 |
Thursday, February 12, 2009
The return of secular Baathists comes after years of rule by Shiite leaders and nearly six years after the Bush administration purged party members from the government and military in 2003. Many Sunnis responded to de-Baathification, to the U.S.-led occupation and to attacks by Shiite militias by allying themselves with al Qaida in Iraq and other militant Sunni groups, but many have since rejected Islamic fundamentalism.
The Baathists' return "is indicative of a larger rethinking of de-Baathification," said Michael Wahid Hanna, a program officer at The Century Foundation, a New York-based nonprofit public policy research group.
Shiite Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki's government recently invited exiled former Iraqi Army officers -- almost all of them Baathists -- to return to Iraq and apply for jobs, an olive branch aimed at building national unity.The above garbage is from Trenton Daniel's " Saddam's party makes comeback, but they're not the same Baathists" ( McClatchy Newspapers). Why is it garbage? Well how about the fact that we noted the story being reported by Iraqi media? Yesterday morning as a number rushed to ga-ga-goo-goo over al-Maliki, it was necessary to point out that no US outlet was reporting the developing story about the Baathists that had been all over the Iraqi media. And now Trenton wants to show up late for the party, after all the guests have left and stand pounding on the front door, drunk and with all the basic facts soooooooooooo wrong. Here's a lie from the mouth of Trenton: "Shiite Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki's government recently invited exiled former Iraqi Army officers -- almost all of them Baathists -- to return to Iraq and apply for jobs, an olive branch aimed at building national unity." We'll again note Ma'ad Fayad's " Iraqi Dawa Party Official: No dialogue with Armed Groups" (Asharq Alawsat -- and Haydar al-Ibadi who is spokesperson for Dawa , Nouri's party): Al-Ibadi categorically denied that any official in the state spoke to Baathist leaders whether inside Iraq or abroad. He explained: "The Iraqi constitution does not allow this. Besides, the public' general mood does not support the Baath Party because it committed a lot of crimes during and after the rule of the [former] regime."He added: "The Baathists have committed a lot of crimes and killed a large number of Iraqis since 2003 to date. It is they who allowed the Al-Qaeda Organization to enter the country and who were involved in the killing of hundreds of Iraqis." He asked: "So, how can such a party rejoin the political process?"However, Al-Ibadi noted: "There are Baathists who returned to their jobs and who live a normal life without any problems. But they did so as Iraqis, not as members of the Baath Party, which is known for being a conspiratorial military party that does not believe in democracy and does not allow the establishment of a democratic rule."He added: "Permission for the return of the Baath Party to political action needs a constitutional amendment, and I very much rule out the possibility of such a move."Trenton quotes al-Ibadi in his article, though he downgrades his position in the party. And he leaves out the whole denial that invitations were taking place. Here's reality, al-Maliki's being built up by the press and they never intended to report on the Baathist issue. The fact that some Americans were noticing the situation meant it was time for a white wash and look who shows up. So what he gives you is, 'Guess what, invitations to Baathists are going out!' He leaves out the entire denial that they were taking place -- a HUGE story in Iraqi media at the start of the week. He leaves out the claims of Constitutional issues at play. He reveals himself as something other than a journalist. Toss a Hershey bar on the ground in front of him and he will drop drawers and drop to all fours. There's Trenty, in too much make up and heels that will kill his back and feet, cooing about "Iraqis' desire for a strong ruler. In the poll's preliminary results, Maliki's State of Law coalition won a plurality of the votes in nine of 14 provinces -- more than any other party. Maliki has reinvented himself as a pragmatic, non-sectarian leader. He was the bold figure who crushed both Sunni and Shiite militias, although his opponents charge that he's becoming a dictator." His opponents say that? I can think of many NGOs that say similar things off the record. al-Maliki has not "reinvented himself," the press has and it takes idiots like Trent -- the equivalent of a general studies major -- to continue to pimp the equivalent of state legistlature elections (only in 14 of Iraq's 18 provinces*) as 'heavy on the symbolism.' The portent was there when al-Maliki began campaigning around the country, offering empty promises and bribes, and he wasn't a candidate. If the President of the United States started trying to pull that stunt in Vermont, people would be outraged. They would rightly point out that the President has no business sticking into his nose into the election of a state legislature. But al-Maliki sits on billions and he controls how it is spent. He completely thrwarted the democratic process and he should have been called out for it. The elections do not indicate a damn thing. The country remains split. Iraq has 18 provinces, nine -- if you misread the results -- are for al-Maliki! Well nine aren't. Kirkuk might go for him. It's doubtful but it could happen. The three Kurdish provinces will not be hopping on board the Dawa Party wagon. And if people want to get