowed to become another Korea, where today 30,000 American troops are held hostage to a crazy North Korean regime while "protecting" a rich and prosperous South Korea.
Withdraw now the 120,000 military personnel from Iraq, Mr. President and Congress. Do it as quickly as the safety of those troops will permit.

Why the Globe and not the New York Times? Because the Globe actually is read by families of the enlisted, therefore, it is aware that there is an ongoing war and it is aware that the Iraq War directly effects their readership.

US President Barack Obama could end the Iraq War immediately . . . if he wanted to. He's the biggest road block at present because he is, as Bully Boy Bush once so infamously put it, "the decider." (Especially true when an apethetic news media has largely moved away from the issue and a public's been lulled into false dreams of peace.) Other things that aren't helpful would include (a) the Iraqi government or 'government' and (b) the Pentagon and KBR. Starting with the former, Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) interviews US Lt Gen Charles H. Jacoby Jr.:

Are you concerned that the elections on which your withdrawal timetable is based may be delayed? The Iraqi parliament is deadlocked over an election law, even though the deadline has long since passed.

This parliamentary election is a decisive point in the history of Iraq's democracy, and it's also very important to the United States. We have a stake in their success. Iraq has had increasingly better elections over time. Of course we look forward to these elections. And so we're very concerned that we're past the date that the Iraqis wanted to have an election law, and that every day that goes by eats into the established date for the election. Iraq has the opportunity to demonstrate that it has a viable and credible democracy, and can be a model for the region. There's lots of opportunity here and we don't want to miss these opportunities by having this election drift.

Would an election delay also delay the plan to withdraw all U.S. combat forces by August 2010?

We do not think we are at the point where we are off our plan, but of course we are going to watch this very carefully. Any decision to vary from the plan is a policy decision that won't take place here. It's too soon to say whether a potential delay in the election is a potential delay in the withdrawal.

Alsumaria notes rumors that US pressure is expected to lead various parties to accept the United Nations' recommendations on the legislation:

To that, Kurds decried the US pressure calling them to renounce their rights in the city and that after announcing that US Vice President Joe Biden called Kurdistan Governor Massoud Al Barazani in order to talk over the obstructions hindering approving elections law. MP Mahmoud Othman told Al Hayat Newspaper that endeavors of Senior US officials are means to pressure Kurds in order to accept the suggested solutions though they are unfair. The US behaviors are biased, Othman added.
It is no secret that this kind of pressure is expected considering the importance USA gives for holding the lections on time. MP Khairallah Al Basri said that failing to reach an accordance solution regarding elections' law will urge the USA to interfere in order to impose solutions.
Alsumaria sources had said that the Legal committee suggested a draft law that proposes to adopt open list and determines the parliament's seats number. The law also stipulates using multi-divisions system and appoints the number of seats for each division without mentioning Kirkuk. However the relevant parties did not agree on this suggestion.

Ali Karim (Asia Times) reports the recents bombings are said, by some, to have an impact on their votes and quotes MP Mithal al-Alosi stating, "I expect a low turnout in the elections if matters go on this way. The wounds of Bloody Wednesday have not healed yet and the Salehiya bombs have deepened those wounds." Mithal Alusi was noted in yesterday's snapshot, he's the head of the Iraqi Nation Party and he appeared as a guest on Al Jazeera's latest Inside Iraq which began broadcasting last Friday.

AFP reports that Faraj al-Haidari, head of the country's Independent High Electoral Commission, declared on Al-Sharquiay TV today, "The electoral commission held talks with the United Nations on Tuesday to discuss the timetable. We must receive the law in the next two days, otherwise we will be unable to hold the election on the scheduled date of January 16. There is material relating to the election, and international companies need time to print it. Fifteen thousand polling stations have to be made ready for the election, as do 50,000 personnel." UPI speaks with MP Mohammad Salman who states there are currently three options.

1) Allow the voting to be based on an open-list (where voters know which people they are voting for and not just a party).

2) Keep the voting to a closed-list (as was done in the 2005 elections).

3) "[P]ostpone the elections for at least one legislative term to give lawmakers the chance to vet all of their concerns."

Salman states that "is the most likely route" but that at least 70 MPs from the Kurdistan Alliance object to the third option. That's an important point because the US continues to pressure tthe KRG to agree to . . . well to anything that will get the bill passed. And many in the press wrongly -- WRONGLY -- continue to state that the issue of oil-rich Kirkuk (claimed by the KRG and by Baghdad) is the road block. It is a road block and it is not just bad reporting to leave out the issue of the lists, it is politically ignorant.

Any legislative body -- true of the US Congress as well as Iraq's Parliament -- makes decisions based on their own interests -- especially when it comes to re-election. Closed lists are thought by many MPs to mean they have a better shot at re-election. Open-lists are feared. (Nouri al-Maliki and Ayad al-Alawi are two who have spoken out publicly for open-lists.) When the Parliament is so fearful that open-lists may mean they aren't re-elected, that is an issue, that is a road block and it's repeatedly set aside or forgotten in press accounts. There are three options, UPI is told. Find where the MP (a Sunni) is at all concerned about the issue of Kirkuk in his statements. What is he concerned about? Open and closed lists.

So the Iraqi Parliament drags their feet and they aren't the only ones. At yesterday's public hearing of the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan, it was learned that the Defense Department had still not submitted all the plans for the draw-down that's supposed to be on the verge of taking place. Not only have they not submitted all of their own plans, they're supervision of KBR is so lax that KBR's been allowed to skip submitting a plan. As noted in yesterday's snapshot, Commissioner Robert Henke attempted to get an answer from the Pentagon's Lee Hamilton to this question: "If the president announces on February 27, 2009 the draw-down plan and we're on November 2nd, is it possible that the contractor hasn't provided you any plan to adjust staff accordingly?" Despite attempting to walk Hamilton through slowly (after Hamilton rambled on with a non-answer reply) and despite asking, "How is that possible?", Henke never got anything that would pass for an answer to his questions.

This morning Jen Dimascio (Politico -- link has text and audio) reports:

KBR, the largest contractor in Iraq, is pulling out of that country so slowly that it could end up costing American taxpayers $193 million more than expected, according to a new Pentagon audit.
Furthermore, during a hearing Monday by the Commission on Wartime Contracting, a legislative body set up to study contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan, Commissioner Charles Tiefer said the company's plodding exit from Iraq could cost even more -- up to $300 million.

As noted in yesterday's snapshot, that's only one portion of the story. Dimascio notes a quote from Commissioner Dov Zakheim and you can see yesterday's snapshot for that full exchange. From last night, Kat's "Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan" covers the hearing and she shares some impression on Commissioner Chris Shays hearing performance. But Dimascio covers one aspect of the big news from yesterday's hearings -- and we did consider skipping it but fortunately didn't because the Commission actually had their act together yesterday (we is Kat, Ava, Wally and myself) -- the other big news was the lack of completed plans.

For the Pentagon, that's especially appalling and it's either an issue of insubordination or the White House isn't really serious about a draw-down. For the Pentagon, the refusal to submit their own plans or demand that KBR draw up their own is appalling. Thompson declared in the hearing that he visited with KBR most recently on September 25th or 26th and they still had no plans -- and Thompson was neither surprised nor worried about the lack of planning.

In the US, Noor Faleh Almaleki has died. The 20-year-old Iraqi woman was intentionally run over October 20th (see the October 21st snapshot) while she and Amal Edan Khalaf were running errands (the latter is the mother of Noor's boyfriend and she was left injured in the assault). Police suspected Noor's father, Faleh Hassan Almaleki, of the assault and stated the probable motive was that he felt Noor had become "too westernized." As noted in the October 30th snapshot, Faleh Hassan Almaleki was finally arrested after going on the lamb -- first to Mexico, then flying to London where British authorities refused him entry and he was sent back to the US and arrested in Atlanta. Karan Olson and CNN note that the judge has set the man's bail at $5 million. Philippe Naughton (Times of London) adds, "Noor died yesterday, having failed to recover consciousness after the attack. The other woman, Amal Khalaf, was also seriously injured but is expected to survive. "

Rachel Stockman and 12 News (link has text and video) supply this timeline:

October 20th
-Around 2 p.m. Police say Faleh Almaleki ran down his daughter, friend.
-Around 5 p.m. Nlets Alert with Almaleki's license plate and vehicle description goes out
October 23rd
-U.S. Customs and Border Protection notified.

Addressing the timeline, Rachel Stockman reports, "They allowed the suspect to cross the border into Mexico so we wanted to know where the communication broke down. What we found? Nlets, the system Peoria police use to notify other authorities is not something US Customs always checks." Dustin Gardiner (Arizona Republic) quotes: prosecutor Stephanie Low stating of the father, "By his own admission, this was an intentional act and the reason was that his daughter had brought shame on him and his family. This was an attempt at an honor killing." Iraqi American Romina Korkes offered her thoughts on the so-called 'honor' killing last week in a column for the Arizona Republic.

Women are attacked daily around the world. The attacks are dismissed. A large number of men seem to think it's okay -- and a significant number of women must agree since we're not in the streets marching -- and that goes a long way towards explaining Rory O'Connor's post at Media Channel -- a site not known for its 'inclusive' view of humanity (to put it mildly). Noting Alissa J. Rubin's opinion piece from Sunday's New York Times (we noted it in Friday's snapshot), O'Connor goes on to rip her apart. Now let's be clear, Alissa J. Rubin being a woman doesn't mean she can't be ripped apart nor are we concerned about tone. She's never been good with math (we've called her "teen queen" at this site) and she's been so wack that she's even been called "crack whore" here. But what have we done that Rory O'Connor doesn't? We've praised her, yes. She's earned a lot of praise over the years here. But that's not it. He doesn't have to praise her and, indeed, he may not find anything worth praising in her writing. That is his opinion.

But where there's a problem is that Alissa J. Rubin was never the paper's problem. On her bad days, she jumbled the numbers and was too quick to believe things she shouldn't have (such as the "Awakenings" being universally embraced in areas they 'patrolled' or 'terrorized'). Her worst day never found her as bad as John F. Burns or Dexter Filkins. I'm not seeing their names mentioned by Rory. Those are the two worst offenders for what he's demanding (truth). But they don't get called out. It's really strange that so few women have worked in Baghdad for the New York Times (others include Cara Buckley, Sabrina Tavernise, Erica Goode and, of course, Judith Miller) but they're always the ones being ripped apart. Not the males. The issue isn't that he called Rubin out. He's allowed to. He can loathe her and rip her apart. The issue is that we haven't seen that same standard applied to men.

This is the Judith Miller effect, the bash the bitch craze, we've long documented here. Judith Miller did not start a war. Judith Miller was not responsible for the entire media landscape. She did not twist the arms of PBS and NBC and Oprah to get air time. Those people wanted her on their shows. She did not twist arms at the paper to land on the front page, the paper wanted her on the front page. Judith Miller was so WRONG about the Iraq War but she wasn't a liar -- at least not on the big issue. She honestly believed their were WMD in Iraq, that's why she commandeered a squadron while stationed in Iraq. She's a lousy reporter, her 'facts' do not hold up. She needs to be held accountable. But she often had co-writers -- such as Michael R. Gordon who remains at the paper and who spent the second Bush term advocating for war on Iran. Judith Miller was a reporter for one of the top three papers in the country (at that time). If you saw her on TV, she was invited on. If you heard her on radio, she was invited on. If you read her in another paper, a decision was made to print her article. It took a lot of people echoing the government (not all of whom believed the lies the way Miller did) to start the war on Iraq, to lie to the people. Miller was one person. Hold her accountable, no question, but what about all the others?

The pleasing lie (pleasing to a lot of members of the press corps) is that Judith Miller, all by herself, lied the nation into war. Judith Miller and others like her helped the US get into Iraq but grasp that Dexter Filkins and John F. Burns kept the US in Iraq. There are some who will kiss Dexy's butt because of those bad, BAD, college campus appearances where he talks about (and has done this for several years now) about how the Iraq War is lost and how they knew it then and blah, blah, blah. That might have mattered. If he'd done it in real time. But in real time, he was lying. In real time, he was taking orders from the military -- as Molly Bingham long ago explained, Dexy even cancelled a meeting with the Iraqi resistance when US military brass frowned. In real time, Dexy let the US military vet his copy. That's reality. His award winning 'reporting'? Vetted by the US military. Vetted and delayed while it was vetted which is why the paper ran it so many days after it was written.

I have no problem with Judith Miller being called out -- and I've called her out myself. But, look through the archvies, we've called out women and we've called out men. We haven't worried about tone but we've made damn sure that people were treated fairly -- even if that just meant that abuse was heaped on equally.

I'm glad that someone at Media Channel remembered there is a war in Iraq and I'm glad that Rory O'Connor wrote with fire. But I'm also aware that Alissa J. Rubin, graded on any scale, qualifies as one of the better reporters the paper's had in Iraq. And I'm also aware that MediaChannel is more than happy to go after Katie Couric or any other woman but I find very little in efforts to praise women or to link to them. (Until O'Connor's column, which I heard about from a friend at the Times, I haven't visited MediaChannel since the efforts to distort Marcia's writing.) And if Alissa J. Rubin was Alan J. Rubin, I have to wonder whether or not MediaChannel would even be weighing in? Again, it's been a long, long time since they've made it known that they're aware of the Iraq War.

This isn't a minor issue -- not the silence on Iraq or the attacks on women. And, repeating, it's not about tone. It's about fairness. We've ridiculed many women here and will do so again and again and again. But we don't go to town on a woman and refuse to on men. Todd S. Purdum is a better writer at Vanity Fair than he was at the Times -- that has to do with the differing role, the fact that he can write longer at Van Fair and the differences between the outlets. But we went to town on Todd (who I know offline) and did so because his work was as appalling as Elisabeth Bumiller's columns (run in the news section but they were columns) at that time. (Bumiller's done some strong reporting in the last few years.) We went to town on her, we went to town on Todd. And the fact that I knew him didn't prevent that nor did the fact that he was a man make me think, "I shouldn't criticize." But there's a real locker room mentality among the online critics where a man gets a pass and another one and another one and, okay, let's make it about the work. But a woman gets ripped apart. The ripping apart doesn't bother me . . . if it's applied to both.

We've linked to Rory before and we'll link to his post today one more time. But it's really past time that a lot of online critics took a look what they were doing. I'm not suggesting anyone change their style or tone or make nice. I am suggesting that they make sure they treat people the same -- regardless of gender. I do not believe Alissa J. Rubin was treated the same as a male reporter would have been. I could be wrong, I often am. But I'm saying my call on that goes to pattern: MediaChannel's emphasis and the climate online.

Kat's "Kat's Korner: Carly Simon's warm benediction" is a review of Carly Simon's just released Never Been Gone. Carly is one of America's most gifted songwriter and one whose work has changed the landscape. She's also one of the surest of singers and for the latest project, she's re-imaging songs from her amazing canon of work. She explained to Dean Goodman (Reuters) that she was hestitant to include her classic "You're So Vain" until she heard the cover Susanna Hoffs and Matthew Sweet did earlier this year on Under The Covers Vol. II (which Kat reviewed here) "and I thought, 'Well if they can do it, I can do it!" And as Ty noted in the roundtable at Third Sunday, "Still on the subject of Carly Simon, Bill, who runs Carly Simon Conversations, recommends this Day Trotter article on Carly Simon's concert, last week at Lincoln Center, this blog post on the concert and this video of 'Touched By The Sun'." The Day Trotter article contains video clips of Carly's concert last week.

Finally, independent reporter David Bacon remains one of the few remaining labor reporters in the country. (And he can be heard on KPFA's The Morning Show each Wednesday morning -- the program begins airing at 7:00 a.m. PST and streams online.) His latest report is "San Diego -- Land of Day Laborers, Farm Workers and Guest Workers" (21st Century Manifesto):

In Oceanside, Carlsbad, Del Mar and north San Diego County, immigrant day laborers wait by the side of the road, hoping a contractor will stop and offer them work. Alberto Juarez Martinez slings his jacket over his shoulder while he waits. His hands show the effect of a lifetime of manual work, plus arthritis suffered as a child in Zapata, Zacatecas. The hands of Beto, a migrant from Uruachi, Chihuahua, also show the effect of a lifetime of manual work. Juan Castillo, a migrant from Tehuacan, Puebla, waits with his friends in the parking lot of a market they've nicknamed La Gallinita, because of the rooster on the roof of the building.
Police in north county towns have now started cruising by day labor sites in plainclothes, pretending to be contractors offering workers jobs, and then citing them and turning them over to immigration agents, even those with green cards Many community organizations are protesting this practice.
Francisco Villa operates a lunch truck that visits the areas where migrant day laborers live on hillsides and under trees. Villa hands out leaflets advising workers of their rights and letting them know that they can find help from California Rural Legal Assistance. Across the street from Villa's truck, Zaragosa Brito and Andres Roman Diaz, two migrants from Arcelia, Guerrero, sit next to a fence where workers look for day labor, or get rides to the fields for farm work. The men sleep out in the open in the field behind the fence, and have worked on a local strawberry ranch, Rancho Diablo, for many years.

David Bacon's latest book is Illegal People -- How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants (Beacon Press) which has won the CLR James Award.

iraq
cnn
karan olson
philippe naughton
the times of london
rachel stockman
the arizona republic
dustin gardiner
romina korkas

mcclatchy newspapers

laith hammoudi

the joplin globe
the los angeles times
liz sly
alsumaria
politico
jen dimascio

the new york times
alissa j. rubin

carly simon

matthew sweet
susanna hoffs

david bacon
kpfa
the morning show

Posted at 08:47 pm by politicsscree
Make a comment Permalink

Nov 3, 2009

mike writing about corzine's loss

Corzine goes down for the count

Tuesday! What a great day!!!!! :D I've been on the phone with C.I., Kat, Ava, Wally, Cedric and Jim doing prep on an article we're doing Sunday.

On what?

Hmm.

The losers.

See.

Yes, Jon Corzine is not New Jersey's choice for governor. We are aware that Bob Somerby spent today trying to do damage control insisting that the governors races in Virginia and New Jersey didn't count. Didn't count? Barack campaigned non-stop for Corzine. Corzine was the incumbent. He couldn't hold on to his seat.

Even with Barry O and Caroline Kennedy.

Or maybe because of them.

Hillary voters will not forget and Jon Corzine learned that lesson tonight. Poor washed up politician.

And most importantly, both races send a message to House and Senate Dems afraid to buck the Great . . . Unwashed. They better start bucking Barack. It's their asses that are on the line if they're up for re-election in 2010, not Barack's.

America's love affair with Barack is over. He currently polls worse than Bush in his first term. It's over and those who chose to be Barry's buds will learn that, yes, WE DO judge you by the company you keep. In fact, let's start a new game: Six Degrees of Barry Soreto.

I can connect Robert Byrd to domestic terrorist Bill Ayers. Watch! Robert Byrd knows Barack and Barack was neighbor and friends with Bill Ayers and with Weather Underground leader Bernardine Dohrn.

It's a fun game to play: Six Degrees of Barry Soreto. Patent pending. All rights assigned to Mike McKinnon. :D

Corzine was a US Senator. He left the Senate to run for governor. He won that race too. Then he ran for re-election and the voters said, "Piss off."

Poor Jon Corzine. He stood by Barry O and thought that would be enough. In fact, it helped defeat him. If I were Barbara Boxer -- who disgraced herself in 2008 as she played catty in the most stereotypical manner -- I wouldn't plan on running for re-election because she's really hated right now. And the polls show that. These whores like Corzine and Boxer who thought they could lie and attack Hillary are finding out that Hillary is a hell of a lot more popular with voters than they are.

So Boxer prepare to do what Jon Corzine's doing right now: Eat s**t.

Jonathan Martin (Politico) reports, " Chris Christie has defeated New Jersey Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine, becoming the first Republican to win statewide in more than a decade.
With 79 percent of the vote in, Christie was winning, 49 to 45, with independent candidate Chris Daggett pulling just 5 percent. " That's got audio if you'd prefer to listen to it instead of reading.

Now they kept saying the Republican Party was dead. Apparently idiots on my side brought it back to life. How did they do that? By lying, by using hypocrisy and by being the smuggest asses in the world.

Most of all by putting the Not Ready For Prime Time Barry O on the world's stage. We could have had a real president, we could have had Hillary who would have done a great job. But we let Republicans, Communists and Socialists infiltrate our Democratic Party primary and give the nomination to Barack The Unprepared. And he has single handedly made Evil Doer George W. Bush look better just by comparison. (That's what happens when you continue ALL of Bush's policies.)

My party better wise up real quick or expect to be eating s**t the way Corzine is tonight.

Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Tuesday, Novemer 3, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, IOM releases a study on internal refugees in Iraq who have returned to their former homes, still no election law in Iraq (and the pretense that Kirkuk is the big hold up continues), a man goes to town on a NYT reporter online so we know the reporter must be a woman, and more.

Today the International Organization for Migration [IOM] released their latest report on internal Iraqi refugees [PDF format warning] entitled "Assessment of Return to Iraq:" The report notes the low rate of return (external refugees coming back to Iraq) and focuses on the 1.6 million estimated interal refugees and what the desires of this vulnerable population are. The report notes that IOM spoke with "4,061 families (24,366 individuals)" while assessing needs.

The bulk of the internally displaced hail from Baghdad (nearly 90%). From the report:

* The majority of identified returnees (33,521 families, or 58%) have returned to Baghdad governorate, while a significant proportion has also been identified in Diyala and Anbar.

* 54,451 of the returnees identified (94%) have returned from internal displacement, while the remaining 3,659 identified families (6%) have returned from abroad.

* Almost 90% of IOM-assessed post-Samarra IDPs were displaced from Baghdad, diyala, and Ninewa, and almost 79% of identified returns are also located in these three governorates.

The report notes the top six reasons IDPs give for their displacement are:

Direct threats to life (29.1%)
Left out of fear (21.7%)
Generalized violence (16.5%)
Forced displacement from property (7.6%)
Ethnic/religious/political discrimination (5.9%)
Armed conflict (5.0%)

The report notes that those who are returning often cite "harsh conditions in displacement" as one of the reasons they have returned (exampele include "high rent, lack of employment opportunities, poor shelter and lack of basic services"). The second and third categories can be combined: "Improved security in area of origin and very difficult conditions in displacement" and "Very difficult conditions in displacement". If you combine the two than 45.46% of those who have returned are citing "very difficult conditions in displacement" regions. Those returning to Baghdad cite "former employment, transporation assistance, repair of damaged homes and property, and renewed access to basic services" as their reasons. 38% of those who have returned to their former homes "reported feeling safe only some of the time." In addition, 42.5% of returnees in Anbar, Baghdad, Diyala and Kirkuk report that "their homes are partially or completely destroyed. In addition, 50% of returnees in these governorates no longer have their movable property, such as cars, due to loss or theft."

Of those returning to their former homes across Iraq, Arab Shia Muslims make up the largest percent (49.4%), followed by Arab Sunni Muslim (31.0%), Turkmen Sunni Muslim (9.7%) and Christians (8.9%). (Kurd Shia Muslim, Kurd Sunni Muslim and Other each account for less than one percent.) Of those who remain internally displaced, the highest percent is (again) Arab Shia (58.4%) followed by Arab Sunni Muslim (29.3%) with Christians and Kurd Sunni Muslim next (each at 4.4%), followed by Other (4.0%) and Kurd Shia Muslim (0.7%). IOM's report also provides a gender breakdown for heads of household of returnees: 12% are female-headed households and 88% of returnees are male-headed housholds (and 35% of the 88% cannot find work). The study found, "Among assessed returnee female-headed households, food is consistently identified as a priority need (60% across Iraq) along with non-food itmes (NFIs) and fueld. In Baghdad, health and sanitation are major concerns for interviewed female-headed households. Access to legal help was also a serious issue, particularly in Diyala and Ninewa governorates." Breaking down employment for returnee heads of household; 69.7% of females heading households are unable to work contrasted with 15.4% of the male heads of household; 4.7% of female heads of household are employed contrasted with 50.1% of male heads of household, and 25.7% of female heads of household are able to work but unable to find employment contrasted with 34.5% of male heads of household in the same situation.