really honest, what the results indicate is a federation just became more likely. Look at the provinces. The north won't go with al-Maliki's party, nor will the south. The support cuts straight along the lines of proposal for breaking up Iraq. (We do not support a federation being imposed upon Iraq in this community. If Iraqis decide they want that, the issue is their business and only their business. Basra recently tried to break away, for those who missed it.) What the results -- if people want to read them as support or non-support for al-Maliki (and that's how the press has played this) -- indicate is that the southern section of Iraq stands a good chance of becoming its own regional government the way the northern section is now the KRG. That's good news for al-Maliki? No, it's not. All the oil rich areas and the ports are denied him with 'control' over central Iraq only. Not only is not good news, it indicates that should al-Maliki do something that the KRG and the southern region do not support, he's about as powerful as Hamid Karzai. If the press insists upon wrongly maintaining that the results (still not official results) say something about al-Maliki, then what it actually says is he has very tiny base of power, it is centrally located in Iraq and he's hemmed in there with only slightly more room than Karzai. It's over, I'm done writing songs about loveThere's a war going onSo I'm holding my gun with a strap and a gloveAnd I'm writing a song about warAnd it goesNa na na na na na naI hate the warNa na na na na na naI hate the warNa na na na na na naI hate the warOh oh oh oh-- "I Hate The War" (written by Greg Goldberg, on The Ballet's Mattachine!) Last Thursday, ICCC's number of US troops killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war was 4237. Tonight? 4243. Just Foreign Policy lists 1,311,696 as the number. The number they finally moved up to last week. In a week's time, according to Just Foreign Policy, no Iraqis died. JFP, dabbling towards an end of the illegal war. The only thing more ridiculous than the continued and intentional misreading of the (unofficial) results is the insisting that the results say something about Muqtada al-Sadr -- al-Sadr only endorsed candidates two weeks prior to the election. The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com. iraqi hate the warthe balletma'ad fayadmcclatchy newspaperstrenton daniel
Posted at 08:46 pm by thecommonills
Permalink
Thursday, February 12, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the UK announces a death, the US Congress let's Iraq War Hawks advise on Afghanistan, candidates continue to be targeted in Iraq (yes, after provincial elections), the Minister of Women's Affairs may withdraw her resignation, and more.
"Over 800 billion dollars" have been spent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, declared Janet St. Laurent before matter-of-factly adding, "and billions more will be needed." St Laurent, the Government Accountability Office's Managing Director, Defense Capabilities and Management Team, was offering testimony to the US House Armed Service Committee this morning. "Addressing U.S. Strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan: Balancing Interests and Resources" was the title of the hearing and Laurent was the only person on the panel that anyone in their right mind would call to testify.
Jack Keane, called "General" throughout? Well golly, does General Dynamics really deserve a seat at the table? No, they don't and Jack Keane shouldn't be sitting on the board of a War Industry Corporation and offering 'unbiased' testimony to Congress. It's APPALLING and SHAMEFUL. As Keane babbled on about what was 'needed' in Afghanistan and evaluated the 2007 escalation in Iraq (the "surge"), no one felt the need to explain that he pushed for that and is considered the brains behind it. This was hardly unbiased testimony and it certainly wasn't testimony that disclosed to the public details they needed to know. Keane, of course, belongs to the Council on/for/of Foreign Relations because you can never have enough of those War Hawk misfits and freaks at a hearing. Enter Stephen Biddle who at least did some grooming before appearing this Congressional go-round. Rounding out the unqualified losers trio was Anthony Cordsman and with Cordsman and Keane both offering their 'expertise' to ABC on a regular basis, one wonders why a hearing was even needed? Or maybe the point is that next month, Congress will explore the wars by taking testimony from Al Roker and Regis Phiblin?
Roker and Philbin couldn't come off any worse than the rejects did and they'd probably both do a great deal better. Early in the hearing, Committee Chair Ike Skelton wondered aloud about the Afghanistan War, how long it's drawn on and the American people's attitude toward it. Keane's response should have alarmed the nation: "I would hope that we would craft a campaign in support of that [increasing troops in Afghanistan] . . . . With a new president here, it is an opportunity . . . . to connect with the American people on this issue" -- it gets worse, but let's stop it right there for one moment. Barack Obama is not the face of change. He is the new face of the empire and Keane grasps that and grasps how Barack's false image provides opportunities for empire building. Back to Keane who felt that the American people -- those supposedly in charge in a democracy -- should be given "a general sense without getting into specifics on our plans . . . if you sort of report out to the American people three or four times a year . . . our credibility stays intact."