Returnees were asked about basic services as well (remember, the bulk live in Baghdad). How many have electricity each day for "More than 18 hours"? Only 2%. Most (34%) report they have only one to two hours of electricity each day. With water, more were able to rely on basic services: 81.8% state they receive "Municipal water/pipe grid" while the next most common response (7.9%) was "Rivers, streams or lakes." Returnees ranked their needs and 61% stated their most pressing need was food.

The report finds:

While the total number of returns in Iraq continues to slowly grow since the end of 2007, it remains a small fraction of the total Iraqi IDP and refugee populations. In the face of uncertain security improvements, the future of return is also unsure. Many IDP families continue to say that they are waiting for security to improve in order to return.
IOM returnee assessments show that 'pull' factors such as improved security in place of origin are more encouraging of return than 'push' factors such as difficult conditions in place of displacement. However, as prolonged displacement makes life difficult for Iraq's internally displaced and refugees, this could change.
Returning home means facing a new set of challenges for Iraqi families. 34% of IOM-assessed returnee families report that they are able to work yet unemployed, 34% returned to partially or completely destroyed property, and 75% have less than 6 hours of electricity per day. In addition, the majority were displaced for more than one year, meaning that they return carrying the stress and financial debilitation of long-term displacement.

UPI reports Nouri al-Maliki and Oscar Fernandez-Taranco met in Baghdad today. Who is Oscar Fernandez-Taranco? The envoy United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon sent "to discuss Baghdad's concerns over foreign meddling following deadly bombings in August and October." Strange that two bombings (and Nouri stomping his feet) gets UN action when the non-stop and ongoing assault on Christians doesn't. Deutsche Presse Agentur reports that Iraqi MP Yonadam Kanna has "petitioned Sunni Muslim parliamentary speaker Iyad al-Samarrai to formally request [. . .] an international investigator to determine who was behind the killing of Iraqi Christians that Iraqi Christians believe are designed to convince them to leave their homes". Mohammad Alef Jamal (Gulf News) adds:

When Iraqi Mandaeans are killed, an international committee is formed to defend their community and when Iraqi Christians are killed or expelled, the Pope appeals to the US President to provide protection for them. This is because these groups follow religions that connect them to other countries.
But when Iraqi scientists and intellectuals are killed, or when border villages are bombed by neighbouring countries and the bodies of Iraqis are torn apart by violent explosions, the only reaction seen is condemnation, calls for immediate investigation, threats and random accusations -- even before an investigation starts.
This is followed by an exchange of accusations between politicians about whose fault it is, and some prominent figures are made scapegoats, solely for electoral reasons.

Violence has created the refugee crisis, the world's largest refugee crisis. Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing which injured two people, a Baquba roadside bombing which claimed the lives of 2 police officers and left three more wounded, a Mosul roadside bombing which claimed 1 life and left two more people injured and a Mosul mortar attack which injured two people.

Shootings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 judge was injured when he was shot not far from his Mosul home.

Ignore the violence, joy for the greedy. BBC News reports, "Iraq's oil ministry has signed an initial agreement with a consortium led by the Italian firm, ENI, to develop the Zubair oilfield in southern Iraq. The deal, which needs cabinet approval, calls for the group to extract 200,000 barrels of oil a day, rising to 1.1 million a day within seven years." Meanwhile AP notes that the consortium of British Petroleum and China National Petroleum Company's successful bid has been finalized. Khalid a-Ansary and Jack Kimball (Reuters) report that the Iraqi Parliament has informed Hussain al-Shahristani, the country's Oil Minister, that he will be testifying before them November 11th on the "distribution of the nation's oil wealth" which has led to Nouri al-Maliki to have another public fit, muttering about "evil supporters of the past regime" and comparing the summons to "the last bombings" (he is a drama queen).

Meanwhile the 163-year-old US daily newspaper the Joplin Globe -- serving the south west sections of Missouri -- offers the editorial "In our view: Time to get out of Iraq:"

In our view, American military force no longer plays a role in Iraq other than "peace-keeping." Someone must contain the violence over time to allow democratic-like institutions to flourish. That should not be the role of American military power; it must be done by Iraqi institutions controlled solely by the Iraqi government. It is now time for a broad and sustained military withdrawal of American military forces from Iraq. Whatever American forces of any sort that remain should be paid for exclusively by the Iraqi government. We can argue forever about the wisdom of our invasion and presence in Iraq beginning in 2003. For sure, Iraq cannot be allowed to become another Korea, where today 30,000 American troops are held hostage to a crazy North Korean regime while "protecting" a rich and prosperous South Korea. Withdraw now the 120,000 military personnel from Iraq, Mr. President and Congress. Do it as quickly as the safety of those troops will permit.

Why the Globe and not the New York Times? Because the Globe actually is read by families of the enlisted, therefore, it is aware that there is an ongoing war and it is aware that the Iraq War directly effects their readership.

US President Barack Obama could end the Iraq War immediately . . . if he wanted to. He's the biggest road block at present because he is, as Bully Boy Bush once so infamously put it, "the decider." (Especially true when an apethetic news media has largely moved away from the issue and a public's been lulled into false dreams of peace.) Other things that aren't helpful would include (a) the Iraqi government or 'government' and (b) the Pentagon and KBR. Starting with the former, Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) interviews US Lt Gen Charles H. Jacoby Jr.:Are you concerned that the elections on which your withdrawal timetable is based may be delayed? The Iraqi parliament is deadlocked over an election law, even though the deadline has long since passed. This parliamentary election is a decisive point in the history of Iraq's democracy, and it's also very important to the United States. We have a stake in their success. Iraq has had increasingly better elections over time. Of course we look forward to these elections. And so we're very concerned that we're past the date that the Iraqis wanted to have an election law, and that every day that goes by eats into the established date for the election. Iraq has the opportunity to demonstrate that it has a viable and credible democracy, and can be a model for the region. There's lots of opportunity here and we don't want to miss these opportunities by having this election drift. Would an election delay also delay the plan to withdraw all U.S. combat forces by August 2010? We do not think we are at the point where we are off our plan, but of course we are going to watch this very carefully. Any decision to vary from the plan is a policy decision that won't take place here. It's too soon to say whether a potential delay in the election is a potential delay in the withdrawal. Alsumaria notes rumors that US pressure is expected to lead various parties to accept the United Nations' recommendations on the legislation:To that, Kurds decried the US pressure calling them to renounce their rights in the city and that after announcing that US Vice President Joe Biden called Kurdistan Governor Massoud Al Barazani in order to talk over the obstructions hindering approving elections law. MP Mahmoud Othman told Al Hayat Newspaper that endeavors of Senior US officials are means to pressure Kurds in order to accept the suggested solutions though they are unfair. The US behaviors are biased, Othman added.It is no secret that this kind of pressure is expected considering the importance USA gives for holding the lections on time. MP Khairallah Al Basri said that failing to reach an accordance solution regarding elections' law will urge the USA to interfere in order to impose solutions.Alsumaria sources had said that the Legal committee suggested a draft law that proposes to adopt open list and determines the parliament's seats number. The law also stipulates using multi-divisions system and appoints the number of seats for each division without mentioning Kirkuk. However the relevant parties did not agree on this suggestion.Ali Karim (Asia Times) reports the recents bombings are said, by some, to have an impact on their votes and quotes MP Mithal al-Alosi stating, "I expect a low turnout in the elections if matters go on this way. The wounds of Bloody Wednesday have not healed yet and the Salehiya bombs have deepened those wounds." Mithal Alusi was noted in yesterday's snapshot, he's the head of the Iraqi Nation Party and he appeared as a guest on Al Jazeera's latest Inside Iraq which began broadcasting last Friday.AFP reports that Faraj al-Haidari, head of the country's Independent High Electoral Commission, declared on Al-Sharquiay TV today, "The electoral commission held talks with the United Nations on Tuesday to discuss the timetable. We must receive the law in the next two days, otherwise we will be unable to hold the election on the scheduled date of January 16. There is material relating to the election, and international companies need time to print it. Fifteen thousand polling stations have to be made ready for the election, as do 50,000 personnel." UPI speaks with MP Mohammad Salman who states there are currently three options.

1) Allow the voting to be based on an open-list (where voters know which people they are voting for and not just a party).

2) Keep the voting to a closed-list (as was done in the 2005 elections).

3) "[P]ostpone the elections for at least one legislative term to give lawmakers the chance to vet all of their concerns."

Salman states that "is the most likely route" but that at least 70 MPs from the Kurdistan Alliance object to the third option. That's an important point because the US continues to pressure tthe KRG to agree to . . . well to anything that will get the bill passed. And many in the press wrongly -- WRONGLY -- continue to state that the issue of oil-rich Kirkuk (claimed by the KRG and by Baghdad) is the road block. It is a road block and it is not just bad reporting to leave out the issue of the lists, it is politically ignorant.

Any legislative body -- true of the US Congress as well as Iraq's Parliament -- makes decisions based on their own interests -- especially when it comes to re-election. Closed lists are thought by many MPs to mean they have a better shot at re-election. Open-lists are feared. (Nouri al-Maliki and Ayad al-Alawi are two who have spoken out publicly for open-lists.) When the Parliament is so fearful that open-lists may mean they aren't re-elected, that is an issue, that is a road block and it's repeatedly set aside or forgotten in press accounts. There are three options, UPI is told. Find where the MP (a Sunni) is at all concerned about the issue of Kirkuk in his statements. What is he concerned about? Open and closed lists.

So the Iraqi Parliament drags their feet and they aren't the only ones. At yesterday's public hearing of the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan, it was learned that the Defense Department had still not submitted all the plans for the draw-down that's supposed to be on the verge of taking place. Not only have they not submitted all of their own plans, they're supervision of KBR is so lax that KBR's been allowed to skip submitting a plan. As noted in yesterday's snapshot, Commissioner Robert Henke attempted to get an answer from the Pentagon's Lee Hamilton to this question: "If the president announces on February 27, 2009 the draw-down plan and we're on November 2nd, is it possible that the contractor hasn't provided you any plan to adjust staff accordingly?" Despite attempting to walk Hamilton through slowly (after Hamilton rambled on with a non-answer reply) and despite asking, "How is that possible?", Henke never got anything that would pass for an answer to his questions.This morning Jen Dimascio (Politico -- link has text and audio) reports:KBR, the largest contractor in Iraq, is pulling out of that country so slowly that it could end up costing American taxpayers $193 million more than expected, according to a new Pentagon audit.Furthermore, during a hearing Monday by the Commission on Wartime Contracting, a legislative body set up to study contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan, Commissioner Charles Tiefer said the company's plodding exit from Iraq could cost even more -- up to $300 million.As noted in yesterday's snapshot, that's only one portion of the story. Dimascio notes a quote from Commissioner Dov Zakheim and you can see yesterday's snapshot for that full exchange. From last night, Kat's "Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan" covers the hearing and she shares some impression on Commissioner Chris Shays hearing performance. But Dimascio covers one aspect of the big news from yesterday's hearings -- and we did consider skipping it but fortunately didn't because the Commission actually had their act together yesterday (we is Kat, Ava, Wally and myself) -- the other big news was the lack of completed plans.For the Pentagon, that's especially appalling and it's either an issue of insubordination or the White House isn't really serious about a draw-down. For the Pentagon, the refusal to submit their own plans or demand that KBR draw up their own is appalling. Thompson declared in the hearing that he visited with KBR most recently on September 25th or 26th and they still had no plans -- and Thompson was neither surprised nor worried about the lack of planning.

In the US, Noor Faleh Almaleki has died. The 20-year-old Iraqi woman was intentionally run over October 20th (see the October 21st snapshot) while she and Amal Edan Khalaf were running errands (the latter is the mother of Noor's boyfriend and she was left injured in the assault). Police suspected Noor's father, Faleh Hassan Almaleki, of the assault and stated the probable motive was that he felt Noor had become "too westernized." As noted in the October 30th snapshot, Faleh Hassan Almaleki was finally arrested after going on the lamb -- first to Mexico, then flying to London where British authorities refused him entry and he was sent back to the US and arrested in Atlanta. Karan Olson and CNN note that the judge has set the man's bail at $5 million. Philippe Naughton (Times of London) adds, "Noor died yesterday, having failed to recover consciousness after the attack. The other woman, Amal Khalaf, was also seriously injured but is expected to survive. "Rachel Stockman and 12 News (link has text and video) supply this timeline:October 20th -Around 2 p.m. Police say Faleh Almaleki ran down his daughter, friend. -Around 5 p.m. Nlets Alert with Almaleki's license plate and vehicle description goes out October 23rd -U.S. Customs and Border Protection notified. Addressing the timeline, Rachel Stockman reports, "They allowed the suspect to cross the border into Mexico so we wanted to know where the communication broke down. What we found? Nlets, the system Peoria police use to notify other authorities is not something US Customs always checks." Dustin Gardiner (Arizona Republic) quotes: prosecutor Stephanie Low stating of the father, "By his own admission, this was an intentional act and the reason was that his daughter had brought shame on him and his family. This was an attempt at an honor killing." Iraqi American Romina Korkes offered her thoughts on the so-called 'honor' killing last week in a column for the Arizona Republic.

Women are attacked daily around the world. The attacks are dismissed. A large number of men seem to think it's okay -- and a significant number of women must agree since we're not in the streets marching -- and that goes a long way towards explaining Rory O'Connor's post at Media Channel -- a site not known for its 'inclusive' view of humanity (to put it mildly). Noting Alissa J. Rubin's opinion piece from Sunday's New York Times (we noted it in Friday's snapshot), O'Connor goes on to rip her apart. Now let's be clear, Alissa J. Rubin being a woman doesn't mean she can't be ripped apart nor are we concerned about tone. She's never been good with math (we've called her "teen queen" at this site) and she's been so wack that she's even been called "crack whore" here. But what have we done that Rory O'Connor doesn't? We've praised her, yes. She's earned a lot of praise over the years here. But that's not it. He doesn't have to praise her and, indeed, he may not find anything worth praising in her writing. That is his opinion.

But where there's a problem is that Alissa J. Rubin was never the paper's problem. On her bad days, she jumbled the numbers and was too quick to believe things she shouldn't have (such as the "Awakenings" being universally embraced in areas they 'patrolled' or 'terrorized'). Her worst day never found her as bad as John F. Burns or Dexter Filkins. I'm not seeing their names mentioned by Rory. Those are the two worst offenders for what he's demanding (truth). But they don't get called out. It's really strange that so few women have worked in Baghdad for the New York Times (others include Cara Buckley, Sabrina Tavernise, Erica Goode and, of course, Judith Miller) but they're always the ones being ripped apart. Not the males. The issue isn't that he called Rubin out. He's allowed to. He can loathe her and rip her apart. The issue is that we haven't seen that same standard applied to men.

This is the Judith Miller effect, the bash the bitch craze, we've long documented here. Judith Miller did not start a war. Judith Miller was not responsible for the entire media landscape. She did not twist the arms of PBS and NBC and Oprah to get air time. Those people wanted her on their shows. She did not twist arms at the paper to land on the front page, the paper wanted her on the front page. Judith Miller was so WRONG about the Iraq War but she wasn't a liar -- at least not on the big issue. She honestly believed their were WMD in Iraq, that's why she commandeered a squadron while stationed in Iraq. She's a lousy reporter, her 'facts' do not hold up. She needs to be held accountable. But she often had co-writers -- such as Michael R. Gordon who remains at the paper and who spent the second Bush term advocating for war on Iran. Judith Miller was a reporter for one of the top three papers in the country (at that time). If you saw her on TV, she was invited on. If you heard her on radio, she was invited on. If you read her in another paper, a decision was made to print her article. It took a lot of people echoing the government (not all of whom believed the lies the way Miller did) to start the war on Iraq, to lie to the people. Miller was one person. Hold her accountable, no question, but what about all the others?

The pleasing lie (pleasing to a lot of members of the press corps) is that Judith Miller, all by herself, lied the nation into war. Judith Miller and others like her helped the US get into Iraq but grasp that Dexter Filkins and John F. Burns kept the US in Iraq. There are some who will kiss Dexy's butt because of those bad, BAD, college campus appearances where he talks about (and has done this for several years now) about how the Iraq War is lost and how they knew it then and blah, blah, blah. That might have mattered. If he'd done it in real time. But in real time, he was lying. In real time, he was taking orders from the military -- as Molly Bingham long ago explained, Dexy even cancelled a meeting with the Iraqi resistance when US military brass frowned. In real time, Dexy let the US military vet his copy. That's reality. His award winning 'reporting'? Vetted by the US military. Vetted and delayed while it was vetted which is why the paper ran it so many days after it was written.

I have no problem with Judith Miller being called out -- and I've called her out myself. But, look through the archvies, we've called out women and we've called out men. We haven't worried about tone but we've made damn sure that people were treated fairly -- even if that just meant that abuse was heaped on equally.

I'm glad that someone at Media Channel remembered there is a war in Iraq and I'm glad that Rory O'Connor wrote with fire. But I'm also aware that Alissa J. Rubin, graded on any scale, qualifies as one of the better reporters the paper's had in Iraq. And I'm also aware that MediaChannel is more than happy to go after Katie Couric or any other woman but I find very little in efforts to praise women or to link to them. (Until O'Connor's column, which I heard about from a friend at the Times, I haven't visited MediaChannel since the efforts to distort Marcia's writing.) And if Alissa J. Rubin was Alan J. Rubin, I have to wonder whether or not MediaChannel would even be weighing in? Again, it's been a long, long time since they've made it known that they're aware of the Iraq War.

This isn't a minor issue -- not the silence on Iraq or the attacks on women. And, repeating, it's not about tone. It's about fairness. We've ridiculed many women here and will do so again and again and again. But we don't go to town on a woman and refuse to on men. Todd S. Purdum is a better writer at Vanity Fair than he was at the Times -- that has to do with the differing role, the fact that he can write longer at Van Fair and the differences between the outlets. But we went to town on Todd (who I know offline) and did so because his work was as appalling as Elisabeth Bumiller's columns (run in the news section but they were columns) at that time. (Bumiller's done some strong reporting in the last few years.) We went to town on her, we went to town on Todd. And the fact that I knew him didn't prevent that nor did the fact that he was a man make me think, "I shouldn't criticize." But there's a real locker room mentality among the online critics where a man gets a pass and another one and another one and, okay, let's make it about the work. But a woman gets ripped apart. The ripping apart doesn't bother me . . . if it's applied to both.

We've linked to Rory before and we'll link to his post today one more time. But it's really past time that a lot of online critics took a look what they were doing. I'm not suggesting anyone change their style or tone or make nice. I am suggesting that they make sure they treat people the same -- regardless of gender. I do not believe Alissa J. Rubin was treated the same as a male reporter would have been. I could be wrong, I often am. But I'm saying my call on that goes to pattern: MediaChannel's emphasis and the climate online.

Kat's "Kat's Korner: Carly Simon's warm benediction" is a review of Carly Simon's just released Never Been Gone. Carly is one of America's most gifted songwriter and one whose work has changed the landscape. She's also one of the surest of singers and for the latest project, she's re-imaging songs from her amazing canon of work. She explained to Dean Goodman (Reuters) that she was hestitant to include her classic "You're So Vain" until she heard the cover Susanna Hoffs and Matthew Sweet did earlier this year on Under The Covers Vol. II (which Kat reviewed here) "and I thought, 'Well if they can do it, I can do it!" And as Ty noted in the roundtable at Third Sunday, "Still on the subject of Carly Simon, Bill, who runs Carly Simon Conversations, recommends this Day Trotter article on Carly Simon's concert, last week at Lincoln Center, this blog post on the concert and this video of 'Touched By The Sun'." The Day Trotter article contains video clips of Carly's concert last week.

Finally, independent reporter David Bacon remains one of the few remaining labor reporters in the country. (And he can be heard on KPFA's The Morning Show each Wednesday morning -- the program begins airing at 7:00 a.m. PST and streams online.) His latest report is "San Diego -- Land of Day Laborers, Farm Workers and Guest Workers" (21st Century Manifesto):In Oceanside, Carlsbad, Del Mar and north San Diego County, immigrant day laborers wait by the side of the road, hoping a contractor will stop and offer them work. Alberto Juarez Martinez slings his jacket over his shoulder while he waits. His hands show the effect of a lifetime of manual work, plus arthritis suffered as a child in Zapata, Zacatecas. The hands of Beto, a migrant from Uruachi, Chihuahua, also show the effect of a lifetime of manual work. Juan Castillo, a migrant from Tehuacan, Puebla, waits with his friends in the parking lot of a market they've nicknamed La Gallinita, because of the rooster on the roof of the building. Police in north county towns have now started cruising by day labor sites in plainclothes, pretending to be contractors offering workers jobs, and then citing them and turning them over to immigration agents, even those with green cards Many community organizations are protesting this practice.Francisco Villa operates a lunch truck that visits the areas where migrant day laborers live on hillsides and under trees. Villa hands out leaflets advising workers of their rights and letting them know that they can find help from California Rural Legal Assistance. Across the street from Villa's truck, Zaragosa Brito and Andres Roman Diaz, two migrants from Arcelia, Guerrero, sit next to a fence where workers look for day labor, or get rides to the fields for farm work. The men sleep out in the open in the field behind the fence, and have worked on a local strawberry ranch, Rancho Diablo, for many years.

David Bacon's latest book is Illegal People -- How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants (Beacon Press) which has won the CLR James Award.

iraq cnn karan olson philippe naughton the times of london rachel stockman the arizona republic dustin gardiner romina korkas
mcclatchy newspapers laith hammoudi
the joplin globe the los angeles times liz sly alsumaria politico jen dimascio
the new york times alissa j. rubin
carly simon
matthew sweet susanna hoffs
david bacon kpfa the morning show

Posted at 09:34 pm by politicsscree
Make a comment Permalink

c.i. and ccr

ruth just called and she and marcia are planning on spotlighting something c.i. wrote and i'll join them:

Women are attacked daily around the world. The attacks are dismissed. A large number of men seem to think it's okay -- and a significant number of women must agree since we're not in the streets marching -- and that goes a long way towards explaining Rory O'Connor's post at Media Channel -- a site not known for its 'inclusive' view of humanity (to put it mildly). Noting Alissa J. Rubin's opinion piece from Sunday's New York Times (we noted it in Friday's snapshot), O'Connor goes on to rip her apart. Now let's be clear, Alissa J. Rubin being a woman doesn't mean she can't be ripped apart nor are we concerned about tone. She's never been good with math (we've called her "teen queen" at this site) and she's been so wack that she's even been called "crack whore" here. But what have we done that Rory O'Connor doesn't? We've praised her, yes. She's earned a lot of praise over the years here. But that's not it. He doesn't have to praise her and, indeed, he may not find anything worth praising in her writing. That is his opinion.

But where there's a problem is that Alissa J. Rubin was never the paper's problem. On her bad days, she jumbled the numbers and was too quick to believe things she shouldn't have (such as the "Awakenings" being universally embraced in areas they 'patrolled' or 'terrorized'). Her worst day never found her as bad as John F. Burns or Dexter Filkins. I'm not seeing their names mentioned by Rory. Those are the two worst offenders for what he's demanding (truth). But they don't get called out. It's really strange that so few women have worked in Baghdad for the New York Times (others include Cara Buckley, Sabrina Tavernise, Erica Goode and, of course, Judith Miller) but they're always the ones being ripped apart. Not the males. The issue isn't that he called Rubin out. He's allowed to. He can loathe her and rip her apart. The issue is that we haven't seen that same standard applied to men.

This is the Judith Miller effect, the bash the bitch craze, we've long documented here. Judith Miller did not start a war. Judith Miller was not responsible for the entire media landscape. She did not twist the arms of PBS and NBC and Oprah to get air time. Those people wanted her on their shows. She did not twist arms at the paper to land on the front page, the paper wanted her on the front page. Judith Miller was so WRONG about the Iraq War but she wasn't a liar -- at least not on the big issue. She honestly believed their were WMD in Iraq, that's why she commandeered a squadron while stationed in Iraq. She's a lousy reporter, her 'facts' do not hold up. She needs to be held accountable. But she often had co-writers -- such as Michael R. Gordon who remains at the paper and who spent the second Bush term advocating for war on Iran. Judith Miller was a reporter for one of the top three papers in the country (at that time). If you saw her on TV, she was invited on. If you heard her on radio, she was invited on. If you read her in another paper, a decision was made to print her article. It took a lot of people echoing the government (not all of whom believed the lies the way Miller did) to start the war on Iraq, to lie to the people. Miller was one person. Hold her accountable, no question, but what about all the others?

The pleasing lie (pleasing to a lot of members of the press corps) is that Judith Miller, all by herself, lied the nation into war. Judith Miller and others like her helped the US get into Iraq but grasp that Dexter Filkins and John F. Burns kept the US in Iraq. There are some who will kiss Dexy's butt because of those bad, BAD, college campus appearances where he talks about (and has done this for several years now) about how the Iraq War is lost and how they knew it then and blah, blah, blah. That might have mattered. If he'd done it in real time. But in real time, he was lying. In real time, he was taking orders from the military -- as Molly Bingham long ago explained, Dexy even cancelled a meeting with the Iraqi resistance when US military brass frowned. In real time, Dexy let the US military vet his copy. That's reality. His award winning 'reporting'? Vetted by the US military. Vetted and delayed while it was vetted which is why the paper ran it so many days after it was written.

I have no problem with Judith Miller being called out -- and I've called her out myself. But, look through the archvies, we've called out women and we've called out men. We haven't worried about tone but we've made damn sure that people were treated fairly -- even if that just meant that abuse was heaped on equally.

I'm glad that someone at Media Channel remembered there is a war in Iraq and I'm glad that Rory O'Connor wrote with fire. But I'm also aware that Alissa J. Rubin, graded on any scale, qualifies as one of the better reporters the paper's had in Iraq. And I'm also aware that MediaChannel is more than happy to go after Katie Couric or any other woman but I find very little in efforts to praise women or to link to them. (Until O'Connor's column, which I heard about from a friend at the Times, I haven't visited MediaChannel since the efforts to distort Marcia's writing.) And if Alissa J. Rubin was Alan J. Rubin, I have to wonder whether or not MediaChannel would even be weighing in? Again, it's been a long, long time since they've made it known that they're aware of the Iraq War.

This isn't a minor issue -- not the silence on Iraq or the attacks on women. And, repeating, it's not about tone. It's about fairness. We've ridiculed many women here and will do so again and again and again. But we don't go to town on a woman and refuse to on men. Todd S. Purdum is a better writer at Vanity Fair than he was at the Times -- that has to do with the differing role, the fact that he can write longer at Van Fair and the differences between the outlets. But we went to town on Todd (who I know offline) and did so because his work was as appalling as Elisabeth Bumiller's columns (run in the news section but they were columns) at that time. (Bumiller's done some strong reporting in the last few years.) We went to town on her, we went to town on Todd. And the fact that I knew him didn't prevent that nor did the fact that he was a man make me think, "I shouldn't criticize." But there's a real locker room mentality among the online critics where a man gets a pass and another one and another one and, okay, let's make it about the work. But a woman gets ripped apart. The ripping apart doesn't bother me . . . if it's applied to both.

We've linked to Rory before and we'll link to his post today one more time. But it's really past time that a lot of online critics took a look what they were doing. I'm not suggesting anyone change their style or tone or make nice. I am suggesting that they make sure they treat people the same -- regardless of gender. I do not believe Alissa J. Rubin was treated the same as a male reporter would have been. I could be wrong, I often am. But I'm saying my call on that goes to pattern: MediaChannel's emphasis and the climate online.

amen. as always, c.i. doesn't shrink or cower. the strongest and bravest woman i've ever known. and 1 who always makes me proud to say, 'that's my friend!'

thanks to every 1 who e-mailed about my daughter and that includes lisa in 9th grade who said she doesn't want kids 'they sound like too much work'. lisa asked about maher arar in her e-mail and i had flyboy type up a reply (i dictated) but that made me think i should probably put something up here about him so this is from the center for constitutional rights:

No Justice for Canadian Rendition Victim Maher Arar
Court Refuses to Hold U.S. Officials Accountable for Complicity in Torture Abroad CONTACT: press@ccrjustice.org
November 2, 2009, New York – Today, a federal Court of Appeals dismissed Canadian citizen Maher Arar’s case against U.S. officials for their role in sending him to Syria to be tortured and interrogated for a year. Arar is represented by the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR). The court concluded that Arar’s case raised too many sensitive foreign policy and secrecy issues to permit relief. It leaves the federal officials involved free of any legal accountability for what they did.
Maher Arar is not available to comment in person, but is issuing the following statement: “After seven years of pain and hard struggle it was my hope that the court system would listen to my plea and act as an independent body from the executive branch. Unfortunately, this recent decision and decisions taken on other similar cases, prove that the court system in the United States has become more or less a tool that the executive branch can easily manipulate through unfounded allegations and fear mongering. If anything, this decision is a loss to all Americans and to the rule of law.”
Said Georgetown law professor and CCR cooperating attorney David Cole, who argued the case, “This decision says that U.S. officials can intentionally send a man to be tortured abroad, bar him from any access to the courts while doing so, and then avoid any legal accountability thereafter. It effectively places executive officials above the law, even when accused of a conscious conspiracy to torture. If the rule of law means anything, it must mean that courts can hear the claim of an innocent man subjected to torture that violates our most basic constitutional commitments.”
CCR Senior Staff Attorney Maria LaHood said, “With this decision, we have lost much more than Maher Arar’s case against torture – we have lost the rule of law, the moral high ground, our independent judiciary, and our commitment to the Constitution of the United States.”
The case was re-heard before twelve Second Circuit judges after a rare decision in August 2008 to rehear the case sua sponte, that is, of their own accord before Arar had even sought rehearing.
Mr. Arar, a Syrian-born Canadian citizen, was detained at JFK Airport in September 2002 while changing planes on his way home to Canada. The Bush administration labeled him a member of Al Qaeda and sent him not to Canada, his home and country of citizenship, but against his will to Syrian intelligence authorities renowned for torture. He was tortured, interrogated and detained in a tiny underground cell for nearly a year before the Syrian government released him, stating they had found no connection to any criminal or terrorist organization or activity. In January 2004, just three months after he returned home to Canada from his ordeal, CCR filed a suit on Mr. Arar’s behalf against John Ashcroft and other U.S. officials, the first to challenge the government’s policy of “extraordinary rendition,” also known as “outsourcing torture.” The Canadian government, after an exhaustive public inquiry, found that Mr. Arar had no connection to terrorism and, in January 2007, apologized to Mr. Arar for Canada’s role in his rendition and awarded him a multi-million-dollar settlement. The contrast between the two governments’ responses to their mistakes could not be more stark, say Mr. Arar’s attorneys. Both the Executive and Judicial branches of the United States government have barred inquiry and refused to hold anyone accountable for ruining the life of an innocent man.
Two Congressional hearings in October 2007 dealt with his case. On October 18, 2007 Mr. Arar testified via video at a House Joint Committee Hearing convened to discuss his rendition by the U.S. to Syria for interrogation under torture. During that hearing – the first time Mr. Arar testified before any U.S. governmental body – individual members of Congress publicly apologized to him, though the government still has not issued a formal apology. The next week, on October 24, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice admitted during a House Foreign Affairs Committee Hearing that the U.S. government mishandled his case. In a strongly worded dissent, Judge Guido Calabresi wrote, “I believe that when the history of this distinguished court is written, today’s majority decision will be viewed with dismay.”Joshua Sohn of DLA Piper US LLP, Katherine Gallagher of CCR, and Jules Lobel, professor at University of Pittsburgh Law School and CCR cooperating attorney, are co-counsel in Mr. Arar’s case. The Center for Constitutional Rights represents other victims of the Bush administration’s programs, from Iraqis tortured and abused at Abu Ghraib prison to Muslim and Arab men rounded up and abused in immigration sweeps in the U.S. in the aftermath of 9/11, to Guantanamo detainees in the recent Supreme Court case.For more on Mr. Arar’s case, including a timeline, court papers and other documents, click here.
Attached Files
Arar v. Ashcroft - US Court of Appeals 11/02/09
The Center for Constitutional Rights is dedicated to advancing and protecting the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Founded in 1966 by attorneys who represented civil rights movements in the South, CCR is a non-profit legal and educational organization committed to the creative use of law as a positive force for social change.

let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

Tuesday, Novemer 3, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, IOM releases a study on internal refugees in Iraq who have returned to their former homes, still no election law in Iraq (and the pretense that Kirkuk is the big hold up continues), a man goes to town on a NYT reporter online so we know the reporter must be a woman, and more.

Today the International Organization for Migration [IOM] released their latest report on internal Iraqi refugees [PDF format warning] entitled "Assessment of Return to Iraq:" The report notes the low rate of return (external refugees coming back to Iraq) and focuses on the 1.6 million estimated interal refugees and what the desires of this vulnerable population are. The report notes that IOM spoke with "4,061 families (24,366 individuals)" while assessing needs.

The bulk of the internally displaced hail from Baghdad (nearly 90%). From the report:

* The majority of identified returnees (33,521 families, or 58%) have returned to Baghdad governorate, while a significant proportion has also been identified in Diyala and Anbar.

* 54,451 of the returnees identified (94%) have returned from internal displacement, while the remaining 3,659 identified families (6%) have returned from abroad.

* Almost 90% of IOM-assessed post-Samarra IDPs were displaced from Baghdad, diyala, and Ninewa, and almost 79% of identified returns are also located in these three governorates.

The report notes the top six reasons IDPs give for their displacement are:

Direct threats to life (29.1%)
Left out of fear (21.7%)
Generalized violence (16.5%)
Forced displacement from property (7.6%)
Ethnic/religious/political discrimination (5.9%)
Armed conflict (5.0%)

The report notes that those who are returning often cite "harsh conditions in displacement" as one of the reasons they have returned (exampele include "high rent, lack of employment opportunities, poor shelter and lack of basic services"). The second and third categories can be combined: "Improved security in area of origin and very difficult conditions in displacement" and "Very difficult conditions in displacement". If you combine the two than 45.46% of those who have returned are citing "very difficult conditions in displacement" regions. Those returning to Baghdad cite "former employment, transporation assistance, repair of damaged homes and property, and renewed access to basic services" as their reasons. 38% of those who have returned to their former homes "reported feeling safe only some of the time." In addition, 42.5% of returnees in Anbar, Baghdad, Diyala and Kirkuk report that "their homes are partially or completely destroyed. In addition, 50% of returnees in these governorates no longer have their movable property, such as cars, due to loss or theft."

Of those returning to their former homes across Iraq, Arab Shia Muslims make up the largest percent (49.4%), followed by Arab Sunni Muslim (31.0%), Turkmen Sunni Muslim (9.7%) and Christians (8.9%). (Kurd Shia Muslim, Kurd Sunni Muslim and Other each account for less than one percent.) Of those who remain internally displaced, the highest percent is (again) Arab Shia (58.4%) followed by Arab Sunni Muslim (29.3%) with Christians and Kurd Sunni Muslim next (each at 4.4%), followed by Other (4.0%) and Kurd Shia Muslim (0.7%). IOM's report also provides a gender breakdown for heads of household of returnees: 12% are female-headed households and 88% of returnees are male-headed housholds (and 35% of the 88% cannot find work). The study found, "Among assessed returnee female-headed households, food is consistently identified as a priority need (60% across Iraq) along with non-food itmes (NFIs) and fueld. In Baghdad, health and sanitation are major concerns for interviewed female-headed households. Access to legal help was also a serious issue, particularly in Diyala and Ninewa governorates." Breaking down employment for returnee heads of household; 69.7% of females heading households are unable to work contrasted with 15.4% of the male heads of household; 4.7% of female heads of household are employed contrasted with 50.1% of male heads of household, and 25.7% of female heads of household are able to work but unable to find employment contrasted with 34.5% of male heads of household in the same situation.

Returnees were asked about basic services as well (remember, the bulk live in Baghdad). How many have electricity each day for "More than 18 hours"? Only 2%. Most (34%) report they have only one to two hours of electricity each day. With water, more were able to rely on basic services: 81.8% state they receive "Municipal water/pipe grid" while the next most common response (7.9%) was "Rivers, streams or lakes." Returnees ranked their needs and 61% stated their most pressing need was food.

The report finds:

While the total number of returns in Iraq continues to slowly grow since the end of 2007, it remains a small fraction of the total Iraqi IDP and refugee populations. In the face of uncertain security improvements, the future of return is also unsure. Many IDP families continue to say that they are waiting for security to improve in order to return.
IOM returnee assessments show that 'pull' factors such as improved security in place of origin are more encouraging of return than 'push' factors such as difficult conditions in place of displacement. However, as prolonged displacement makes life difficult for Iraq's internally displaced and refugees, this could change.
Returning home means facing a new set of challenges for Iraqi families. 34% of IOM-assessed returnee families report that they are able to work yet unemployed, 34% returned to partially or completely destroyed property, and 75% have less than 6 hours of electricity per day. In addition, the majority were displaced for more than one year, meaning that they return carrying the stress and financial debilitation of long-term displacement.

UPI reports Nouri al-Maliki and Oscar Fernandez-Taranco met in Baghdad today. Who is Oscar Fernandez-Taranco? The envoy United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon sent "to discuss Baghdad's concerns over foreign meddling following deadly bombings in August and October." Strange that two bombings (and Nouri stomping his feet) gets UN action when the non-stop and ongoing assault on Christians doesn't. Deutsche Presse Agentur reports that Iraqi MP Yonadam Kanna has "petitioned Sunni Muslim parliamentary speaker Iyad al-Samarrai to formally request [. . .] an international investigator to determine who was behind the killing of Iraqi Christians that Iraqi Christians believe are designed to convince them to leave their homes". Mohammad Alef Jamal (Gulf News) adds:

When Iraqi Mandaeans are killed, an international committee is formed to defend their community and when Iraqi Christians are killed or expelled, the Pope appeals to the US President to provide protection for them. This is because these groups follow religions that connect them to other countries.
But when Iraqi scientists and intellectuals are killed, or when border villages are bombed by neighbouring countries and the bodies of Iraqis are torn apart by violent explosions, the only reaction seen is condemnation, calls for immediate investigation, threats and random accusations -- even before an investigation starts.
This is followed by an exchange of accusations between politicians about whose fault it is, and some prominent figures are made scapegoats, solely for electoral reasons.

Violence has created the refugee crisis, the world's largest refugee crisis. Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing which injured two people, a Baquba roadside bombing which claimed the lives of 2 police officers and left three more wounded, a Mosul roadside bombing which claimed 1 life and left two more people injured and a Mosul mortar attack which injured two people.

Shootings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 judge was injured when he was shot not far from his Mosul home.

Ignore the violence, joy for the greedy. BBC News reports, "Iraq's oil ministry has signed an initial agreement with a consortium led by the Italian firm, ENI, to develop the Zubair oilfield in southern Iraq. The deal, which needs cabinet approval, calls for the group to extract 200,000 barrels of oil a day, rising to 1.1 million a day within seven years." Meanwhile AP notes that the consortium of British Petroleum and China National Petroleum Company's successful bid has been finalized. Khalid a-Ansary and Jack Kimball (Reuters) report that the Iraqi Parliament has informed Hussain al-Shahristani, the country's Oil Minister, that he will be testifying before them November 11th on the "distribution of the nation's oil wealth" which has led to Nouri al-Maliki to have another public fit, muttering about "evil supporters of the past regime" and comparing the summons to "the last bombings" (he is a drama queen).

Meanwhile the 163-year-old US daily newspaper the Joplin Globe -- serving the south west sections of Missouri -- offers the editorial "In our view: Time to get out of Iraq:"

In our view, American military force no longer plays a role in Iraq other than "peace-keeping." Someone must contain the violence over time to allow democratic-like institutions to flourish. That should not be the role of American military power; it must be done by Iraqi institutions controlled solely by the Iraqi government. It is now time for a broad and sustained military withdrawal of American military forces from Iraq. Whatever American forces of any sort that remain should be paid for exclusively by the Iraqi government. We can argue forever about the wisdom of our invasion and presence in Iraq beginning in 2003. For sure, Iraq cannot be allowed to become another Korea, where today 30,000 American troops are held hostage to a crazy North Korean regime while "protecting" a rich and prosperous South Korea. Withdraw now the 120,000 military personnel from Iraq, Mr. President and Congress. Do it as quickly as the safety of those troops will permit.

Why the Globe and not the New York Times? Because the Globe actually is read by families of the enlisted, therefore, it is aware that there is an ongoing war and it is aware that the Iraq War directly effects their readership.

US President Barack Obama could end the Iraq War immediately . . . if he wanted to. He's the biggest road block at present because he is, as Bully Boy Bush once so infamously put it, "the decider." (Especially true when an apethetic news media has largely moved away from the issue and a public's been lulled into false dreams of peace.) Other things that aren't helpful would include (a) the Iraqi government or 'government' and (b) the Pentagon and KBR. Starting with the former, Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) interviews US Lt Gen Charles H. Jacoby Jr.:Are you concerned that the elections on which your withdrawal timetable is based may be delayed? The Iraqi parliament is deadlocked over an election law, even though the deadline has long since passed. This parliamentary election is a decisive point in the history of Iraq's democracy, and it's also very important to the United States. We have a stake in their success. Iraq has had increasingly better elections over time. Of course we look forward to these elections. And so we're very concerned that we're past the date that the Iraqis wanted to have an election law, and that every day that goes by eats into the established date for the election. Iraq has the opportunity to demonstrate that it has a viable and credible democracy, and can be a model for the region. There's lots of opportunity here and we don't want to miss these opportunities by having this election drift. Would an election delay also delay the plan to withdraw all U.S. combat forces by August 2010? We do not think we are at the point where we are off our plan, but of course we are going to watch this very carefully. Any decision to vary from the plan is a policy decision that won't take place here. It's too soon to say whether a potential delay in the election is a potential delay in the withdrawal. Alsumaria notes rumors that US pressure is expected to lead various parties to accept the United Nations' recommendations on the legislation:To that, Kurds decried the US pressure calling them to renounce their rights in the city and that after announcing that US Vice President Joe Biden called Kurdistan Governor Massoud Al Barazani in order to talk over the obstructions hindering approving elections law. MP Mahmoud Othman told Al Hayat Newspaper that endeavors of Senior US officials are means to pressure Kurds in order to accept the suggested solutions though they are unfair. The US behaviors are biased, Othman added.It is no secret that this kind of pressure is expected considering the importance USA gives for holding the lections on time. MP Khairallah Al Basri said that failing to reach an accordance solution regarding elections' law will urge the USA to interfere in order to impose solutions.Alsumaria sources had said that the Legal committee suggested a draft law that proposes to adopt open list and determines the parliament's seats number. The law also stipulates using multi-divisions system and appoints the number of seats for each division without mentioning Kirkuk. However the relevant parties did not agree on this suggestion.Ali Karim (Asia Times) reports the recents bombings are said, by some, to have an impact on their votes and quotes MP Mithal al-Alosi stating, "I expect a low turnout in the elections if matters go on this way. The wounds of Bloody Wednesday have not healed yet and the Salehiya bombs have deepened those wounds." Mithal Alusi was noted in yesterday's snapshot, he's the head of the Iraqi Nation Party and he appeared as a guest on Al Jazeera's latest Inside Iraq which began broadcasting last Friday.AFP reports that Faraj al-Haidari, head of the country's Independent High Electoral Commission, declared on Al-Sharquiay TV today, "The electoral commission held talks with the United Nations on Tuesday to discuss the timetable. We must receive the law in the next two days, otherwise we will be unable to hold the election on the scheduled date of January 16. There is material relating to the election, and international companies need time to print it. Fifteen thousand polling stations have to be made ready for the election, as do 50,000 personnel." UPI speaks with MP Mohammad Salman who states there are currently three options.

1) Allow the voting to be based on an open-list (where voters know which people they are voting for and not just a party).

2) Keep the voting to a closed-list (as was done in the 2005 elections).

3) "[P]ostpone the elections for at least one legislative term to give lawmakers the chance to vet all of their concerns."

Salman states that "is the most likely route" but that at least 70 MPs from the Kurdistan Alliance object to the third option. That's an important point because the US continues to pressure tthe KRG to agree to . . . well to anything that will get the bill passed. And many in the press wrongly -- WRONGLY -- continue to state that the issue of oil-rich Kirkuk (claimed by the KRG and by Baghdad) is the road block. It is a road block and it is not just bad reporting to leave out the issue of the lists, it is politically ignorant.

Any legislative body -- true of the US Congress as well as Iraq's Parliament -- makes decisions based on their own interests -- especially when it comes to re-election. Closed lists are thought by many MPs to mean they have a better shot at re-election. Open-lists are feared. (Nouri al-Maliki and Ayad al-Alawi are two who have spoken out publicly for open-lists.) When the Parliament is so fearful that open-lists may mean they aren't re-elected, that is an issue, that is a road block and it's repeatedly set aside or forgotten in press accounts. There are three options, UPI is told. Find where the MP (a Sunni) is at all concerned about the issue of Kirkuk in his statements. What is he concerned about? Open and closed lists.

So the Iraqi Parliament drags their feet and they aren't the only ones. At yesterday's public hearing of the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan, it was learned that the Defense Department had still not submitted all the plans for the draw-down that's supposed to be on the verge of taking place. Not only have they not submitted all of their own plans, they're supervision of KBR is so lax that KBR's been allowed to skip submitting a plan. As noted in yesterday's snapshot, Commissioner Robert Henke attempted to get an answer from the Pentagon's Lee Hamilton to this question: "If the president announces on February 27, 2009 the draw-down plan and we're on November 2nd, is it possible that the contractor hasn't provided you any plan to adjust staff accordingly?" Despite attempting to walk Hamilton through slowly (after Hamilton rambled on with a non-answer reply) and despite asking, "How is that possible?", Henke never got anything that would pass for an answer to his questions.This morning Jen Dimascio (Politico -- link has text and audio) reports:KBR, the largest contractor in Iraq, is pulling out of that country so slowly that it could end up costing American taxpayers $193 million more than expected, according to a new Pentagon audit.Furthermore, during a hearing Monday by the Commission on Wartime Contracting, a legislative body set up to study contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan, Commissioner Charles Tiefer said the company's plodding exit from Iraq could cost even more -- up to $300 million.As noted in yesterday's snapshot, that's only one portion of the story. Dimascio notes a quote from Commissioner Dov Zakheim and you can see yesterday's snapshot for that full exchange. From last night, Kat's "Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan" covers the hearing and she shares some impression on Commissioner Chris Shays hearing performance. But Dimascio covers one aspect of the big news from yesterday's hearings -- and we did consider skipping it but fortunately didn't because the Commission actually had their act together yesterday (we is Kat, Ava, Wally and myself) -- the other big news was the lack of completed plans.For the Pentagon, that's especially appalling and it's either an issue of insubordination or the White House isn't really serious about a draw-down. For the Pentagon, the refusal to submit their own plans or demand that KBR draw up their own is appalling. Thompson declared in the hearing that he visited with KBR most recently on September 25th or 26th and they still had no plans -- and Thompson was neither surprised nor worried about the lack of planning.