It was a series of appalling statements (". . ." indicates editing on my part, he was very long winded) and equally appalling was that no one on the committee appeared bothered by it. The closest to reality in the 'full committee hearing' (many members bailed during the hearing, many never showed) came from Ranking Member John McHugh with the first of what he dubbed two "editorial comment"s, "There is going to be a damn tough war and there is going to be casualties and there is going to be losses." He was referring to Afghanistan Version 4.9 Rebooted and Expanded. And he wasn't calling it out (he's a Republican, they generally don't call out meaningless wars), but at least he was noting some of the costs.
McHugh wanted to know what we'd measure success in Afghanistan with and the fact that this farce continued without any member of Congress screaming out loud shows you that Barack is the tool of empire intended to provide the clean slate. There is no measure of success, not even from those advocating for more troops in Afghanistan. As the 'surge' there approaches, there is no definition of success, no clear goals. And we're all supposed to just forget that's how the US muddled through for the last eight years. It was disgusting. Cordsman tossed out a lot of words but had no answer -- though he clearly thought he'd provided them. "What you do have to do," he intoned at one point fancies himself a grand thinker, "is move towards a level of stability." Well, yes, Anthony, one would assume sending thousands of troops into a country should stabilize it but that's not really a way to "measure" success, now is it?
Biddle wanted to ignore the question completely. He felt it was beneath him. "The question is not what the current trend is, the question is the projection forward," he would declare in part of his run-on answer and explain that it was much more difficult to project forward; however, he thought that was one of his gifts. No one else on the face of the planet thinks Biddle has even one gift. But, again, it was nice that he showered for a change. (He truly is -- as anyone who's attended his past performances can attest -- one of those men who believes it's shower OR cologne -- and generally he sticks with the latter.) Biddle was so focused on "projection forward" that he couldn't see today's reality clearly. He noted "many" diplomats are no longer needed in Iraq ("many of which we have less need for in Iraq") and "I would like to see a political surge" in Afghanistan.
A political surge? And he thinks that's worked in Iraq? In fact, he thinks that the US diplomatic corps in Iraq needs to be thinned out? He's the only one who feels that way and one longed for Senator Barbara Boxer to pop in and set the weasel straight. No one touched on his comment. No one followed up. No one asked, "Biddle, what political progress are you seeing in Iraq?" He can't even say provincial elections because Iraq has 18 provinces and only 14 have held the elections (plus the violence around the elections and the candidates has been intense). But he's convinced that Iraq's chug-chug-chugging along so nicely we can pull the limited number of diplomats there and install them in Afghanistan.
And how would we measure progress? Have we all forgotten George W. Bush's refusal to define success in Iraq? Keane has: "We clearly have to -- to win -- defeat the insurgency. When the insurgency's defeated" and leaves "the battlefield or, as in Iraq, it comes to the political process," it will be . . . what? Attempting to clarify that clear-as-mud statement, Keane created two groups: Reconcilables and Irreconcilables. Reconcilables, he says, will come into the process and Irreconcilables will not. He forgot to inform where the Irreconcilables go? Forced relocation? Victims of death squads? Who knows? But Keane is saying that there are two groups of people in Afghanistan -- who knew their society -- or any -- was that simplistic? -- and when some of them are part of a political process and some of them aren't it will mean . . . something. Clearly.
Struggling still to define success, Keane declared, "This will take resources" uh-huh "and it will take time" uh-huh "and it will take the blood of our troops." Left unsaid was that it will enrich General Dynamics. Left unsaid is that the sentence provides no measurables for success. Since Keane had just basically (in that sentence) repeated what McHugh had said before asking his question, McHugh rushed to say (ignoring Janet St. Laurent's comments), "I couldn't agree with General Keane more." Yes, active listening is a skill that is highly effective with young children and, apparently, members of Congress. Keane's use of it was so effective, he had McHugh cheering him on -- despite the fact that he never answered McHugh's question.
(St. Laurent -- in case anyone's interested in her comments, McHugh wasn't -- called for a civilian and Defense Department "integrated approach" and measures for "whether or not these resources are being applied effectively?" While a stronger answer on measures would have been appreciated as a member of the GAO, that might have been the most she could offer.)
US House Rep Gene Taylor was among the few Democrats to bother asking questions during the period where each representative could have had five minutes for questioning (this is where the hearing really began to thin out of of members and those who remained yawned, stretched, scratched themselves and looked bored -- as I'm sure did those of us in the visitor seats). He noted that in Iraq the military had "to pay the tribes to stop shooting at Americans . . . It looks like a power sharing agreement has been made with the sheiks and they are shooting a lot less Americans." This led to a curious claim on the part of Keane that "they're paying for it" -- the costs of the war, in Iraq. He actually told the committee -- and no one questioned him on this -- that Iraq was bearing the financial costs of the war to the US and paying for it with their oil money. And no one laughed out loud.