In the US, Noor Faleh Almaleki has died. The 20-year-old Iraqi woman was intentionally run over October 20th (see the October 21st snapshot) while she and Amal Edan Khalaf were running errands (the latter is the mother of Noor's boyfriend and she was left injured in the assault). Police suspected Noor's father, Faleh Hassan Almaleki, of the assault and stated the probable motive was that he felt Noor had become "too westernized." As noted in the October 30th snapshot, Faleh Hassan Almaleki was finally arrested after going on the lamb -- first to Mexico, then flying to London where British authorities refused him entry and he was sent back to the US and arrested in Atlanta. Karan Olson and CNN note that the judge has set the man's bail at $5 million. Philippe Naughton (Times of London) adds, "Noor died yesterday, having failed to recover consciousness after the attack. The other woman, Amal Khalaf, was also seriously injured but is expected to survive. "Rachel Stockman and 12 News (link has text and video) supply this timeline:October 20th -Around 2 p.m. Police say Faleh Almaleki ran down his daughter, friend. -Around 5 p.m. Nlets Alert with Almaleki's license plate and vehicle description goes out October 23rd -U.S. Customs and Border Protection notified. Addressing the timeline, Rachel Stockman reports, "They allowed the suspect to cross the border into Mexico so we wanted to know where the communication broke down. What we found? Nlets, the system Peoria police use to notify other authorities is not something US Customs always checks." Dustin Gardiner (Arizona Republic) quotes: prosecutor Stephanie Low stating of the father, "By his own admission, this was an intentional act and the reason was that his daughter had brought shame on him and his family. This was an attempt at an honor killing." Iraqi American Romina Korkes offered her thoughts on the so-called 'honor' killing last week in a column for the Arizona Republic.

Women are attacked daily around the world. The attacks are dismissed. A large number of men seem to think it's okay -- and a significant number of women must agree since we're not in the streets marching -- and that goes a long way towards explaining Rory O'Connor's post at Media Channel -- a site not known for its 'inclusive' view of humanity (to put it mildly). Noting Alissa J. Rubin's opinion piece from Sunday's New York Times (we noted it in Friday's snapshot), O'Connor goes on to rip her apart. Now let's be clear, Alissa J. Rubin being a woman doesn't mean she can't be ripped apart nor are we concerned about tone. She's never been good with math (we've called her "teen queen" at this site) and she's been so wack that she's even been called "crack whore" here. But what have we done that Rory O'Connor doesn't? We've praised her, yes. She's earned a lot of praise over the years here. But that's not it. He doesn't have to praise her and, indeed, he may not find anything worth praising in her writing. That is his opinion.

But where there's a problem is that Alissa J. Rubin was never the paper's problem. On her bad days, she jumbled the numbers and was too quick to believe things she shouldn't have (such as the "Awakenings" being universally embraced in areas they 'patrolled' or 'terrorized'). Her worst day never found her as bad as John F. Burns or Dexter Filkins. I'm not seeing their names mentioned by Rory. Those are the two worst offenders for what he's demanding (truth). But they don't get called out. It's really strange that so few women have worked in Baghdad for the New York Times (others include Cara Buckley, Sabrina Tavernise, Erica Goode and, of course, Judith Miller) but they're always the ones being ripped apart. Not the males. The issue isn't that he called Rubin out. He's allowed to. He can loathe her and rip her apart. The issue is that we haven't seen that same standard applied to men.

This is the Judith Miller effect, the bash the bitch craze, we've long documented here. Judith Miller did not start a war. Judith Miller was not responsible for the entire media landscape. She did not twist the arms of PBS and NBC and Oprah to get air time. Those people wanted her on their shows. She did not twist arms at the paper to land on the front page, the paper wanted her on the front page. Judith Miller was so WRONG about the Iraq War but she wasn't a liar -- at least not on the big issue. She honestly believed their were WMD in Iraq, that's why she commandeered a squadron while stationed in Iraq. She's a lousy reporter, her 'facts' do not hold up. She needs to be held accountable. But she often had co-writers -- such as Michael R. Gordon who remains at the paper and who spent the second Bush term advocating for war on Iran. Judith Miller was a reporter for one of the top three papers in the country (at that time). If you saw her on TV, she was invited on. If you heard her on radio, she was invited on. If you read her in another paper, a decision was made to print her article. It took a lot of people echoing the government (not all of whom believed the lies the way Miller did) to start the war on Iraq, to lie to the people. Miller was one person. Hold her accountable, no question, but what about all the others?

The pleasing lie (pleasing to a lot of members of the press corps) is that Judith Miller, all by herself, lied the nation into war. Judith Miller and others like her helped the US get into Iraq but grasp that Dexter Filkins and John F. Burns kept the US in Iraq. There are some who will kiss Dexy's butt because of those bad, BAD, college campus appearances where he talks about (and has done this for several years now) about how the Iraq War is lost and how they knew it then and blah, blah, blah. That might have mattered. If he'd done it in real time. But in real time, he was lying. In real time, he was taking orders from the military -- as Molly Bingham long ago explained, Dexy even cancelled a meeting with the Iraqi resistance when US military brass frowned. In real time, Dexy let the US military vet his copy. That's reality. His award winning 'reporting'? Vetted by the US military. Vetted and delayed while it was vetted which is why the paper ran it so many days after it was written.

I have no problem with Judith Miller being called out -- and I've called her out myself. But, look through the archvies, we've called out women and we've called out men. We haven't worried about tone but we've made damn sure that people were treated fairly -- even if that just meant that abuse was heaped on equally.

I'm glad that someone at Media Channel remembered there is a war in Iraq and I'm glad that Rory O'Connor wrote with fire. But I'm also aware that Alissa J. Rubin, graded on any scale, qualifies as one of the better reporters the paper's had in Iraq. And I'm also aware that MediaChannel is more than happy to go after Katie Couric or any other woman but I find very little in efforts to praise women or to link to them. (Until O'Connor's column, which I heard about from a friend at the Times, I haven't visited MediaChannel since the efforts to distort Marcia's writing.) And if Alissa J. Rubin was Alan J. Rubin, I have to wonder whether or not MediaChannel would even be weighing in? Again, it's been a long, long time since they've made it known that they're aware of the Iraq War.

This isn't a minor issue -- not the silence on Iraq or the attacks on women. And, repeating, it's not about tone. It's about fairness. We've ridiculed many women here and will do so again and again and again. But we don't go to town on a woman and refuse to on men. Todd S. Purdum is a better writer at Vanity Fair than he was at the Times -- that has to do with the differing role, the fact that he can write longer at Van Fair and the differences between the outlets. But we went to town on Todd (who I know offline) and did so because his work was as appalling as Elisabeth Bumiller's columns (run in the news section but they were columns) at that time. (Bumiller's done some strong reporting in the last few years.) We went to town on her, we went to town on Todd. And the fact that I knew him didn't prevent that nor did the fact that he was a man make me think, "I shouldn't criticize." But there's a real locker room mentality among the online critics where a man gets a pass and another one and another one and, okay, let's make it about the work. But a woman gets ripped apart. The ripping apart doesn't bother me . . . if it's applied to both.

We've linked to Rory before and we'll link to his post today one more time. But it's really past time that a lot of online critics took a look what they were doing. I'm not suggesting anyone change their style or tone or make nice. I am suggesting that they make sure they treat people the same -- regardless of gender. I do not believe Alissa J. Rubin was treated the same as a male reporter would have been. I could be wrong, I often am. But I'm saying my call on that goes to pattern: MediaChannel's emphasis and the climate online.

Kat's "Kat's Korner: Carly Simon's warm benediction" is a review of Carly Simon's just released Never Been Gone. Carly is one of America's most gifted songwriter and one whose work has changed the landscape. She's also one of the surest of singers and for the latest project, she's re-imaging songs from her amazing canon of work. She explained to Dean Goodman (Reuters) that she was hestitant to include her classic "You're So Vain" until she heard the cover Susanna Hoffs and Matthew Sweet did earlier this year on Under The Covers Vol. II (which Kat reviewed here) "and I thought, 'Well if they can do it, I can do it!" And as Ty noted in the roundtable at Third Sunday, "Still on the subject of Carly Simon, Bill, who runs Carly Simon Conversations, recommends this Day Trotter article on Carly Simon's concert, last week at Lincoln Center, this blog post on the concert and this video of 'Touched By The Sun'." The Day Trotter article contains video clips of Carly's concert last week.

Finally, independent reporter David Bacon remains one of the few remaining labor reporters in the country. (And he can be heard on KPFA's The Morning Show each Wednesday morning -- the program begins airing at 7:00 a.m. PST and streams online.) His latest report is "San Diego -- Land of Day Laborers, Farm Workers and Guest Workers" (21st Century Manifesto):In Oceanside, Carlsbad, Del Mar and north San Diego County, immigrant day laborers wait by the side of the road, hoping a contractor will stop and offer them work. Alberto Juarez Martinez slings his jacket over his shoulder while he waits. His hands show the effect of a lifetime of manual work, plus arthritis suffered as a child in Zapata, Zacatecas. The hands of Beto, a migrant from Uruachi, Chihuahua, also show the effect of a lifetime of manual work. Juan Castillo, a migrant from Tehuacan, Puebla, waits with his friends in the parking lot of a market they've nicknamed La Gallinita, because of the rooster on the roof of the building. Police in north county towns have now started cruising by day labor sites in plainclothes, pretending to be contractors offering workers jobs, and then citing them and turning them over to immigration agents, even those with green cards Many community organizations are protesting this practice.Francisco Villa operates a lunch truck that visits the areas where migrant day laborers live on hillsides and under trees. Villa hands out leaflets advising workers of their rights and letting them know that they can find help from California Rural Legal Assistance. Across the street from Villa's truck, Zaragosa Brito and Andres Roman Diaz, two migrants from Arcelia, Guerrero, sit next to a fence where workers look for day labor, or get rides to the fields for farm work. The men sleep out in the open in the field behind the fence, and have worked on a local strawberry ranch, Rancho Diablo, for many years.

David Bacon's latest book is Illegal People -- How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants (Beacon Press) which has won the CLR James Award.

iraq cnn karan olson philippe naughton the times of london rachel stockman the arizona republic dustin gardiner romina korkas
mcclatchy newspapers laith hammoudi
the joplin globe the los angeles times liz sly alsumaria politico jen dimascio
the new york times alissa j. rubin
carly simon
matthew sweet susanna hoffs
david bacon kpfa the morning show

Posted at 09:31 pm by politicsscree
Make a comment Permalink

Nov 2, 2009

catch up

okay, that's Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Photo-Op This!" and don't expect too much more.

sick baby today. and i was freaking out.

swine flu!

swine flu!

flyboy kept saying: it's not swine flu.

when the doctor said it this afternoon, i releaxed.

but it is a cold and i've been busy, busy, busy with that all day.

so i've got nothing tonight. i'm just boring beyond belief, i know.

i did listen to carly simon's never been gone when i was rocking the baby to sleep.

and i'm sure the radio was on in the car but i don't remember it playing.

i don't remember looking at a tv all day.

so i'm really out of it.

sorry.

oh, Kat's "Kat's Korner: Carly Simon's warm benediction" is a review of carly's new album so check it out already.

last night c.i. highlighted sian ruddick's 'Troops give anti-war soldier Joe Glenton a 'fantastic' response' (socialist worker) and i can do that now:

Joe Glenton, a British soldier who is refusing to return to fight in Afghanistan, received the backing of his fellow troops after he led more than 10,000 protesters on last Saturday’s Stop the War demonstration in London.
Joe hit the news last week after it was revealed that he was refusing to follow military orders not to attend the march.
Him coming could add to the case that the army is bringing against him for speaking out about the horror and illegality of the war.
But Joe told Socialist Worker, “It felt empowering to be on the demonstration. I was surrounded by like-minded people—from the military and ordinary walks of life.”
Joe is still stationed in barracks, and he lives with other soldiers during the week.
“I was slightly worried on Sunday night about going back in, but I thought I’ll just see what they thought.
“The response was fantastic. Soldiers shook my hand and patted me on the back.
“One guy said, ‘You’re saying what everyone else is thinking.’
“I think there has always been support for people speaking out, and it has raised a debate inside the army.”
Discontent over the intensifying war in Afghanistan has spread in the army over recent months—and it has had a deep effect in the ranks.
Joe said, “I feel like I’m strutting round, not tip-toeing, after hearing what the guys think.
“Talking to soldiers in other units, you get the impression that people are questioning why we’re in Afghanistan.”
In September, in addition to the original charge of desertion and intent to avoid active duty, the army wanted to charge Joe with bringing the army into disrepute by speaking out.
Joe and his legal team fought for this charge to be dropped—and they won.
Joe said, “I feel like we are in the ascendancy now. We’ve taken the initiative.
“We’ll have to see what happens in the coming weeks—if they bring more trumped up charges we’ll take them on.”
Joe is continuing to speak out and encourages others to do the same. “We have to start talking and demanding the details,” he said.
“Write to your MP for answers, get out on the streets, demonstrate and debate. Whatever people can do to stop this war, they should do it.”
The following should be read alongside this article: » Thousands surge against the war» Former Guantanamo prisoner Omar Deghayes speaks out
Support Joe in his fight for justice. Email messages of support to
joeisinnocent@hotmail.co.uk
Download a petition against the army’s attempts to court martial him at » www.stopwar.org.uk
© Socialist Worker (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original.
Share this story on:
Delicious Digg reddit Facebook StumbleUpon
If you found this article useful please help us maintain SW by » making a donation.
» comment on article » email article » printable version

there now i don't feel so bad about being so worthless tonight. let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

Monday, November 2, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces another death, no movement on passing an election law in Iraq, KBR is costing US tax payer $193 as a result of their inability to manage their workforce, the Pentagon isn't providing all the plans for the draw-down to the GAO, and more.

The first (partial) week of October saw 5 people reported dead and 24 reported wounded, the second week (October 4th through 10th) saw 46 reported dead and 131 injured, the third week (October 11th through 17th) saw 89 reported dead and 336 reported wounded, the fourth week (October 18th through 24th) saw 53 reported dead and 107 reported wounded, and the fifth week (October 25th through October 31st) saw 191 reported dead and 580 reported injured. Totals? 384 reported dead and 1106 reported wounded. At least. Michael Christie and Michael Roddy (Reuters) cite "security sources" for the toll of 343 people killed. Barbara Surk (AP) reports that AP's count for October is 364 killed. John Leland (New York Times) reports, "In October, 453 Iraqi civilians and security personnel were killed, an increase from a monthly low this year of 279 in September but considerably below the high of 677 in April, according to the Interior Ministry. The statistics do not count deaths in the northern Kurdish region."

8 US service members were announced dead in Iraq during the month of October. Today the US military announced another death: "FORWARD OPERATING BASE KALSU, Iraq -- A Multi-National Corps -- Iraq Soldier died Nov. 2 of non-combat related injuries. Release of the Soldier's identity is being with held pending notification of the next of kin. The name of the deceased service member will be announced through the U.S. Department of Defense Official Web site [. . .] The announcements are made on the web site no earlier than 24 hours after notification of the service member's primary next of kin. The incident is currently under investigation." Maloy Moore (Los Angeles Times) reports that the fallen was 20-year-old Lukas C. Hopper of Merced, California who "is survived by his mother and father, Robin and Yancy Hopper, both of Merced." The announcement brings to 4356 the number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war. In other reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Mohammed al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) report 2 Tikrit roadside bombing which wounded one person. Reuters drops back to yesterday to note a Mosul car bombing which left 2 people dead and two more injured.

Shootings?

Mohammed al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) report 1 person shot dead in Mosul. Reuters drops back to yesterday to note 1 attorney shot dead in his Mosul office.

Violence continues, actually increases, and Nouri al-Maliki maintains he is the new strongman, the new Saddam to be trusted and should continue as prime minister of Iraq. On Al Jazeera's latest Inside Iraq (which began broadcasting Friday), the topic was Nouri al-Maliki and the guests joining host Jasim Azzawi included head of Iraqi Nation Party Mithal al-Alsui and US Dept Assistant Secretary of State for Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs Michael Corbin.

Jasim Azzawi: This murderous double explosion that happened in Iraq is quite sophisticated. It has all the marks, perhaps, of foreign power and yet it is domestically carried out. Today the Iraqi government arrested 60 security officers -- perhaps they were either in cahoot or negligent in their duty how do you look at this double bombings?

Mithal al-Alsui: Well, first of all, I have to say that when we talk about total sections we talk about so complicated cases. This is one side but of the other side we didn't feel that the government they do have any kind of a platform or a vision how to deal with the terrorists or the security in Iraq. More than that they just react and such news as you are hearing, the government they are arresting or they are trying to start an investigation of some officers. My opinion, this is just a reaction, trying to cover the need of the new election in Iraq.

Jasim Azzawi: Indeed you are right. Perhaps the arrest or the questioning of the 60 officers might be a face saving formula. Mr. Corbin, today I was struck by what the Iraqi Foreign Minister, Hoshyar Zebari, said. He said, "The US cannot wash its hand of the situation in Iraq. We expect more engagement from the American forces. What does that mean in light of the fact that SOFA stipulates American forces should go back to their barracks by June 30th. Is the Iraqi government speaking with two voices? al-Maliki says we don't want them and his foreign minister says we need them back.

Michael Corbin: First of all, I can't comment on what Hoshyar Zebari, the Foreign Minister, said, Jasim. But what I can say first is that we strongly condemn these horrific bombings conducted by people with no respect for human life. The victims in this latest bombing were children, were passerby on the street. We see no benefit that anyone could claim by trying to claim victory by trying to conduct these kind of attacks. We are in partnership with the government of Iraq. We are working closely with the security forces, we're working closely with Prime Minister Maliki to try and prevent this kind of attack. The Iraqis have control of their cities since June 30. They have made enormous strides. What you see here is terrorists who have tried every means to cause havoc and destruction moving from first targeting mosques and churches and minorities, then targeting innocent people in market places to now targeting uh government buildings where normal Iraqis work, where passersby are being targeted. We don't see any strategy here by the insurgents, we see only bloody killing and we find it despicable that anyone would seek to rush to claim credit for this type of attack.

What a load of crap. First off, if you'd done what Michael Corbin did in Syria, you might shut your damn mouth and keep your head down real low. That's (A). (B) He served under George W. Bush and now he wants to develop a sense of righteous indignation? NOW? The bombings were part of the ongoing Iraq War. The US government has attempted to label the Iraqis taking part in this war as "terrorist" which is a bunch of crap, they are people who feel they are defending their country. Micheal Corbin -- of all people -- wants to lecture on innocents being killed.

The US military killed innocents and the US government knew it was going to happen because (a) they ordered it and (b) the whole damn world knew it was going to happen. Which is how we get Elizabeth Piper (Reuters) reporting (March 2005) on Jawdat Abd al-Kadhum whose 'crime' was driving and for that 'crime' "he lost his leg to an American bullet." The US military likes to call it "collateral damage." In March 2007, they were even bragging about new ammo which, they stated, would be helpful in "reducing collateral damage" in Iraq. There's the Palestine Hotel in Baghdad was attacked April 8, 2003 by . . . the US military claiming the lives of journalists Taras Protsyuk and Jose Couso and wounding three other journalists. On the same day -- on the same day -- that the US military attacked the Baghdad bureau of Al Jazeera killing journalist Tareq Ayyoub. Now we can go on and on -- as the illegal war has -- but the point should have been made: Michael Corbin needs to check that righteous indignation that he has oh-so recently sprouted.

But spewing mock outrage allowed him to avoid answering a direct question, didn't it? And wasn't that the point? "I can't comment on what Hoshyar Zebari, the Foreign Minister, said." Then why the hell are you on the show? For your beauty? Don't make me laugh.

Jasim Azzawi: But then again, Mr. Corbin, they are a symbol of the Iraqi government and those terrorist attacks are meant to strike at the very heart of the Iraqi symbol. We'll get to that point later on, but let me get to Mithal. There are two theories, Mithal Alusi, the reasons behind these suicide bombings. One is: To create chaos and embarrass the Iraqi government. The other one is, which I would like you to comment on, is that: It is meant to embarrass al-Maliki himself for abandoning his erstwhile allies -- primarily the Iraqi National Alliance.

Mithal al-Alsui: Well I must come back to the -- to the main point which I really believe that even the United States of America with all of the institutions they got, the terrorists, they succeed to attack America, they succeed to attack many European states. But in general, what we need here in Iraq, we need to start to build the Iraqi institution. What we need here to start, to go out of the propaganda issues, what we need here is to start to believe in our citizens and our nation and to serve the people. We still action -- we still reaction in very naive and simple ways and this is not the way to stop terrorists this is not the way to stop --

Jasim Azzawi: Are you saying the Iraqi government is failing to do the proper things? Are you casting doubt on the -- on the whole structure of the Iraqi government and its vision for the future?

Mithal al-Alsui: For sure, Mr. Maliki government, it didn't succeed to provide service. They didn't succeed to push the economy. They didn't succeed to help in the oil industry. They didn't succeed to find any platform or vision for the education, for the health sectors. They didn't succeed in different ways so the security is part of the result of this government and we are so sorry to hear it repeatedly from the American side, "We are helping the Iraqi government and we are supporting the Iraqi government." We are asking our American friends: You need to support the Iraqi political process and the democratic process. We need to support the Iraqi economy --

Jasim Azzawi: Let me give a chance to Mr. Corbin to answer that. Go ahead, your aid and your help is going in the wrong direction, that's what he's saying.

Michael Corbin: I agree with Mithal that we have to build institutions. I agree that we have to help with education and health. But what we see is an Iraqi government that is capable now of making decision. We're in partnership with the Iraqi government. When the UN mandate ended at the end of 2008, it was a significant step forward for Iraqi institutions. Iraq now can deal with its neighbors. Iraq is in a position now where we have a partnership on economic issues. Oil. We've had one bid round for international oil companies to come into Iraq. We're preparing for another. We see many elements where the Iraqi government and Iraqi institutions such as the very Ministry of Justice which was targeted --

Despite Michael Corbin's inane mutterings, no 'progress' in Iraq. John Leland (New York Times) reported in this morning's paper, "Meanwhile, Iraqi legislators again failed to agree on laws governing the January elections, despite warnings that further delay could prevent the vote from taking place on time. Discussions in Parliament on Sunday instead focused on other matters." To recap, prior to Barack Obama being elected US President, Iraq 'intended' to hold national elections in December 2009. They then pushed the elections back to January 2010 which Barack used to break his campaign promise re: troop draw-down in Iraq (he called it withdrawal and, in his speeches, rarely included "combat" which is a meaningless qualifier anyway). All this year, they've anticipated the elections being held in January 2010 and the deadline for passing legislation was October 15th. The day before that deadline, they decided to kick decisions back to October 19th. And so it has gone, over and over. It is now November 2nd and they have no election law.Appearing October 21st before the US House Armed Services Committee, the Pentagon's Michele Flournoy was asked of the delays in Iraq passing an election law.Michele Flournoy: Uh, let me start by saying, you know, the draw-down plan that we have, is conditions based and it creates multiple decision points for re-evaluating and, if necessary, changing our plans based on developments on the ground. Although the government of Iraq's self-imposed deadline of October 15th for passing the elections law has passed, we judge that the COR [Council Of Representatives] still has another week or two to come to some kind of an agreement on the elections law before it will put the January date -- the early January date -- in jeopardy in terms of the election commission's ability to actually physically execute the, uh, the election. If a new law with open lists is not passed, the fall back solution for them is to return to the 2005 election law which is based on a closed list system. But that could be used for upcoming elections, the COR would simply have to vote on an election date. If that law is not passed in the next two weeks, they will be looking at slipping the date to later in January which would still be compliant with the [Iraqi] Constitution but would be later than originally planned. In that instance, M-NF-I [Multi-National Forces Iraq] would need to engage with the government of Iraq to do some contingency planning on how to secure the elections at a later date and that might well have-have implications. Though she maintained Iraq could fall back on the 2005 election law, other bodies begged to differ. As Rod Nordland (New York Times) reported, "Iraq's existing election law was declared unconstitutional by its highest court, which said it needs to be replaced or amended." Yesterday Gabriel Gatehouse (BBC News) reported, "Iraqi MPs have until Sunday to pass controversial legislation or face postponing parliamentary elections set for 16 January. The poll is seen as crucial to the stability of the country, and any delay would likely impact on the US plan for withdrawal." There was no passage and AFP reports today that KRG President Massud Barzani and US Vice President Joe Biden "pressed the need for a key election law to be passed". BBC News reports the United Nations "had warned that it could not guarantee to endorse the polls if the bill was not approved on Sunday" -- that was yesterday and the bill was not approved. BBC points out that the 'sticky points' are Kirkuk and the issue of open or closed lists. The latter will determine whether voters vote for individual candidates and this is something that many in Parliament are opposed to. Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) reports this afternoon that things remain at a standstill and quotes Iraqi MP Hunain al-Qaddo stating, "If we don't manage to make any progress on the electoral law, that will have a negative impact on the political process and it will send a very bad signal to Iraq's enemies that the political system isn't working. [. . .] I still have hopes but I think if we don't manage to do something this week or next week, we really have to look at postponing the election." Meanwhile Mohammed Jamjoom and Jormana Karadsheh (CNN) report Kurdish MP Mahmoud Othman states that the US is pushing the "highest levels of the Kurdish leadership" to go along with a plan for January elections that would yet again set aside the issue of Kirkuk. In an offensive statement issued last week, Chris Hill (US Ambassador to Iraq) and Gen Ray Odierno (top US commander in Iraq) insisted that the election law should be a 'one-time only' type deal and not apply to or consider Article 140 of Iraq's Constitution. Article 140 is the one that mandates the Kirkuk issue be resolved (via a referendum). That was supposed to have taken place 2 years ago. It did not. Now let's get back to offensive: In 2000, the US election was decided not by the voters nor by the means outlined in the US Constitution. Instead the US Supreme Court injected itself into the dispute and issued a laughable ruling that was so perverted the Court insisted it was a 'one-time only' ruling and couldn't be cited as precedent in future cases. That's what Hill and Odierno are now proposing. Regardless of who gets or doesn't get Kirkuk, it's amazing how the US continues to kick the can down the road over and over. This issue was supposed to have been addressed no later than 2007. The US is again pushing for it to be postponed. And the only time the KRG can get people to the table on this issue is when they have the pressure of an upcoming election which needs to be addressed.

Today the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan met in DC and heard from a number of witnesses including someone on the second panel who mentioned Flournoy's October 21st testimony, Rear Adm Thomas Traaen who declared, "As I'm sure you know, the testimony given by Secretary [Michele] Flournoy, Mr. [Alan] Estevez, Vice Adm [James] Winnefeld and, my boss, Lt Gen [Kathleen] Gainey on 21 October was well received by the House Armed Services Committee. My testimony here will draw heavily from their insightful remarks." Those remarks included establishing that decisions on draw-down and going back in would be made by events on the ground in Iraq. Yes, that is a clear contradiction of the position Barack Obama presented as a candidate when he was fond of saying the US military did everything they had been tasked to do and did it well. And, yes, he was stealing from Hillary Clinton back then and, yes, Hillary was attacked by CODESTINK and others for those comments but they apparently sounded so much better out of Barack's mouth thereby explaining the refusal to call him out. So Barack's plan as outlined in that hearing was the same plan he outlined to the New York Times, the one that left Michael Gordon flabbergasted because Barack was saying that he was 'withdrawing' and at the same time saying he was going back in if anything went wrong and playing definition games regarding the military ("trainers," etc.).

Also appearing on the second panel was the GAO's William Solis who declared that the Pentagon hasn't completed the plans for a draw-down. He stated that the Defense Dept "has not fully defined or identified the contracted services it will need to successfully complete the draw-down and support the remaining US forces in Iraq." Solis explained that 128,700 US service members were in Iraq as of the end of August "spread among 295 bases throughout the country." Solis' opening, prepared remarks, can be found [PDF format warning] here. While the GAO was able to count the number of US service members in Iraq, there was no count on the number of contractors leading Co-Chair of the Commission, Michael Thibault to declare, "It is both peculiar and troubling that eight years after the overthrow of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, and more than six years since the overthrow of the Ba'athist regime in Iraq, we still don't know how many contractor employees are working in the region. [. . .] How can contractors be properly managed if we aren't sure how many there are, where they are and what they are doing?"

Commissioner Dov Zakheim: Yes, uh, first, Adm Traaen, I noticed on page three of your testimony, uh, you said that there will be a proportionally larger contractor presence. Now GAO has said that you haven't -- DoD, rather, hasn't fully determined its need for contracted services so how are you planning to oversee this? You're going to have more contractors, you already have fewer CORs than you need right now, the proportions going to go up. Could you walk me through your current plans and your timetables and how you plan to address this issue?

Rear Adm Thomas Traaen: Yes, sir. First of all, I think the proportionality is prudent as we close forward operating bases and operating sites and as the military either resets or re-postures in Afghanistan. The proportionality issue is not surprising to me. Uh, I think that the number of contractors -- in terms of measuring that to the plan -- is moving down significantly faster than CENTCOM had originally planned and so I think that getting out in front of it is the first part of the plan. It's to make sure that we're removing capability where we don't need it. Certainly, I think the CENTCOM plan is to be conditions based and I think that there is a protocol that we would continue to move forward in terms of making sure that there are some outliers -- for example, the elections that are coming up in the January time frame, counter-insurgency efforts that -- if we draw down too quickly -- we could put that combatant commander in harms way of not being able to produce his mission. I do believe that there is proper planning in terms of the MNFI fusion cell that is tasked with fusing, synchronizing and integrating this effort. And as the third point, I think having MNFI and that fusion cell also combined with the Joint Logistics Procurement Support Board that is the JCCIA and an MNFI established board that will properly prioritize and coordinate those efforts as the fourth point of light making sure that drawing down in accordance with those priorities is the proper way to go, sir.

Commissioner Dov Zakheim: Uhm, let me turn now to Mr. Thompson. Uhm, we know that the target is a 32% contractor draw-down. I believe that's the number that Adm Traaen has in his testimony. But looking at that chart, I guess I'm thrown a little bit. Contractors have already declined by seven -- nearly eighteen percent but not KBR. In fact, KBR has declined by roughly half of that 18% number. In the previous panel, and you may have been here when we discussed this, I noted that if a service wasn't completely closed down, then any contractor -- well, not any -- some contractors, and I guess I should emphazise that, not all would act this way. But some contractors would drag their feet because service hasn't closed down, you don't pull the people out, you keep charging. Could you explain to me why it is that KBR which has been under so much scrutiny from GAO, from the IG, even from this commission, is pulling it's people back at half the rate -- half the rate -- of all other contractors.

Lee Thompson: Number one, when we talk about consolidation, draw-down, consolidation of bases, drawdown, those services that we provide under LOGCAP [Logistics Civilian Augmentation Program] are still being performed. There's a common mistake of rolling up all bases as a single base. There's different sizes of bases. So you had the small contingency operation locations and that which is a lower brigade size which would be a contingency operation site. They move into our services, the services we contracted for are still being provided. There has been a reduction as that [chart] says, from when we started. In fact, the number's around 50,000 today. So we've put a freeze on them. They -- KBR -- cannot hire above a certain limit based on the basis of the estimate that was negotiated this past August and September. As we get the guidance from CI MNFI on what bases will close, we'll descope and we'll start moving out contractors. We are in fact doing those, we're looking at those critical skills. But remember the major draw-down starts after the [Iraqi] elections. So we are watching that and I'm depending upon our DCA[A -- Defense Contract Audit Agency] folks that are doing the floor checks for us.

Commissioner Dov Zakheim: So can you state with absolute certainty that KBR has moved expiditiously and, for instance, has not moved people from one location to another? Are you certain of that? Do you have that degree of oversight and visibility? Given some of the things we heard earlier from one of our Co-Chairman, Co-Chariman [Michael] Thibault about issues arising with dining halls and certain things, are you absolutely certain that KBR's getting people out as they should?

Lee Thompson: I'm not going to sit here and say I'm absolutely certain but I will tell you that we'll provide the oversight and look at those places where we are closing to make sure that there's not excess personnel there. And we will -- they have to get a blessing from us as we move and we descope, we descope the property, if we close a base, we look at the personnel where they're reallocating or realinging them to so we're looking and we're scrutinizing that. And I depend on my folks forward, the same two officers -- if you will -- that said they're against or-or whatever Chairman Thibault had to say about what they said overseas.

Commissioner Dov Zakheim: Mr. Solis, could you comment on both of these points? One, the adequacy of planning and, second, the degree of oversight of KBR and the seeming discrephancy between KBR LOGCAP 3 and other draw-downs.

Willaim Solis: Well I think in terms of the planning, I mentioned before in my opening statement that there is -- there's a lot of things that are going on with regards to the retrograde of equipment. One thing that we haven't seen a whole lot of is planning, as I mentioned, for determining the requirements, the oversight for the contracts that are going to be coming onboard. And we still have a concern about that, we still have seen exact plans. As I mentioned to you the GMASS [Global Maintenance and Supply Services] contract in Kuwait ,which is a major maintenance contract, which is necessary to move equipment out, look at it, and get -- and then repair it and move it out to Kuwait or whever it's going to go -- back to a unit, over to Afghanistan or whatever -- they expect a major increase, as I mentioned, doubling the size of their contract force to about 6,000 people. We have not seen what kinds of plans are going to be put in place to increase the contractor oversight there -- and that's not just there, I think it's other contracts that we have seen as well. I think in terms of the LOGCAP, we haven't really looked in terms of the numbers so I can't really contra -- comment on that. But I think that these numbers are going to flucuate, whether it's LOGCAP or some of these other major contracts in terms as the draw-down proceeds and that's why it's important to really understand what you're contract requirements are going to be during this period.

The first panel included April Stephenson who stated KBR's ineffective managing of their workforce is costing tax payers "at least $193 million". Stevenson was testifying on behalf of the Defense Contract Audit Agency. She explained KBR had not done the staff reductions and, as a result and barring no major action on KBR's part, there staff ratio in Iraq would, by August 2010, be 1 KBR employee for every 3.6 US service members. That will probably be a detail noted by any who note the hearing. But another detail -- the reason for the excerpt above -- is equally important: No plans.

The GAO -- like the House Armed Services Committee -- is not seeing plans. Do they exist? What's being discussed isn't 2011 or post-2011. What's being discussed above is the draw-down that's supposedly going to begin taking place as soon as Iraq holds national elections. Where are the plans?

The inability to move foward on the election bill (passing legislation) by the Iraqi government or 'government' is rightly being noted. What about the inability of the Pentagon to provide plans for events that are supposed to be right around the corner?

And what's up with allowing KBR to drag it's feet there? Commission Charles Tiefer asked if KBR had a written, detailed plan for their part in the draw-down. Thompson declared, "I was over there a few weeks ago, a month ago, and they provided me with a briefing. I think it was 25th, 26th of September." He continued, "Was there a written plan? We have a normal, operational, 'how do I close a base' kind of plan that they have signed up to early on." Who is providing oversight and how will there be a draw-down starting supposedly in a few months if there are no plans in writing? (No, a general "how do I close a base" is not a written plan.) Commissioner Robert Henke attempted to get a "short, succinct answer" on the KBR issue: "If the president announces on February 27, 2009 the draw-down plan and we're on November 2nd, is it possible that the contractor hasn't provided you any plan to adjust staff accordingly?" What he received was a babble from Thompson that contradicted and spun. Henke then attempted to get answers by going bit by bit through a timeline and asking "How is that posssible?" In Thompson's most honest response in the entire hearing he included "I don't know" as part of his long-winded, run-the-clock-down response.

Friday's snapshot had an error -- thank you to a Congressional staffer who informed me of it. Duncan Hunter cited a project which was Task Force Odin not "Odum" -- ODIN stands for Observe, Detect, Identify and Neutralize. It is not and was not named after General William Odum as I wrongly stated. My error and my apologies.

Today Iran's Press TV reports:The US military has finished erecting an advanced radar system in Iraq to monitor the border with Iran, Syria and Turkey, a report says. The radar system will monitor aircraft and anti-air targets approaching from the borders, several Arabic language news websites reported on Monday, citing comments by unnamed Isareli sources. The report posted on the Palestinian Maannews website said that the system would transmit information to the Iraqi air force and some of its radar would be connected to the control tower at the Baghdad International Airport. Which gives us a chance to relive one of those 'great moments' in illegal war history. For those who've forgotten or never knew about the US spying (the governments of England and Australia joined in the spying as well) on the UN, refer to Martin Bright, Ed Vulliamy and Peter Beaumont's "Revealed: US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war" (Observer, March 2, 2003):The United States is conducting a secret 'dirty tricks' campaign against UN Security Council delegations in New York as part of its battle to win votes in favour of war against Iraq. Details of the aggressive surveillance operation, which involves interception of the home and office telephones and the emails of UN delegates in New York, are revealed in a document leaked to The Observer. The disclosures were made in a memorandum written by a top official at the National Security Agency - the US body which intercepts communications around the world - and circulated to both senior agents in his organisation and to a friendly foreign intelligence agency asking for its input. The memo describes orders to staff at the agency, whose work is clouded in secrecy, to step up its surveillance operations 'particularly directed at... UN Security Council Members (minus US and GBR, of course)' to provide up-to-the-minute intelligence for Bush officials on the voting intentions of UN members regarding the issue of Iraq.

iraq the new york times john leland rebecca santana jason ditz
the christian science monitor jane arraf
mcclatchy newspapers bbc news gabriel gatehouse
jomana karadsheh
martin bright ed vulliamy peter beaumont
the los angeles times

Posted at 08:16 pm by politicsscree
Make a comment Permalink

Oct 30, 2009

tony blair, go away

Tony Blair is clearly hugely qualified to be the first President of Europe – he loves getting his snout in the trough, national sovereignty means nothing to him and he can lie through his teeth and get away with it.
On the presidency, Blair grandly announced that he is interested provided that it is “big enough”.
Does he mean the job? Or the limo?

that's from tony parson's telegraph of london piece and, yes, tony blair is all norma desmond these days. tony blair thinks it's time for his close up and for his comeback.

the world thinks differently.

meanwhile did angela merkel really nix tony blair's big? if so, way to go angela!

the finanical times of london also feels tony brown is not the rightf fit:

Council or won’t he? And will they – his former peers in the Council, the 27 EU heads of government that make up this select electorate – want him?

With the all-but-ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon, these questions have burst out of the Euro-parlour game into the public square. The answer is not as clear as it might seem at first glance.

In the first place, there is no real consensus – yet – about what the job actually entails, yet everyone knows that it will be defined by the first person who holds it.

Is it a position that requires the star quality that – as David Miliband, the UK foreign secretary, put it in ostensibly arguing for Mr Blair – stops traffic in Washington and Beijing, Moscow and New Delhi?

It is far from clear EU leaders, in their vanity, would allow themselves to be eclipsed by that kind of star. They may well prefer someone who patiently attends to the (27) agenda(s) and works to build the sort of messy consensus that keeps the union staggering forward. The impenetrable Lisbon treaty is verbose on this but uncharacteristically brief on the role of representation.

But, if it is global recognition the EU wants, Mr Blair can certainly oblige. In his decade at the top of British and international politics, he was, indeed, a star, albeit in a rather dim firmament. It is a seductive argument that with his mix of access and charm, and his I’m-a-straight-sort-of-guy way of doing business, he would enable the EU to, at last, punch its weight on the international stage.

Europe does need a more persuasive voice, otherwise it risks fading into geopolitical irrelevance in a world parcelled up between a G2 of the US and China. And, even though the other big job of foreign policy chief created by the Lisbon treaty could turn out to be more important, it is far from obvious there are good alternatives to Mr Blair as president of the Council.

The objections to Mr Blair are not – as the opposition Conservative party has it – that his appointment would be seen as an affront to British sensibilities. William Hague, the shadow foreign secretary and former Tory leader, said naming him as president would be seen as a “hostile” act. He sounds as though he is confusing Brussels with the Kremlin, circa 1980. David Cameron adopted a more even – and gently mocking – tone in saying a future Tory government could work with Il Presidente.

No, Mr Blair is the wrong man for this job for different reasons.

The folly of Iraq, a war of choice sold on a false prospectus, looms large. Quite aside from the fact that this unprovoked invasion broke Iraq as a state and as a society, giving a fillip to jihadism across the wider Middle East, Mr Blair, subordinating the UK to the incompetent adventurism of the Bush administration, did not try to reach agreement with his European partners and contributed mightily to the union’s division.

But alongside the debris piled up by the Iraq catastrophe, Mr Blair blew a historic opportunity to embed Britain in Europe and change the British conversation about Europe. At a time when Britons of his generation have never felt more familiar with and at ease with their European neighbours, and when so many EU arguments were going the British way, Mr Blair all but abandoned any attempt to win domestic opinion to even the pragmatic case for pooling a small portion of British sovereignty, instead capitulating to the Eurosceptic and jingoist media. On leaving office he blamed the press for forcing Britain’s leaders into a false dilemma of being for or against Europe: “it’s either isolation or treason”. But after his landslide 10 years earlier he could have crossed the English Channel on foot. Leaders are supposed to lead.

The star power his supporters attribute to Mr Blair, moreover, ignores the fact that the EU is more about chemistry than cosmology. It requires coalition-building skills of a high order, and a real understanding of the intra-EU tensions between big and small states, between north and south, and increasingly, east and west, and of the prickliness of the big three, France, Germany and the UK. Mr Blair may instinctively incline too much to the power of the big states to unite the union.

The Blair claim to this job cannot be lightly dismissed, but nor is it self-evident he is the man to invest the EU with glittering new credibility with a sprinkle of pixie dust. This is not about redeeming his reputation. It is about promoting Europe’s
let's close with c.i.'s 'iraq snapshot:'

Friday, October 30, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces more deaths, no movement on an election law, a new attack on press freedoms in Iraq, nepotisim is an ugly thing, and more.

Today the US military announced: "BAGHDAD -- A Multi-National Division-Baghdad Soldier died, Oct. 30, of non-combat related injuries sustained in a vehicle accident. The name of the deceased is being withheld pending notification of next of kin and release by the Department of Defense. The names of the service members are announced through the U.S. Department of Defense Official Website [. . .] The announcements are made on the Website no earlier than 24 hours after notification of the service member's primary next of kin. The incident is under investigation." And they announced: "CONTINGENCY OPERATING BASE, Iraq -- A Soldier assigned to Multi-National Division - South died of non-combat related injury October 30. [. . .] The incident is under investigation." The announcements bring the total number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 4355.

On the second hour of today's The Diane Rehm Show, Iraq was addressed by guest host Frank Senso, NPR's Tom Gjelten, CNN's Elise Labott and McClatchy Newspapers' Jonathan Landay.

Frank Senso: To Iraq now, and in a few minutes, to our phone calls, to bring our audience into this and any other conversation that they may want to have with respect to what's going on in the world. But in Iraq discussions amidst ongoing, violence, intensifying violence in some cases, about trying to fix the national election law because that is what is looming large. Jonathan Landay, what's the landscape look like right now?

Jonathan S. Landay: Well they've tried for a third time to pass an election law in time for the January elections and they've failed again. The issue -- there are a number of issues, but the main issue has to do with the city of Kirkuk in northern Iraq and uh a city that sits atop billions of gallons of untapped oil. Uh, the issue has to do with the -- what census is going to be used to register voters there. Now this is a city that the Kurds -- now this is right now a predominately Kurdish city. It was, the Kurds say, a predominately Kurdish city before the reign of Saddam Hussein who ethically [ethnically] cleansed Kurds out of the city and brought in Arabs. The issue is, do you -- since the fall of Saddam Hussein, the Kurds have been restoring their majority in that city and, indeed, other ethnic groups claim over uh restoring their majority, bringing in more Kurds than there had been before. The Kurds want voter registration to be based on the most recent census, I think it was in fact, done this year. The Sunni Arabs and other ethnic groups there -- the Turkomen for instance -- want the voter registration based on the 2004 census and they have not been able to come to an agreement on this and this has hung up the passage of this law and what it really -- and what it really comes down to it appears is contol over that massive amount of untapped petroleum.

Frank Senso: And yet this-this-this dispute, this stand off over the election law comes just after this Sunday terrible bombing in Baghdad, the worst in two years killing more than 150, wounding hundreds more, severely damaging three major government buildings now there's been an arrest of some 50 odd security and there was some suggestion that this intensifying violence might drive the politicians to nail down this election law and drive those to some kind of political, if not resolution, progress. Tom?

Tom Gjelten: Well it seems, Frank, that the Iranians, I mean the Iraqis, have become so inured to this kind of violence that just sort of everything proceeds normally and that's true I think in both a good sense and a bad sense. In a good sense, there has been this move towards stability and peace in Iraq and Iraq's been filling more confident about their future and they seem amazingly enough to have taken this bombing in stride in a sense. I mean there have been other bombings --

Frank Sesno: It's almost unimaginable, isn't it?

Tom Gjelten: It's almost unaimaginable. But they have -- this is six years that they've been through this and they seem to be able to cope with these great tragedies. On the other hand, the negative side is that, as you say, you know, you would -- you would hope that this would jolt them into sort of some reality but, again, they become so used to this that they just proceed with the same stalemate.

Frank Sesno: What's behind the uptick in violence, Elise?

Elise Labott: Well, we saw -- first we saw an uptick in violence in August and there were also some massive bombings at the Foreign Ministry, at the Finance Ministry and this seemed to be kind of a way to sew sectarian tensions once again and they thought that maybe this would lead Iraq down the path it was in 2006, 2007 with major sectarian tensions. Now what officials says is they think that these foreign fighters are [or?] the real hard core al Qaeda in Iraq are trying just at anything, they tried at religious targets, now they're just trying at softer targets to kill a lot of people. They think maybe it can effect the election in January. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has been running as the security candidate. He's the one that's bringing stability to Iraq, he's the one that got US forces out of the city. The question is now is this going to effect his standing as the security candidate.

Jonathan S. Landay: There may be also something else going on here. The more instability, I think perhaps the insurgen -- whoever is behind these bombings create, in their mind, it delays perhaps the departure of American forces and what do you get from that? Well you get a delay or perhaps problems coming up with additional American forces to send to Afghanistan and there may very well be that thinking going on on the part of those who are responsible for these massive bombings.

On the above. Jonathan S. Landay used the term census. That is incorrect. There has been no census. The issue, which McClatchy's Sarah Issa and Hannah Allem and which the New York Times' Timothy Williams have outlines, is where the voting rolls for 2009 or the voting rolls for 2004 will be used. There has been no census. "Census" is a concrete term. And, in fact, a census in Kirkuk is mandated -- as is a referendum -- by Iraq's 2005 Constitution. No census has been conducted. This is not a minor issue and it goes to the dispute over Kirkuk. "Census" was the wrong term to use. There is NO census thus far.

That's (A). (B) Tom Gjelten. What the ___ was that? I'm reminded of when Goodtime Gals Linda Robinson and Gwen Ifill decided to discuss Blackwater's September 17, 2007 slaughter (see the October 8, 2007 snapshot) -- a discussion noteable for its appalling ignorance and gross lack of concern for human life. Gjelten can argue that some of his remarks were intended to be about officials. But he can only argue that about some of his remarks. And what exactly does he want Iraqis to do? They're shell shocked and just because he hasn't reported on the multitude of studies, THE MULTITUDE OF STUDIES, on the effects this illegal war has had on Iraqi children doesn't mean the damage isn't real and doesn't exist. So his happy talk bulls**t was embarrassing. That was really a shameful moment for NPR. The 'good' and the 'bad' of the bombings? How appalling. What made it worse for NPR was that it wasn't a guest from, for example, NBC News. It was an NPR reporter. That's shameful. The good and the bad of bombings? Pay attention, Tommy.

Our children are surrounded by violnce. Most of them are traumatized. I call them the silent victims. Our Iraqi childeren are the silent vctims.

That's Iraqi psychiatrist Dr. Saied al Hashimi speaking to Jennifer Eccleston (CNN) in 2007. From that report:

From January to March of last year, the World Health Organization worked with Iraqi psychiatrists on a series of studies on the mental health of children in the cities of Baghdad, Mosul and Dohuk. (Watch the effects of war on children )
One of the studies on primary-school-age children in Baghdad found that nearly half of the 600 children surveyed had experienced a major traumatic event since the war began. Just over one in every 10 suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder, the study found.
Another of the studies found that older children in Mosul suffered even worse. Thirty percent of the 1,090 children surveyed showed signs of post-traumatic stress disorder. Nearly all of those with PTSD symptoms, 92 percent, had not received any treatment, according to the study.
In fact, the doctors aren't immune to the dangers of the conflict. Fifty percent of Iraq's psychiatrists have fled the country or been killed since the war began, said Dr. Naeema Al-Gasseer, the WHO's representative for Iraq.

A month after CNN filed that report, NPR's Linda Wertheimer spoke with Dr. Mohammed al-Aboudi about the mental stress Iraqi children were under. Now we can go through various reports and studies. We can enlarge and look at other segments of the country's population. But the above alone demonstrates how offensive Tom's statements are. The population is shell shocked and the illegal war has caused that trauma. The bombings that he thinks have good and bad are the same violence responsible for creating the world's largest refugee crisis. And the UN has already advised that Sunday's bombings will most likely results in Syria and Jordan receiving some additional Iraqi refugees. I'm not seeing any "good and bad" to the bombings. And Tom's statements were inarticulate and offensive. Frank Senso did a fine job this week filling in for Diane but had Diane been present, she probably would have said something. She generally does when gas baggery replaces discussion -- when human beings are removed from the issue, she generally brings them back into the picture even if it means she has to disagree with a guest. (She did that most recently with a guest gas bagging -- and glorifying -- the drone strikes in Pakistan when she made a point to note the civilian deaths the man was dismissing.) Tom's statements were offensive and it's only more so because he works for NPR. He declared that "you would hope that this would jolt them into sort of some reality" -- Tom, we'd hope the reality of the violence in Iraq and the fact that it is an inhabited country would jolt you into some sort of reality but there's no evidence, as yet, that it has.

Let's break that up for a moment to note this:

What are the lessons of Iraq that I carry with me? The cultures are as different as mountains and desert, and for outsiders, there is a familiar struggle to see the place as it truly is, not as we might wish it would be. Back in 2003, the Americans wanted to believe that an age of brotherhood and integration, loosed by American military might, had come to Iraq. Many Iraqis wanted to believe it, too. Thinking too much about the depth of distrust, long latent between sects and ethnicities, would mean acknowledging that a frenzy of violence waited in the wings. They swept into the desert sands the centuries-long struggle of Sunnis and Shiites for dominance in the fertile river basin between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. It was as if officials thought that perhaps by saying they were brothers, they would become them.

That's Alissa J. Rubin from an opinion piece that'll be in Sunday's New York Times.

Back to NPR, (C) Jonathan S. Landay and Elise Labott's speculation -- presented as such with Labott making clear she was referring to what officials were stating. It's a shame that more time wasn't spent on that. No one knows why the bombings are taking place (other than due to the ongoing, illegal war). Could they be to influence the elections? Possibly. Could they be to harm Nouri al-Maliki? Possibly. But it's equally true that the message can be sent throughout Iraq. The August 9th bombing just outside Mosul, for example, was deadly (at least 35 dead) and it received huge attention within Iraq and outside of it. Why target only Baghdad if the issue is just the elections? It's not as if only residents of Baghdad will be voting. Equally true is that there are other areas that should be easier to attack than the region targeted on Sunday. So why those targets?

We noted the arrests Nouri ordered in yesterday's snapshot. Heyetnet reports:

Puppet government police forces arrested three people claimed to be wanted in al Hadbaa area of eastern Mosul.

In al Furat area of Baghdad, continous arrest and raid campaigns perpetrated by government army forces led indiscriminate arrests of dozens. Eyewitnesses said that aforementioned forces used sectarian and irritating slogans beating civilians. During the arrest campaigns the area was monitored by American occupation forces.

On the other hand, government police and army forces arrested eight civilians in various areas of Diyala Province.

In Basra, government police forces arrested 20 people in raid and search campaign alleged to be wanted.

In Tuzkharmotu of Saladin Province, government police forces arrested three civilians who were beaten, insulted and irritated.

In Latifiya of southern Baghdad, sectarian government army forces arrested seven civilians in raid and search attacks.

Today Deng Shasha (Xinhua) reports that Iraq's Sunni vice president (Iraq has two vice presidents -- one Sunni, one Shia) Tariq al-Hashimi has "called on an evaluation of running the security dossier after Sunday's bloody suicide bombings that claimed the lives of 155 Iraqis." Meanwhile Prashant Rao (AFP) reports that today saw many clerics using the sermons to call out "Iraqi authorities" and quotes Sheikh Abdul Mahdi al-Karbalai stating, "With insurgents having repeated the same bombings, with the same style and in the same secure area, we have to review the security plan that has been implemented in Baghdad" while Grand Ayatollah al-Sistani declared, "I demand immediate and urgent checks for the reasons that led to teh bombings." Nouri's government rsponse has been to attack Syria (naturally) and to attack the press (ibid). On the latter, Azzaman reports he has "banned movement by press vehicles with equipment to broadcast live. [. . . ] The order has been issued by the military command of Baghdad operations which specificially denies television broadcasters the right of live coverage."

Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Mohammed al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing which left four people injured and a Mosul sticky bombing which claimed the life of 1 police officer.

Shootings?

Reuters drops back to Thursday and notes that 3 police officers were shot dead and another injured at a Mosul police checkpoint.

Corpses?

Reuters notes 1 corpse discovered in Mosul while 1 police officer -- who may or may not have been part of the investigation into Sunday's bombings -- was discovered dead (from a shooting) in his Baghdad office.

Violence was kind-of, sort-of an issue yesterday in the US House Armed Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. The hearing was about IEDs and the money spent on studying them. The Pentagon's James Schear and Lt Gen Thomas Metz as well as the GAO's William Solis were the witnesses, Vic Snyder is the Subcomittee Chair.

Subcommittee Chair Vic Snyder: IEDs remain the number one cause of casulities to coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. Although IEDs are not a new threat, they have been used with unprecedented frequency in Iraq and Afghanistan. While the decrease in successful attacks in Iraq is encouraging, that success has not been replicated in Afghanistan which has seen an increase in success in fatality attacks with our increase in forces there. Since former CENTCOM commander General [John] Abizaid called for a Manhattan Project like effort 5 years ago to defeat IEDs, Congress has provided nearly $17 billion to DoD's efforts. This effort has grown from a twelve-man army task force to the Jointed IED Defeat Organization, or JIEDDO, which currently employs a staff of about 3600 dedicated government, military and contract personnel.

Lt Gen Thomas F. Metz declared, "What's really different in the two theaters is that over time in Iraq, as we were experiencing 1500, 2500 IEDs a month -- and finding and clearing half of them, we were gaining an enormous amount of forensics and biometrics information. We use that in the COIC [Counter-IED Operations Integration Center] to our advantage It is our asymetric advantage."

US House Rep Duncan Hunter noted a lack of mobilization. He referred to NPR's report on IEDs this week and how, despite all the money being spent, it was human beings noting, for example, "that corpse wasn't there yesterday" and guessing that it appeared to hide an IED. He noted that Marines in Afghanistan report they have only rarely seen predator drones and that instead they rely on "hand held mine sweepers -- a version of which people use on the beach to find coins." He also showed a child's innocence or foolilshness as he lived in a world where only the 'guilty' were killed.

US House Rep Duncan Hunter: This doesn't make me feel comfortable that we are truly doing everything that we can right now. Once-once more, if Secretary Gates said, "No more IEDs to be buried" -- I understand that there are tons in Afghanistan and they can be turned on like that at any point in time. But we could do that. We could stop IEDs from being buried if we mobilize to do it. And -- and if we want to politically about this war too -- it would fall off the map if nobody was dying. Iraq's not in the paper anymore because nobody's dying. One reason is we've knocked off IEDs, huge in 2007 and 2008, with [Gen William] Odum by killing over 3,000 IED placers. Project Odom with IEDS killed more people than every single other person in Iraq put together -- with all the offensive operations, Odom killed more and they were all bad guys -- not one single civilian, they were all inputting IEDs.

"Not one single civilian." Just "bad guys." Because a drone is judge and jury. So if a drone says it's "bad guys" that's all the proof Duncan Hunter needs. (And, to clarify, this is Duncan Hunter the younger, the 32-year-old elected to his father's seat. Still wet behind the ears and with a child's wide-eyes, he needs correcting, not the blanket approval Snyder gave him when Snyder followed Hunter. And someone might have bothered to inform Hunter that, despite his claims that "nobody's dying" in Iraq, Iraq saw at least 155 people die on Sunday alone. "Nobody's dying"? That didn't require a correction? Did he mean no US service members? If so, even that's wrong because there are 8 announced dead in Iraq so far this month -- granted 2 of them were announced today so, at the time of the hearing, only 6 had been announced. And it's a good thing to Duncan Hunter that the news media walked away from Iraq? Really? (Hunter is a veteran of both the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars, FYI.) Congress had time for that nonsense yesterday. Not for anything important, but they had time for that.

Related, Iraq Veterans Against the War's Martin Smith looks into the educational benefits scandal and reports (US Socialist Worker) on various people who have suffered and are suffering:

Politicians always clamor that we have to "support our troops" and take care of our veterans first. The White House Web site quotes Obama's proclamation that "we...owe our veterans the care they were promised and the benefits that they have earned."
But the VA's latest failure to deliver on educational benefits--coming just a few years after the scandal of VA health care negligence at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington D.C.--leaves these lofty assertions sounding like just another example of the politicians' empty rhetoric.
And given Obama's increasingly clear record of impressive speeches followed by little action, some veterans are calling his administration "the audacity of nope."
While the veterans at the VA office in Chicago expressed relief at finally receiving their first check, the bitterness persists. Bureaucratic red tape and mismanagement always holds up money and benefits for veterans, but there always seems to be an abundant supply of cash for bank bailouts, the "cash for clunkers" program to help U.S. automakers, a failed Olympic bid for the city of Chicago, or a bloated Pentagon budget.

How is that related? One damn hearing. That's all the Congress is going to hold on that scandal? Really? One damn hearing. They fawned over VA Secretary Eric Shinseki October 14th -- even when he admitted that the VA knew before he became the Secretary (and that he found out as soon as he became the Secretary) that they wouldn't be able to implement the benefit checks in a timely manner. They acted like smiling zombies. October 15th, when he was present, they were suddenly concerned for their one and only hearing thus far into the scandal. That's disgusting. That effected so many veterans and it got so little attention from Congress. Most importantly, it's still not 'fixed.' Read Martin Smith's report. But Congress has other things to do and, point of fact, the Senate held no hearings on the issue. Want to explain how that happened?

Staying on the topic of veterans issues and dropping back to the October 21st snapshot:

Meanwhile Lauren DeFranco (WABC -- link has text and video) reports Christal Wagenhauser gave birth to a two month premature daughter and she and the family want Cpl [Keith] Wagenhouser -- currently stationed in Iraq -- home to see the baby: "If the baby's condition deteriorates, it would take Wagenhauser a week to get home. At that point, it would be too late."

Jennifer Logan (CBS) reports that Keith Wagenhauser was finally given time to visit his family and arrived in New York yesterday and explains: "In an incubator adorned with her father's military photo, Madison, born by life-saving caesarean section, weighing just 2-pounds 11-ounces is being treated in the neonatal intensive care unit of Stony Brook University Medical Center. Initially, marine brass explained that emergency leave is granted only in cases of imminent or actual death in their immediate family and that Madison's condition was not sufficiently life threatening enough to grant an exception." So while the military brass did the right thing, what's the hold up with the US Congress when it comes to the latest (known) threat to deport the spouse of a veteran?

Iraq War veteran Jack Barrios would probably love some downtime with his family but the government keeps creating problems as LA's KABC reports (link has text and video):

Subha Ravindhran: [. . .] Frances Barrios considers herself an American. She grew up and went to high school here in Van Nuys but for the past 17 years, she's been living in this country illegally. Now she and her husband, an Iraq War veteran, must deal with the consequences. 26-year-old Army Specialist Jack Barrios can barely talk about the time he served in Iraq.

Jack Barrios: I'll skip that.

Subha Ravindhran: You don't want to talk about that.

Jack Barrios: Yeah.

Subha Ravindhran: But what he can speak about is the battle his family is going through now. His wife, 23-year-old Frances, is facing deporation back to Guatemala -- a country she left when she was just six-years-old.

Jack Barrios: I'm pretty sad and angry that we will get separated.

Subha Ravindhran: Not only will three-year-old Matthew and one-year-old Allanna be separated from their mother, but Jack will also lose his main caretaker. Since he returned from Iraq in 2007, he's been suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.

Frances Barrios: He was an outgoing person, you could say. He used to like being outside with his friends and just, you know, having a good time. When he came back, like I said, he shut down. It wasn't him.

Subha Ravindhran: Their attorney Jessica Dominguez says the chances of keeping Frances here are slim.

Jessica Dominguez: It's just mind boggling to try to understand that in a situation like this, Mr. Barrios cannot be assured that his family is going to stay together because immigration laws do not protect the sanctity of his family at this point.

The US government wants to deport her. (She's from Guatemala originally, entered the US with her mother when she was just six-years-old.) As offensive as that is -- and it's really offensive -- it's also economically stupid because Jack suffers from PTSD. The US government is going to provide him a caretaker who will do all that Frances currently does? Really? Teresa Watanabe (Los Angeles Times) reported earlier this week:

But as he undergoes counseling and swallows anti-depressants, the soldier is fighting an even bigger battle: to keep his family from collapsing as his wife, an undocumented immigrant from Guatemala, faces deportation.
His wife, 23-year-old Frances, was illegally brought to the United States by her mother at age 6, learned of her status in high school and discovered just last year that removal proceedings have been started. Her possible deportation has left Barrios in panic as he contemplates life without her.
The Army reservist says his wife is the family's anchor, caring for their year-old daughter and 3-year-old son and helping him battle his post-traumatic stress.
"She's my everything," Barrios said as he sat glumly in the family's sparsely furnished but tidy Van Nuys apartment. "Without her, I can't function. It would be like taking away a part of my soul."
Hundreds of U.S. soldiers are facing the same trouble as they fight to legalize their spouses' status, a difficult process that has affected their military readiness, according to Margaret Stock, a lieutenant colonel in the Army Reserves and an immigration attorney specializing in military cases.

Turning to the issue of contracting, Walter Pincus (Washington Post) reports on the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction's latest report which finds that Aecom Government Services which "supplied vehicle parts for the Iraqi army sought reimbursements from the U.S. military far in excess of the costs of the items". Tom A. Peter (Christian Science Monitor -- link has text and audio) reports that the report finds that KBR is not recycling in their catering facilities despite the contract stating they would.

Dropping back to the October 21st snapshot, "In the US yesterday, a twenty-year-old Iraqi woman was run over along with her 43-year-old friend. James King (Phoenix News) reports that police are looking for the twenty-year-old's father, Faleh Hassan Almaleki, whom they supsect of running the two women down and that the alleged motive is that the daughter was 'becoming too westernized.' Katie Fisher (ABC 15 -- link has text and video) reports the 20-year-old woman is Noor Faleh Almaleki and her 43-year-old friend is Amal Edan Khalaf and the friend is also the mother of the twenty-year-old's boyfriend." CNN reports he was arrested yesterday in Atlanta -- after he had gone to Mexico, flown to London where British officials refuse him admittance in England, and returned to the US. CNN states his daughter is still in the hospital and "unresponsive" to treatment thus far. Sarah Netter (ABC News -- link has text and video) reports on the apparent attempted honor killing and notes that Noor's status as "life-threatening condition".

TV notes. NOW on PBS begins airing on many PBS stations tonight (check local listings for times and for other dates if it doesn't air on your PBS station tonight):

Home to a worldwide summit on climate change in early December, Denmark is setting a global example in creating clean power, storing it, and using it responsibly. Their reliance on wind power to produce electricity without contributing to global warming is well known, but now they're looking to drive the point home with electric cars. To do this, they've partnered with social entrepreneur Shai Agassi and his company Better Place.
This week, NOW investigates how the Danish government and Better Place are working together to put electric cars into the hands of as many Danish families as possible. The idea is still having trouble getting out of the garage here in America, but Denmark could be an inspiration.
Will so much green enthusiasm bring about a "Copenhagen Protocol"?

Washington Week also begins airing tonight on many PBS stations and sitting around the table with Gwen this week are Ceci Connolly (Washington Post), John Dickerson (Slate and CBS News), Marilyn Serafini (National Journal) and Nancy A. Youssef (McClatchy Newspapers). Meanwhile Bonnie Erbe will sit down with Karen Czarnecki, Melinda Henneberger, Eleanor Holmes Norton and Genevieve Wood to discuss the week's events on PBS' To The Contrary. Check local listings, on many stations, it begins airing tonight. And turning to broadcast TV, Sunday CBS' 60 Minutes offers:

H1N1 Vaccine
Scott Pelley reports on the manufacture, distribution and safety of the H1N1 flu vaccine. Watch Video

Yakuza
How does a foreigner jump the line in America for a life-saving liver transplant? It might be because he is a high-ranking member of Japan's mafia, known as the Yakuza, whose criminal influence is worldwide. Lara Logan reports.

The Movie Pirates
They are the bane of Hollywood: criminals who copy films - sometimes before the movies even reach the theater - and distribute them illegally on the Internet, costing Hollywood billions in lost revenue. Lesley Stahl reports.

60 Minutes, this Sunday, Nov. 1, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.

iraq
npr
the diane rehm show
jonathan s. landay

mcclatchy newspapers
elise labott
kabc
subha ravindhran
the los angeles times
teresa watanabe
cbs news
jennifer logan
the washington post
walter pincus
neal conan
60 minutes
cbs news
pbs
to the contrary
bonnie erbe

Posted at 08:33 pm by politicsscree
Make a comment Permalink

Oct 29, 2009

thoughts on the elections & the congress

A determination to protect the power over the purse -- something Congress has fiercely guarded since the earliest days of the Republic -- was on display Thursday as the House and Senate approved a bill preserving funding for a number of programs the White House had sought to cut.

It was the latest move by lawmakers in both parties to support projects they consider important to their states -- and perhaps to their reelection prospects.

The bill, which would fund environmental programs and the Interior Department, includes hundreds of earmarks: $1.4 million for repairs at Alcatraz, $650,000 for preservation of the Santa Barbara mission and $1 million for land purchases in the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area, among others. That spending comes despite Obama's plea for lawmakers to scale back their controversial practice of steering money to pet projects.

that's from richard simon's 'congress bucks obama on spending cuts' (los angeles times) and I say good for them. they weren't elected by barack obama, they were elected by their constituents. they need to remember that - especially with midterm elections approaching.

they weren't elected by barack and they don't work for barack. and it's past time congress realized that. they work for their consitutents.

if i hear 1 more deluded dem in congress saying 'i just want to do my part for my president,' i'll scream. you do your part for your constituents. screw the president - whomever he or she may be. you work for your constituents and that should always be your 1st concern.

they should be asking each and every day: 'how did i serve the people in my district/state today?' and they should have an answer, a real answer.

if they don't, that's their 1st hint that they're not doing their jobs.

i see barack as a 1 term president. maybe he'll get re-elected, but i don't see it. let's say he does. okay, in 7 more years, many members of congress are still going to be in office. are they going to still be serving barry o?

or will they 'serve' the next president (dem, republican or whatever)?

they need to get focused on serving the communities that elected them.

the inability to do that is part of the reason so many are polling so badly. it's not just harry reid although he is probably the best known example.

and sorry but i hope jon corzine loses his race for re-election as governor.

don't dislike him.

but instead of making a case to the voters, he's got barry o breezing in and out of the state.

what the hell does barack have to do with new jersey?

not a damn thing.

and if jon corzine - already the sitting governor - can't make a case for himself to the voters of new jersey that persuades them, he doesn't deserve to continue to hold office.

let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

Thursday, October 29, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces another death, the Iraqi refugee crisis continues, problems with the public inquiry into the Iraq War the UK government plans to hold, no election law passed by the Iraqi Parliament, and more.

Today the US military announced: "JOINT BASE BALAD, Iraq – A Soldier who was currently assigned to the 13th Sustainment Command (Expeditionary) died Wednesday of a non-combat related injury at Camp Adder, Iraq. The name of the deceased is being withheld pending notification of next of kin and release by the Department of Defense.The names of service members are announced through the U.S. Department of Defense official website at http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/. The announcements are made on the Web site no earlier than 24 hours after notification of the service member's primary next of kin. The incident is under investigation." The announcement brings the total number of US service members killed in Iraq to 4353.

Meanwhile Sunday's Baghdad bombings have pretty much erased the August Baghdad bombings ("Bloody Wednesday," "Black Wednesday," "Gory Wednesday," "Iraq's 9-11," etc.). Press TV reports, "Iraq has arrested some 60 security forces over the weekend twin bombings which targeted government buildings in Baghdad, killing up to 153 people." The Sentinel states the 60 were compoes of "11 army officers and 50 security officials". Xinhua adds, "The arrested were in charge of providing security for a downtown Baghdad district which was hit by the deadly suicide attacks that targeted government buildings, Major General Qassim Atta said." BBC News notes, "The BBC's Gabriel Gatehouse in Baghdad says it is not clear whether those arrested are accused of negligence or collusion. However, he added, it seems to confirm what many people have suspected - that the security forces are susceptible to infiltration by insurgents or are just not up to the job." Reuters reports Qassim al-Moussawi, spokesperson for Baghdad security, "said that officers, foot soldiers and police in areas where attacks happen would be arrested in the future and placed under investigation." Jomana Karadsheh (CNN) adds, Baghdad Governor "Abdul Razzaq said security forces made mistakes and were negligent in their work, and he demanded a court-martial for those who allowed explosive-laden vehicles to get through checkpoints." Karadsheh also notes the number arrested is 61. Timothy Williams and Mohammed Hussein (New York Times) explain, "The statement Thursday that announced the arrest order came from Baghad Operations Command, which is responsible for security in the capital and reports directly to Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki. The statement did not offer any further details, so it remained unclear whether the 61 security force members were suspected of having adied those who carried out the attacks."

The death toll for the Sunday bombings is at least 155 and does include children. Mohammed Jamjoom (CNN) reports:

The force of the blast threw Rawnaq against the wall of her office at the Ministry of Justice. She instantly thought of her two children in the day care center just two floors below.
"I rushed downstairs and found all the children under the rubble," says Rawnaq, "My daughter Tabarak was standing near the stairs. My son Hamoodi outside. Me and a colleague took them out, running. A police car drove us to the hospital."
Both children were injured, 3-year-old Tabarak much more so than her 2-year-old brother. Severe head and back injuries have left the little girl needing extensive surgery and unable to sleep due to unceasing pain. She is also deeply afraid.

Back in August, the day before Bloody Wednesday, Iraqi Thug and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki was in Syria where he was demanding that nearly 200 Iraqis be handed over to Iraq. It was all like a bad acid flashback since Nouri spent years in Syria and the Syrians refused to turn him over at the whims of Saddam Hussein. Nouri was grateful back then, now he's just a raging drama queen. Bloody Wednesday came the next day and Nouri immediately blamed the bombings on Syria. He and his spokespeople and cabinet would sometimes say that it was former Ba'athists in Syria. Sometimes. Mainly they would rail against Syria. That hasn't ceased all this time later. Phil Sands (Le Monde) offers today that "Syria is perhaps the only country in the Arab middle east that can truly claim to be independent from the US, and Damascus remains a thorn in the side of American regional ambitions. [. . .] In the post-Saddam Hussein world, the Iraqi government is jealous of its sovereignty, an independence that goes only as deep as the presence of more than 100,000 American soldiers on Iraqi soil allows. There is little sign a planned pull-out will be complete." Syria has a huge number of Iraqi refugees and we'll turn now to the topic of Iraqi refugees. Joseph A. Kechichian (Gulf News) explains:

According to the International Organisation on Migration, there are still 1.6 million internally displaced Iraqis who cannot "return home". Many are trying to survive "without work, their own home, schooling for children, access to water, electricity and health care". These refugees are Iraqi citizens who are not represented in government but whose fates will probably determine whether the pool from which opposition forces can recruit bombers will shrink. As it is widely recognised, remnants of the Baath party or any number of the security services created by the old regime are still active, even if Baghdad and its allies continue to hearken to Al Qaida.

The United Nations' World Food Program has launched "a pilot project in Damascus" in which food vouchers are distributed "in the form of mobile phone text messages to Iraqi refugees. [. . .] Around one thousand families are involved in the four-month pilot phase, which will be extended if it is successful. The project has been developed in cooperation with the Syrian government, enabling the refugees to redeem their vouches in state-run stores in the Jaramana and Sayeda Zeinab neighourhoods of Damascus. The mobile phone service provider MTN has donated SIM cards for the project." Cassandra Vinograd (Wall St. Journal) reported Tuesday, "In the WFP program, each family will receive one $22 voucher per person every two months. After each transaction, families will receive an updated balance, also sent by SMS to their mobile numbers -- free of charge. There are more than 1.2 million displaced Iraqis in Syria, according to government figures. To date, about 130,000 regularly receive food assistance from WFP with complimentary food and non-food assistance from the U.N.'s refugee agency." Though some have criticized the WFP for targeting people with cell phones (under the mistaken belief that refugees wouldn't have them), Richard Spencer (Telegraph of London) reports, "The discovery that most of the 130,000 people to whom the organisation provided food vouchers had mobile phones gave officials the idea for the pilot scheme, to be targeted at 1,000 families in the first instance." Laura MacInnis (Reuters) quotes Emilia Casella, WFP spokesperson, stating, "They will be able to exchange their electronic vouchers for rice, wheat, flour, lentils, chickpeas, oil and canned fish, as well as cheese and eggs -- items that cannot usually be included in conventional aid baskets." Saeed Ahmed (CNN) quotes Casella stating, "It infuses some contribution to the communities, because we're not giving food away. They have to go to the local shops to buy it." Staying with Syria, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees expects more Iraqi refugees to flee to Syria as a result of Sunday's bombings. EU News Network states UNHCR spokesperson Andrej Mahecic "told a delegation in Geneva earlier this month that the United Nations recommended the resettlement of more than 80,000 Iraqi refugees to other countries." Meanwhile UNHCR is building homes in Taza, Iraq following bombings there this sumemr which ledft many people homeless, "Immediately after the blast, UNHCR field staff visited Taza to assess the damage and to distribute emergency aid to the survivors. The team found that about 160 houses, mostly made from mud bricks, had been totally destroyed and some 400 damaged. As a result, around 3,500 people were left without shelter. The refugee agency immediately swung into action, funding the reconstruction of 150 collapsed homes and the renovation of 73 shops and two other buildings in Shorja Market. The work was carried out by an Iraqi implementing partner as part of UNHCR's emergency shelter programme which has helped rehabilitate some 10,000 conflict-damaged buildings for refugees and internally displaced Iraqis and aims to double this figure in 2010." But in Syria, IRIN reports, a significant number of Iraqis are attempting to win asylum "across the Middle East to Europe and North America" and they note, "A year after its launch, strikingly few Iraqis have taken up the UN's Voluntary Repatriation Programme. Less than 300 families from Syria have returned to Iraq under the programme, though the number claiming resettlement has grown rapidly."

The Chicago Tribune did a multi-article series at the start of the week on Iraqi refugees in the US. The paper noted of one group: "Back home, they worked for the Americans, as translators, project specialists and office managers. For that, they received death threats from militants opposed to the U.S., and they ask to remain anonymous, fearing retribution against relatives in Iraq." Then there's Layla Mousa whose husband is in Jordan while she and their three children are in Chicago where she struggles to make ends meet, find work (she's a hair dresser) and rebuffs offers of payment for sex and states, "Now I want to go back to Iraq, not even Jordan. America is just a lie." Layla Mousa is among the Iraqi refugees who Ahlam Mahmoud attempts to asist even though she herself is a refugee: "She didn't have it easy herself. When she and her two children arrived in Chicago in 2008, she had only the clothes she was wearing when she left Syria, where, she says, she was imprisoned for refusing to spy on foreigners. The apartment they got in Chicago had three beds, one plate, a fork, a spoon and two knives." In Syria, Ahlam Mahmoud was also someone refugees turned to. Using her own resourceful nature, she quickly began developing a network of assistance and advice. Due to her connections, the Syrian government attempted to force her to spy on other Iraqi refugees. She refused and was thrown into prison. When the outcry and attention became too much, the Syrian govenment ordered her released from prison and she was quickly transported to the US. Also attempting to assist other refugees is Fatima Hindi who became an Iraqi government official, was then kidnapped and sought Egypt and then the US for safety along with her three-year-old daughter Takwa. She states, "They kidnapped me because of America. America couldn't protect me. When I first got here, I cried on the street."

Today Nancy Eshelman (Patriot-News) reports on Iraqi refugee Zina Alkubaisy who ended up in the United States with her husband and their children following her husband's kidnapping: "Alkubaisy began working the phones. She contacted people who knew people and eventually learned what militant group had snatched her husband. Her connections arranged to have him released the next day. But a chilling phone call warned the couple they would not be so lucky the next time. It would be in their best interest to leave the country."

The October 22nd snapshot noted the United Nations High Commisoner for Refguees (UNHCR) released a new report entitled "Asylum Levels and Trends in Inudstrialized Countries First Half 2009: Statistical overview of asylum applications lodged in Europe and selected non-European countries." The report found that Iraqis continued to be the number one aslyum-seekers around the globe. Last Friday UNHCR's Andrej Mahecic spoke on the issue of Iraqi refugees and the forcible deportation of them:

UNHCR is concerned about the fact that some European states have begun forcibly returning Iraqi originating from the region of Central Iraq over the last few months. In our guidelines issued last April, we noted that in view of the serious human rights violations and continuing security incidents throughout Iraq, most predominantly in the central governorates, asylum-seekers from these governorates should be considered to be in need of international protection. UNHCR therefore advises against involuntary returns to Iraq of persons originating from Central Iraq until there is a substantial improvement in the security and human rights situation in the country.

This reminder comes after the UK attempted to forcibly return 44 Iraqi men to Baghdad earlier this month. They were reportedly unsuccessful asylum claimants held in immigration removal centres in the UK. Iraq only accepted 10 who were allowed to leave the chartered aircraft in Baghdad, and the remaining 34 were returned to the UK and placed in immigration centres.

Other European states have signed readmission agreements with Iraq for voluntary and forced return. Denmark has forcibly returned 38 people originating mainly from Central and Southern Iraq since signing its agreement in May 2009. Sweden has undertaken some 250 forced returns with an unspecified number of returnees originating from the five central governorates of Iraq since signing an agreement in February 2008. UNHCR has also concerns about the safety and dignity of these returns.

Concerning asylum-seekers from the three northern governorates, as well as those from the southern governorates and Al Anbar, UNHCR recommends that their protection needs are assessed on an individual basis.

Colin Yeo (Guardian) evaluates the UK Home Office's attempt to forcibly deport Iraqi refugees this month:

The second problem is a profound lack of understanding or respect for the rule of law at all levels of UKBA. Six Iraqis were taken off the removals flight because they had managed to get in touch with good lawyers. A high court judge was persuaded that the flight might be unlawful because the route and destination were unknown and Iraq is a highly unstable country, as the appalling recent bomb attacks and interviews with those who did return to Iraq vividly demonstrate. The flight was no less unlawful for the other Iraqis yet UKBA went on regardless, simply because the other Iraqis did not manage to get a lawyer. Some may disagree with the refugee convention and human rights law, but they are the law of the land and while they remain so they must be respected.

But like an unruly toddler, the Home Office believes that what matters is whether they are caught, not what the rules are. Time and time again the Home Office is found to be acting unlawfully: on prolonged unlawful detention, secret policies, misleading the courts and failure to respect court judgments in the last fortnight alone. Substantial compensation is paid to some of the victims as a result. What UKBA fails to appreciate is that there are many, many more victims whose rights are violated but who never manage to secure the protection of the rule of law.

Friday's snapshot noted that Christians in northern Iraq were under attack again and weighing whether or not to leave Kirkuk. Richard Spencer (Telegraph of London) noted "Baghdad's dwindling Christian population. Even in the darkest days of Saddam Hussein's rule, it was a thriving community. Now it is half gone,d riven out by the casual lawlessness of the streets." Iraqi Christians make up a significant number of external refugees. (It should also be noted that Baghdad's Jewish community has been decimated since the start of the illegal war.) While much attention was given to the government buildings damaged and destroyed in Sunday's bombings, Adirenne S. Gaines (Charisma Magazine) reports that St. George's Church in Baghdad was also badly damaged. Though the issue wasn't important enough for the New York Times to put it in print, they did post a blog by Rod Nordland: "Built in 1936 by the British military during their occupation of Iraq, the church loast some of its famous stained-glass windows when the United States military bombed a nearby building in 1992, and more were destroyed during the invasion in 2003, leaving only three examples remaining. They were mementos of British regiments stationed there. Sunday the last three stained glass windows were blown out by suicide bomb blasts that destroyed three Iraqi government buildings nearby, according to the church's lay pastor, Faiz Georges." Episcopal Life notes the church has approximately 2,000 members.

On the issue of Iraq's religous minorities, Senator Carl Levin's office released the following statement Monday:

WASHINGTON -- Calling the plight of religious minorities in Iraq "a tragic consequence" of the war there, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., today introduced a Senate resolution calling on the U.S. government, Iraqi government and United Nations Mission in Iraq to take steps to alleviate the dangers facing these minority groups. Sens. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., and Dick Durbin, D-Ill., joined Levin in sponsoring the sense of the Senate resolution.
"While violence has declined in Iraq overall, religious minorities continue to be the targets of violence and intimidation," Levin said. "Members of many minority groups who have fled other parts of the country have settled in the north, only to find themselves living in some of the most unstable and violent regions of Iraq. We strongly urge the Iraqi government, the United Nations and the U.S. government to address this crisis without delay."
Of approximately 1.4 million Christians of various denominations living in Iraq in 2003, only 500,000 to 700,000 remain. Another minority group, the Sabean Mandeans, has seen its population decline by more than 90 percent. Iraq's Jewish community, once one of the largest in the Arab world, has almost ceased to exist.
According to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, members of religious minorities "have experienced targeted intimidation and violence, including killings, beatings, abductions, and rapes, forced conversions, forced marriages, forced displacement from their homes and businesses, and violent attacks on their houses of worship and religious leaders." The U.N. High Commissioner on Refugees reported that in 2008, there were an estimated 2.8 million internally displaced persons living in Iraq. Of that 2.8 million, nearly two out of three reported fleeing their home because of a direct threat to their lives, and, of that number, almost nine out of ten said they were targeted because of their ethnic or religious identity.
The resolution introduced by the senators addresses the tragedy in several ways. It states the sense of the Senate that the fate of Iraqi religious minorities is a matter of grave concern and calls on the U.S. government and the United Nations to urge Iraq's government to increase security at places of worship, particularly where members of religious minorities are known to face risks. The resolution calls for the integration of regional and religious minorities into the Iraqi security forces, and for those minority members to be stationed within their own communities. The resolution calls on the Iraqi government to ensure that minority citizens can participate in upcoming elections, and to enforce its constitution, which guarantees "the administrative, political, cultural, and educational rights" of minorities. Finally, it urges a series of steps to ensure that development aid and other forms of support flow to minority communities in Iraq.

Iraq is the source of more external refugees than any other country currently; however, Iraq does have refugees in its own country including the Palestinians who are trapped on borders and largely ignored by the global community as they live lives as prisoners, unable to leave Iraq and unable to leave the tented, border communities they've been exiled to since the start of the illegal war. In addition to the Palestinians, there are the Iranian refugees of the MEK. Welcomed into Iraq by Saddam Hussein decades ago, they've called Iraq home for some time. The Iranian government doesn't care for them so you know Nouri's going to jump when that government snaps. Until 2009, the US was protecting the MEK who reside in Camp Ashraf. Nouri gave the US government repeated assurances that he would respect the refugees. Then, on July 28th, he launched an assault on Camp Ashraf.

Saturday Jamshid Karegarfar's account of what happened was published in the Washington Times:

The situation came to a head July 28, when some 2,000 Iraqi forces stormed Ashraf, and to add insult to injury, used American Humvees and weapons to do so, while the Americans stood by and watched. The attack left 11 dead and 500 injured - and the Iraqis took 36 Ashraf residents as hostages. I was one of them.

At first, we were held outside Ashraf. During the first days of captivity we were severely beaten, and went through physical and psychological torture. Some of us who were run over by Humvees and hit by bullets were in excruciating pain.

Then, we were transferred to the local prison in the city of Khalis. From there, they took us to an Iraqi military intelligence detention center and finally to the prison at al-Muthana airfield.The goal was to break us down. But we refused to give in.

In protestof the raid and being taken hostage, we went to a hunger strike and refused food for weeks, and we prayed for deliverance. We had no idea what was happening or why we were being held. And we had no idea of the support we were getting around the world.

The government or 'government' out of Baghdad can't help the refugees or their own people. They can't even pass an election law apparently. "If it doesn't make a deal before this weekend, Iraq will run out of time to organize an election before Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's term expires," Renee Montagne observed on today's Morning Edition (NPR).

Renee Montagne: What, Quil, is at stake with the delay of this election law?

Quil Lawrence: Well, as you say, the Iraqi prime minister and his government's term run out on January 31st so the election commission here has said they need 90 days to organize a legitimate poll and Parliament is deadlocked on over a dozen or so complicated issues regarding the election. They may vote on it today. If the elections are delayed or if they are rushed, there's a risk that Iraq's government could be deemed illegitimate and then a whole Pandora's Box of problems can open up -- issues of legitimacy of the government, maybe even a crisis like we've seen in Afghanistan. One big question is whether the US has done enough to push it through, especially since their plan to pull out 70,000 troops by August can't really start until the elections are done.

Renee Montagne: Well six years on the ground in Baghdad, hasn't the American embassy there worked up a fair amount of what you might call institutional knowledge regarding Iraqi politics?

Quil Lawrence: Well the problem is it took the Obama administration four months to get an ambassador confirmed and out here and that's taken that ambassador another couple of months to assemble a new political team. So he's got a good number of people with expertise in the region -- a good number of Arabic speakers -- but they've never been to Iraq before, many of them. So before they can have much influence, they need to learn who the players are and build these personal relationships with them and that could take months and years.

Renee Montagne: Although haven't American diplomats been, in a sense, pressing the flesh at the Parliament.

Quil Lawrence: There's been as many as six of them at a time over at the Parliament but it's sometimes curious who they're meeting with or not meeting with on the Iraqi side. And like I said, they're just getting up to speed so it's possible they could walk right past a very important Iraqi politician in the halls of Parliament and not even know him by face.

Okay, on the above. On pulling out troops (which is the draw-down, not the "withdrawal" as so many outlets keep insisting -- confusing the two in a way that even the White House doesn't) and how it can't start until after the election?

Yesterday, the KRG swore in their prime minister's cabinet. Yesterday. Elections were held in July. In December 2005, Iraq last held the national elections. Nouri comes along in April as the US-installed prime minister (after the US rejected the Iraqis first choice). In May, he announces his cabinet. Point? The counting of the votes, the verifying and assorted other issues mean the elections are not 'over' in January even if held then. As for a vote happening as early as today, CNN reports that as well but notes, "The Kurdish bloc in the Iraqi parliament intends to boycott the vote on a proposed election law if the oil-rich province of Kirkuk is banned from voting in next year's national elections, two Kurdish lawmakers say." Mu Xuequan (Xinhua) reports that "the Iraqi parliamentary legal committee again failed to reach a compromise over Kirkuk issue, and decided to delay Thursday's parliament session to Sunday, an official in the parliament told Xinhua." This, Xuequan reports, despite efforts today by US Ambassador to Iraq Chris Hill and the top US commander in Iraq Gen Ray Odierno to "urge" Iraqi politicians to pass a law.

No law was passed but violence continued . . .

Bombings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing injured five people and a Mosul suicide bomber took his own life.

Shootings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports an armed attack on a Mosul police checkpoint which left 3 police officers dead and an armed clash in Mosul in which one person was injured.

Today is the 2413 day of the Iraq War. Jake Armstrong (Pasadena Weekly) notes that and other facts -- and he notes Iraq facts each week, by the way, in his "The Count."

In England, Peter Walker (Guardian) reports that the inquiry into the Iraq War will hear evidence starting November 24th and that former Prime Minister Tony Blair will be offering public testimony. Chris Ames (at The Index on Censorship) reports:

As the Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq war announces its first public hearings, serious concerns about censorship and secrecy are beginning to arise. Some of those who are thinking about giving evidence are wondering how free they will be to do so and whether the evidence they present will ever see the light of day.

Tony Blair's upcoming appearance at the Inquiry has taken centre stage, with his actions on Iraq threatening his bid to become the first EU president. While Blair won't face prosecution in this Inquiry for launching the war, witnesses fear they might be prosecuted for talking about it.

Other political factors also play a role in the timing of the hearings, which will open on 24 November. Sir John Chilcot said that the Inquiry intends to stop these hearings during the general election campaign, expected in the spring. It appears that the move is intended to limit the possibility for highly charged appearances or new disclosures to influence voters. This should not be a consideration for the Inquiry, which is supposedly independent of government.

Chilcot has also suggested that the Inquiry's report, which is not expected until at least the end of next year, might not be published in full but might include a secret annexe dealing with intelligence matters.

Meanwhile in Malaysia tomorrow and Saturday, Meena L. Ramadas (Sun Daily) reports, a tribunal, the War Criminal Conference and Exhibition, will be held which will hear from "a Sudanese reporter and a Briton who were detained without trial in Guantanamo Bay" "in an effort to bring Iraq war perpetrators to justice." Tun Mahathir bin Mohamad (Malaysia's prime minister from 1981 to 2003) will be the keynote speaker and he states, "International institutions and the courts established by the United Nations charter have done nothing in dealing with war crimes. Even the powerful nations like the United States and the United Kingdom have done nothing."

War is big business. Tom Fowler (Houston Chronicle) reports that with KBR getting less work in Iraq, it "reported a 14 percent drop in third-quarter profit". KBR insists it did professional work. Few not currently working for KBR who've seen their work in Iraq make the same assertions. KBR's shoddy work may be responsible for multiple deaths of US citizens -- death by shower. On the topic of death by shower, Jeremy Scahill's "Pentagon Investigation Iraq Electrocution Death" (The Nation) reports:

The Department of Defense has confirmed that the US Army Criminal Investigation Command has launched a formal investigation into the electrocution death of 25-year-old Adam Hermanson, a US Air Force veteran-turned private security contractor who died in a shower at the compound of his employer, Triple Canopy, at Camp Olympia inside Baghdad's Green Zone on September 1, 2009. The State Department's Regional Security Office is also investigating.
The DoD appears to be placing responsibility for the deadly incident squarely on Triple Canopy. "As part of the terms and conditions of the JCC-I/A contract, Triple Canopy is solely responsible for providing billeting, showers, latrines and other life support activities to its employees at Camp Olympia," according to Under Secretary of Defense Ashton B. Carter. Hermanson is the nineteenth US soldier or contractor to die from electrocution in Iraq since 2003.

KBR denies having anything to do with the wiring which, if true, would mean they weren't responsible for the above shock . . . just approximately 230 other ones.

The heartbeat went out of our house
The rhythm went out of our romance
But in life that happens and you just have to remember to breathe . . .

That's from Carly Simon's "Coming Around Again" as redone on her latest album, Never Been Gone. Today she was on NPR's Talk Of The Nation and discussed a variety of topics including singing with Lucy Simon in the Simon Sisters and recently on the phone. In terms of revisiting ten of her classic songs for the new album, Carly observes, "Yes, it was a very interesting kind of synergy between the old and the new." To hear her segment with host Neal Conan click here and note NPR online has paired it up with her 2008 concert which you can also stream. Click here to watch Carly on Monday's Good Morning America (ABC). Carly Simon appeared on NBC's Today Show yesterday and performed "You Belong To Me."

iraq

jomana karadsheh

timothy williams
the new york times

rod nordland

richard spencer
the telegraph of london

press tv
the sentinel

bbc news
gabriel gatehouse

cnn
mohammed jamjoons
npr
morning edition
renee montagne
quil lawrence
jeremy scahill
carly simon
talk of the nation
neal conan

Posted at 08:30 pm by politicsscree
Make a comment Permalink

Oct 28, 2009

carly coming around again

"I truly feel as if I was born a musician," Ms. Simon says. "I was born with a little bit of a faucet in my head that was always dripping music. It was always giving me a melody at any given time...At any time, talking to you or cleaning up my bathroom, you can stop me and say all right, turn on the faucet and let me hear what's coming out, and I can give you a melody. It doesn't make it good," she adds, "but I have this melody drip."

Writing lyrics is her way of problem solving, her way of seeing things from an often necessary distance.

It has been well chronicled that it has not been easy nor uncomplicated being Carly Simon. Now, at 64, she has initiated a multi-million dollar lawsuit against Starbucks, for "concealment of material facts," and "unlawful, unfair and fraudulent business practices" - what she claims is the corporation's failure to meet its contractual obligations in promoting and marketing "This Kind of Love," her 2008 album that failed to find its audience.

"So it sends the message to everyone that the record is a dud," Ms. Simon says. "It was very hard to get out of that mire. I was really hit hard. I couldn't really do anything because my hands were tied. Starbucks still owned me, even though they weren't marketing me...I couldn't go to another labeI. I had to wait a year before putting out a new album." Her voice grows more animated and expressive. "I poured my heart into that album...It felt like 'pieces on the ground' - a lyric from one of my ex-husband's songs."

that's from ck wolfson's 'catching up with carly simon' (martha's vineyard times) and you know i love gossip so here's some.

what i'm hearing - true or false - is that carly's wrong about the album sales.

what i'm hearing is that starbucks lied about how much the album sold.

to avoid paying her.

that the sales she's talking about are based on borders books and targets and other stores like that. but that starbucks - which did a bad job selling the cd - didn't officially include the sales from their own stores. by 'officially' i mean they cheated and lied and it's called theft.

there's some gossip to keep in mind.

and if you bought a copy of this kind of love at starbucks, ask yourself: 'did they scan it? did your receipt show the title of the album?' the answer is no.

the easiest way to prove that the sales were correct would be to find out how many were shipped to starbucks around the country and how many returned.

again, the gossip is that carly sold a lot better (some say 150,000 more copies, some say as high as 250,000 more copies) at starbucks than she knows.

it's just gossip at this point and it may not be true.

if it's not true, i'm sure starbucks would willingly fork over the books that they seem reluctant to share at present.

so carly simon's new album is never been gone and you really, really need to get it.

if you've ever had a bad break up, you really need to hear 'it happens everyday.' and if you haven't had a bad break up, who the hell have you dated!!!!

seriously, grab the album, it's wonderful.

let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

Wednesday, October 28, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces another death, still no election law in Iraq, more on the Iraqi govenrment's desire to go nuclear, Najaf gets a new bank, the KRG gets a new cabinet, and more.

The US military announced yesterda: "CAMP VICTORY, Iraq – A Multi-National Corps-Iraq Soldier died today of a non-combat related injury at Camp Victory. The name of the deceased is being withheld pending notification of next of kin and release by the Department of Defense. The names of service members are announced through the U.S. Department of Defense official website at http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/. The announcements are made on the Web site no earlier than 24 hours after notification of the service member's primary next of kin. The incident is under investigation." DoD identifes the fallen as Maj David L. Audo from Saint Joseph, Illinois who was 35-years-old. The announcement brings the total number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 4352.

"How stable is Iraq?" asked Riz Khan last night on his self-titled Al Jazeera program. "Stable enough for national elections in January?" He was joined by a panel consisting of Iraqi Laith Kubba, the New America Foundation's Steven Clemmons and one-time director of the US Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq J. Scott Carpenter.

Riz Khan: Let me ask a question that came from our Facebook page, and I'll put this to Steven Clemmons here, this came from Ninveh Albazi in California, Steven, here in the US. And Ninveh says, "The longer the US military stays, the more terrorists will come in Iraq to fight. If they leave, more bombings over power will occur. Either way the Iraqi people will suffer." How do you feel about that -- the presence of -- US presence actually being a trigger for these kind of attacks?

Steven Clemmons: Well I think that there are some people in society -- and we've seen it throughout the Middle East -- that react very viscerally and negatively to the sense that they're being occupied by foreign troops. In Afghanistan, it's one of the things that's driving Pashtun resistance beyond the question of, uh, the Taliban. And-and so, I think it would be wrong to-to-to argue that in fact the American troop presence doesn't drive some violent minorities. I think on the whole, Iraqi society has felt as if the United States has done more beneficial things recently and so those feelings are not as widespread. But-but certainly there are people like Robert Pape at the University of Chicago among others that have shown that foreign troop deployments do drive a kind of -- drive suicide bombings, drive some of the more radical responses from societies. So there is some truth to it. I don't think I would agree with the-the decibel level of the questioner's comments though.

Riz Khan: Well, Laith, this came in via Twitter to us, a viewer by the name of Mosharraf Zaidi who says, "Even with stability in Iraq, does Maliki have the sense to ensure a free and fair process? Is it even up to him?"

Laith Kubba: Well, I mean, the good news is there is sufficient, I think, awareness and organization in Iraq to have elections that are, generally speaking, fair and free. I think the last elections had a high turnout -- about 70%. Of course, there were cases of fraud. But by and large, I think it was representative. So that's on the good side. But I think on the negative side, even if you had representatives in Parliament, the system is in a grid-lock because it's a parliamentary system, not a presidential system. It does not produce an effective executive that takes the country and move forward. You have, ultimately, a quote over power and that paralyzes government.

Riz Khan: I'll get to the intracacise of that in a moment because there are some interesting intracacies to the elections in Iraq but, Scott, if I could put this to you from LiveStation chat room, people are online here, Crane in the USA says, "How can fair and transparant elections be ensured when there are repeated bombings?" And let me ask you, do you think the elections will go ahead in January with all the delays and potential problems?

J. Scott Carpenter: I do. I'm a perinally optimist about this, that at the last minute -- however late the last minute is, the Iraqis will find some way to have these elections because they see how important they are to the political future of Iraq, to American withdrawal -- frankly. I do think there will be elections that are credible in Iraq because people don't trust each other and so there will be lots of observation which is what drove the credibility and legitimacy of the provincial elections is that there were so many political party observers watching one another that when the results were broadcast, no one really questioned the legitimacy of the results.

Riz Khan: Steven Clemmons, do you think the west, there are those who think the west is really pushing for the elections as a way of closure to finally dust their hands and finally close the chapter on Iraq.

Steven Clemmons: I don't think it's just to dust their hands and put a punctuation point. I mean I think everyone would like to see that what we did there succeeded in something. But I think that we've seen Iraqi society already get near ripping itself in shreds internally and the reason why elections and civil institution building and these democratic processes which J. and Laith were speaking about are so important is it creates opportunites for cohesive and collaborative governance within Iraq. That if it doesn't proceed and move forward, the place has a high possibility of pulling itself apart. So I think it's much more than us saying we're done with this -- with this experiment although, clearly, I would like us to move on as well and see Iraqi society take responsibility for itself succeed. But on the other hand, I think that this is an important part of showing that the Iraqi government can have some durability and sustainability after we begin to much more greatly downsize our troop presence.

Riz Kahn: We have this came in, I'll put this to you, Laith, this comes in from Facebook as well and it's from Cambodia where a viewer by the name of Heidi Aljani in Pursat says, "We were warned of the United States' prolonged military presence when Obama spoke of Iraq. The new excuse: Iraqi people and their government are to blame for the inability to govern themselves." Now do you believe that the elections are definite and looking at this issue that Iraq has too much of an issue trying to govern itself. What's your view?

Laith Kubba: Well two things. Number one, I think elections will take place, that's not the issue. Yes, there is a problem currently in finding the right formula on how Iraq should govern itself. But I think by and large, it is the right thing to do is to leave Iraqis to work it out for themselves; however, that does not mean walking out. I think it's really too idealistic. I think that will create enough power vacuum and might lead to escalating violence where the US has to send back some troops and intervene again.

Staying with the issue of the elections, this morning Dow Jones reports that the KRG's represenative Qubad Talabani is stating that, following the January elections, the draft oil law may "finally pass." Sahar Issa and Hannah Allam (McClatchy Newspapers) report that a bill may be presented "to parliament for a vote within days". Qassim Abdul-Zahra (AP) reports that KRG President Massoud Barzani "demanded" today that Kirkuk become a part of the Kurdistan Region. Kirkuk is disputed territory due to Saddam Hussein forcing Kurds out of the region during his reign. Both the Baghdad-based government or 'government' and the KRG claim Kirkuk really belongs to them. This is not a new issue. It is so not a new issue that the 2005 Iraqi Constitution addressed the issue and mandated that a referendum be held on the matter. Article 140 has never been followed. The issue has not been resolved. It is repeatedly pushed aside. Sort of like the draft election law. Weeks ago was the deadline for passing the elections law and the deadline was missed. Appearing before the US House Armed Services Committee last week, the Pentagon's Michele Flournoy insisted that time remained:

Although the government of Iraq's self-imposed deadline of October 15th for passing the elections law has passed, we judge that the COR [Council Of Representatives] still has another week or two to come to some kind of an agreement on the elections law before it will put the January date -- the early January date -- in jeopardy in terms of the election commission's ability to actually physically execute the, uh, the election. If a new law with open lists is not passed, the fall back solution for them is to return to the 2005 election law which is based on a closed list system. But that could be used for upcoming elections, the COR would simply have to vote on an election date. If that law is not passed in the next two weeks, they will be looking at slipping the date to later in January which would still be compliant with the [Iraqi] Constitution but would be later than originally planned.

It is now one week since Flournoy claimed Iraq had two weeks. There is no progress. The same day she was testifying to Congress, " Rod Nordland (New York Times) reported, "The Iraqi Independent High Electoral Commission and United Nations elections experts have said Iraq needs at least 90 days to adequately prepare for the vote. Iraq's existing election law was declared unconstitutional by its highest court, which said it needs to be replaced or amended." The court ruling would appear to render obsolete Flournoy's claim that the law for the 2005 elections could still be used with just passage of legislation for a new date. In addition, 90 days? There are 3 days left in this month, 30 in November and 31 in December. That's 64.

90 days needed. 90 minus 64 (check my math always) is 26 days. That would be January 26th, if legislation passed Parliament today. If. And maybe. The Iraqi Freedom Congress' Amjad Ali weighs in with "Amid violence, Iraq Freedom Congress calls for a sovereign, secular, transitional government" (Flesh & Stone):

Over nearly seven years the "political process" did not result in anything but ferocious fighting between the forces and the parties that were part of this process in order to gain as much privilege, influence, power and wealth as possible. This conflict resulted in prolongation of the political chaos, an insecurity in Iraq, exacerbated poverty and destitution, and curtailed social and health services.
The elections, one of the mechanisms of imposing the "political process," have never solved the issue of the power struggle because none of the elections held changed the sectarian and ethnic quotas. And that means the elections merely reproduced the same forces that are currently in power.
All of the elections have been characterized by farces such as fraud, political assassinations, and the delayed announcement of voting results until agreements among the influential forces had been reached. However, after every election, we witnessed an increase of violence and terrorist activities as part of political arm twisting among these forces.
National reconciliation was one of the themes to bring together the political movements that did not participate in power sharing with the forces that supported the war and occupation. The reconciliation was projected by the occupation administration to involve the pan-Arab nationalist forces who were excluded from the formation of a new Iraq to impose security and political stability. However, fears of the parties in power (political Islam, Shiite in particular, and Kurdish nationalists) has undermined national reconciliation.
In the midst of the current political situation, neither the occupation nor the successive governments have been able to establish a state in Iraq. The conflict among the parties and the forces has always been a key factor in that lack of progress. Moreover, the conflict over what would be the identity of the state -- whether an Islamist Shiite, a Islamist Sunni, Arab nationalist, or federal moderate Islamist --is another obstacle to the establishment of an Iraqi state.
The ongoing violence, which is another form of political conflict, will not end through a political process that was brought by the occupation. And the experience of nearly seven years of conflict between the political forces taught us that the violence would not be terminated. In fact, it would only reproduce more violence and terror. What is happening today, such as restructuring old alliances and forming new ones and the escalation of the conflicts within the one party, is an explanation of how deep the crisis is. As a result we could hear the prime minister and a number of political parties calling for an end to the rule of consensus or democracy through consensus.

Whenever the elections take place, they'll be the first national elections since 2005. In January 2009, provincial elections were held in 14 of Iraq's 18 provinces. In July the Kurdistan Region's three provinces held their elections. Today KRG Prime Minister Barham Salih's cabinet was sworn in: "Dr Salih was appointed Prime Minister by the Kurdistani List coalition, which won the Kurdistan Region parliamentary elections in July with 58 percent of the vote, and voter turnout of nearly 80 percent. Mr Azad Barwari, a senior member of the Kurdistan Democratic Party, was appointed Deputy Prime Minister." AFP reports the swearing in was "clouded by several MPs walking out after a refusal of separate votes for each minister." Vahal (Mideast Youth) offers this:

In a ceremony attended by the president of the region, Mr. Massoud Barzani, the outgoing PM, Mr. Nichervan Barzani as well as the Iraqi first lady, Mrs. Hero Ibrahim Ahmad, the sixth cabinet was sworn in at the Parliament.

The new cabinet will have only one woman, Asos Najib Abdullah who will be the minister of labor and social affairs.

Here is some poetic justice, the man who sentenced Saddam Hussein to death by hanging, judge Ra'ouf Rashid will now be the minister of Justice in Barham Salih's cabinet.

Sunday's bombings resulted in many deaths which means many burials. Saad Fakhrildeen (Los Angeles Times) reports, "The cars streamed into Najaf over the last two days as families buried loved ones killed in Sunday's double bombing in Baghdad. By Tuesday afternoon, what was thought to be the last of the dead were brought to the Valley of Peace cemetery, the most sacred burial ground for Iraq's Shiite majority. Undertaker Mehdi Assadi had listened to mourners' screams as at least 80 of the estimated 155 killed in Sunday's Baghdad bombings were buried in the Valley of Peace." Deutsche Presse-Agentur reports approximately 60 children are still missing following Sunday's Baghdad bombings with some believing they may be buried/trapped under the rubble and the Iraqi military rejecting the assertion with the following statement: "There is no truth in reports that there are bodies under the rubble of the Ministry of Justice in Baghdad. All the martyrs and injrued have been taken to hospitals." The military is awfully sure of themselves. Suprising when you consider Monday's report by Miguel Martinez on ABC's World News Tonight with Charlie Gibson where Martinez showed some of the destruction and noted, "This is the hole created by the explosion. It goes down about twenty-five feet. The blast was so powerful they burst a water main, flooding this section of Baghdad. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki who faces re-election in January has campaigned on his ability to make Iraq safer. His opponents say this bombings proves the military is infiltrated." If you saw the broadcast, you know no one could see to the bottom of the crater -- the very wide crater -- because it was filled with water. On Sunday's bombings, an Iraqi correspondent for McClatchy poses a number of questions at Inside Iraq, beginning with: "Is it completely correct to keep accusing only the neighboring countries all the time? If we assume they are involved, who implement their plans in Iraq?"

Yesterday's snapshot noted Martin Chulov (the Guardian) report on Iraq attempting to "become a nuclear player [. . .] The Iraqi government has approached the French nuclear industry about rebuilding at least one of the reactors that was bombed at the start of the first Gulf War. The government has also contacted the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and United Nations to seek ways around resolutions that ban Iraq's re-entry into the nuclear field." Today he does an audio report at the Guardian on the issue.

Martin Chulov: I think Iraqi politicians are looking around and they're seeing that they're out of options as far as delivering services to their -- to their constituents. It's got no electricity capacity, or very little. It has very little water capacity. And not much for science and technology so they figure now that a new reactor may help them serve their energy needs and all sorts of other scientific and health needs that might lead them forward.

Jon Dennis: Iraq hasn't had a very happy history with its nuclear technology.

Martin Chulov: It certainly hasn't. Three decades of Saddam during which he attempted to make good and maintain a nuclear program ended in catastrophe. All three nuclear reactors were bombed and destroyed. And he was invaded twice, partly on the basis that he had these reactors. So it's been a long and fraught and ultimately fruitless history with nuclear energy in Iraq but now, six years after Saddam was ousted, the Iraqis are looking to have another go at it.

Jon Dennis: But how could Iraq ensure that any new nuclear facility would be secure?

Martin Chulov: And this is indeed the problem and this is going to be a giant step -- a giant obstacle in getting any sort of approval. Iraq is a signatory to a number of non-proliferation treaties that were -- that were imposed after the invasion and which a number of yellow cake vials did, in fact, go missing. There are some contaminets out here in the Iraqi community that have not been recovered in six years since. Iraq has shown a very limited capacity to ensure its essential sites including four of its ministries which have been destroyed over the past three months by suicide bombers who have been able to drive straight up to the gates.

The report is a segment of Guardian Daily, the newspaper's daily audio broadcast. Today Oliver August (Times of London) observes:

Iraq's new masters insist they have no intention of trying to develop nuclear bombs. "We are co-operating with the IAEA and expanding and defining areas of research where we can implement nuclear technology for peaceful means," the Science and Technology Minister, Raid Fahmi, told the Guardian.
That is unlikely to reassure Iraq's neighbours, however, given the chaotic conditions that reign in the country.
The insurgency is by no means subdued, with a group linked to Iraqi al-Qaeda claiming responsibility for the latest bombings, which killed more than 155 people on Sunday. The Sunni extremist group said on a website that its "martyrs . . . targeted the dens of infidelity".

The New Zealand Herald adds, "Iraq has also begun lobbying the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the United Nations to overturn resolutions which ban Iraq using atomic energy." At Iran's Press TV, a commentator named Jaled Ali Ayoub shares this opinion, "wake up, stupids they destroyed all irak with their amunitions and know they are going to reconstract irak with the companies, owned by them and paid by all the irakis population. You cannt by more ignorents, because when the morality of the iraks gain the power of irak, i sware that they will destroy it again. look to another horizon the green go and the english, they only represents death to all arabs and muslim. 10 of billions of US$ was stolen from your country."

Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Jenan Hussein (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing which wounded six people, a Baghdad sticky bombing which claimed the lives of 3 women and left four men injured and a Mosul roadside bombing which claimed 4 lives and left six people injured. Reuters notes a Tikrit roadside bombing "blew up an oil tanker" claiming 2 lives in the process ("the driver and his assistant"). Lin Zhi (Xinhua) reports a Diyala Province bombing which left three people injured (one female, two males) and a Diyala Proinvce "makeshift bomb" wounded a father and son.

Shootings?

Reuters notes that Iraqi and US forces "killed a suspsected al Qaeda member" in Mosul yesterday.

Meanwhile Mu Xueuqan (Xinhua) reports Ban Ki-moon, UN Secretary-General, stated today that the UN will send someone to the country "for preliminary consulations related to Iraq's security and sovereignty." Khaled Farhan (Reuters) reports Najaf has a new bank, "In one of Shi'ite Islam's holiest cities, a bank has opened a branch only for women, hoping to tap a potentially large market and meet pent-up demand from Muslim women for financial services that meet their needs."

The Iraq War drags on and, if you doubt that, you're not paying attention. In the US, Pamela E. Walck (Savannah Morning News) reports Fort Stewart is sending 400 soldiers from the 2nd Heavy Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry to Iraq for a year. Jessica Fitzgerald's husband (Spc Kevin Fitzgerald) is among those deploying and she tells Walck, "This is his second deployment. It's not any easier this time." Spc Carla Robinson tells Walck, "I'm really feeling pretty positive right now. The sooner we get there, the sooner we can come home." And Sgt Brandon Bodily states, "This is my first deployment. I'm just hoping I come back safely." P. Norman Moody (Floriday Today) reports, "Florida National Guard soldiers from Cocoa began intense training this week for deployment in January to Iraq and Kuwait. The Guard's 53rd Infantry Brigade kicked off the training for 2,500 troops in what's expected to be the largest single-unit deployment of the Florida National Guard since World War II." Meanwhile Sify News reports that India qill not be sending troops to Iraq or Afghanistan according to Defense Minister A.K. Anthony. That declaration came on the same day that UPI reports, "U.S. and Indian forces wrapped up their largest joint military exercise to date, practicing a set of maneuvers simulating environments in Iraq and Afghanistan."

Turning to the US. Tony Perry (Los Angeles Times) reports the US military believes they've stumbled onto a category of people with an advanced level of detection when it comes to roadside bombs: "Military researchers have found that two groups of personnel are particularly good at spotting anomalies: those with hunting backgrounds, who traipsed through the woods as youths looking to bag a deer or turkey; and those who grew up in tough urban neighborhoods, where it is often important to know what gang controls which block." You have to wonder why the military can spend money studying that but they can never seem to study rape within the ranks? That issue was a topic yesterday on Democracy Now! (link has text, video and audio) as Amy Goodman and Sharif Abdel Kouddous spoke with a director of a new documentary.

AMY GOODMAN: Rape in the Ranks: The Enemy Within is a documentary that focuses on the cases of three female service members victimized by rape and other forms of sexual assault. One of the victims, Tina Priest, she was found dead in Iraq in March 2006, just weeks after she had accused a male soldier of raping her. Her family was told she took her own life, but they don't believe that. They think she may have been killed because she came forward with the rape accusation. In this scene from the film, Tina Priest's mother, Joy Priest, visits her daughter's gravesite.

PASCALE BOURGAUX: How did she die?

JOY PRIEST: She died in Iraq from what the Army says was a self-inflicted gunshot wound to her chest. That's what the Army says. I don't -- I don't know how she died. I want to find out how she died.

PASCALE BOURGAUX: What do you think?

UNIDENTIFIED: Don't know what to think.

JOY PRIEST: There are so many different opinions. I don't -- I don't see her killing herself. But if she did, I can understand why --

PASCALE BOURGAUX: Why?

JOY PRIEST: -- she did. Yes, because of the trauma that she had been through with the rape and the way that people treated her afterwards. And so, I can see how she would be depressed enough to do that. But it's not like her.

AMY GOODMAN: An excerpt of Rape in the Ranks: The Enemy Within. For more, we're joined by the film's director, Pascale Bourgaux, a French journalist and filmmaker. The film had its premiere last night here in New York at the Independent Film Festival.

Welcome to Democracy Now! Talk about Tina and the other three women you profile.

PASCALE BOURGAUX: So, Tina, the -- you've seen in the excerpt, it's -- I mean, the family is still looking for the truth, because they're convinced that she didn't commit suicide, that she was killed. But the case is dead. They asked answer -- they ask answer to the Army, but they never -- you know, they never answer those questions they raised. And then, the three other cases. There is Suzanne. She was raped by her command. She deserted. She refused to go back to Iraq to escape from her commander. And then she was in jail.

Finally, Grammy, Academy Award and Golden Globe winning singer-songwriter Carly Simon appeared on NBC's Today Show this morning and performed "You Belong To Me." The Carly classic (which Carly co-wrote with the Doobie Brothers' Michael McDonald) is part of a new album released this week, Never Been Gone. Carly offers two songs she hadn't previously recorded for commercial release as well as ten of her best-loved classics that she's reimagined to find diferent levels in and meanings to including "You're So Vain," "Anticipation," "Let The River Run," "The Right Thing To Do," "Boys In The Trees" and "That's The Way I've Always Heard It Should Be." Thursday she's on Tavis Smiley (PBS) and also on NPR's Talk Of The Nation. Click here to watch Carly on Monday's Good Morning America (ABC).

iraq

martin chulov

the guardian
jon dennis

al jazeera

the new york times
rod nordland

iraqi freedom congress
amjad ali

mcclatchy newspapers
hannah allam

sahar issa

the los angeles times
saad fakhrildeen

abc news
world news tonight with charlie gibson
miguel marquez

the times of london
oliver august

jenan hussein