A fact US House Rep Duncan Hunter apparently missed or he wouldn't have tried out his own one-liner: "We do have victory [in Iraq] and I hope you'll let people know that." He hopes who will let people know that? Keane? Maybe when he's next on ABC? Who knows, the entire statement was exactly the nonsense the country's come to expect from Duncan Hunter. US House Rep Susan Davis noted of NATO allies and the Afghanistan War, "Their public opinion is worse than ours." This appeared to irk Biddle who straightened his spine as he spat out, "Many Europeans do not believe that this is a war." Silly Europeans! Maybe Keane's plot/plan to give limited updates three or four times a year can trick them and get them on board the way he seems to think it can fool Americans? US House Rep Tom Rooney (Republican and one of Congress' newest members) spoke last. He cited a book by Marcus Luttrell (presumably Lone Survivor -- written by Luttrell and Patrick Robinson). And that was pretty much it. A highly disappointing hearing but, considering the panel, that should have been expected.
And some say Nawal al Samurrai (also spelled al Samurraie in some press accounts) should have expected the lack of support as al-Maliki's Minister of Women's Affairs. But she didn't and thought she would receive assistance. Instead her ministry's tiny budget was cut further (from $7500 to $1500 a month). Tina Susman and Caesar Ahmed (Los Angeles Times) quote Parliamentarian Nada Ibrahim explains, "It's not a real ministry. It's one room with a woman, no budget, no staff. It's a trick." The reporters note that the issue "also highlights what many women say is the lip service paid them by the Shiite conservatives loyal to Dawa and other Shiite parties dominant in parliament. In August, Inaam Jawwadi, a female member of parliament from the Shiite bloc, called for Samarai's ministry to be turned into a Cabinet portfolio, but the proposal went nowhere." Susman and Ahmed explain, "Her eyes glistened with tears as she described the frustration of confronting widows and not being able to fofer them anything beyond promises that she would try to help. She found herself sitting in her small office appealing to nongovernmental organizations for money to launch the programs she had envisioned when she took the position in July." She tells them, "It's shameful for me in Iraq, a rich country, to have to ask NGOs for money." To The Contrary's Bonnie Erbe (US News & World Reports via CBS News) proposes, "Here's an idea: As a start, confiscate the Bush and Cheney family fortunes, which are voluminous, and use that money to feed the widows and orphans their war created." Corey Flintoff (NPR -- this is a text only report at NPR) explains, "Samarraie, a 47-year-old gynecologist and member of parliament, says that part of the problem is that Iraq is a patriarchal society, where women are considered adjuncts of their husbands or fathers. And part of it, she says, is political expediency." Parliamentarian Saleh al-Mutlaq declares the Shi'ite extremists don't support the women's ministry, "I mean, it was a joke from the beginning, and they will never support it. And this poor lady, she was a minister for some time, but she didn't have any kind of financial support to support women's issues." Flintoff reports women in Parliament are rallying around the issue, that a five hour meeting took place among them and that they are determined to address this leaving Samarrai debating whether or not to withdraw her resignation. Susman and Ahmed note that al-Maliki's underlings deny any "allegations that women's rights have eroded since the rise of the Shiite power structure. They point out that 25% of seats for the newly elected provincial councils are reserved for women" -- and we'll stop it right there. January 14th, Alissa J. Rubin and Sam Dagher (New York Times) broke the news that although the 25% was supposed to be set aside, it had not been. Instead, a new 'system' was put in place and it is not known how women will do under it but it is expected they will do far worse. When al-Maliki's people point to the 25% figure, they are LYING and pointing to something legally overturned. And while al-Maliki's thugs cut the 25% that was supposed to be law, the Kurdistan Regional Government ups their numbers. Alla Majeed (UPI) reports: "Kurdish lawmakers Wednesday made amendments to their provincial elections law to set aside 30 percent of the seats for females, al-Bayyna of the Iraqi Hezbollah reported Wednesday." And last night, the KRG posted an interview with Human Rights Minister Dr. Yousif Mohammad Aziz who noted, among other things, "One of our biggest challenges is preventing violence against women. Other challenges are street children and underage labour; terrorism and dealing with terror suspects according to the law. Another challenge is to raise the public's awareness of international human rights laws. I believe that since 1991, we have made some progress in these areas." Asked about statistis, Aziz responds, "The government statistics show a large increase in the number of women coming forward for protection because of the new specially dedicated directorates and the success of our campaign to raise awareness of the issue. The positive sign is that the number of honour killings is decreasing. Of course, the presence of such crimes is still appalling and our aim is to eliminate honour killings altogether, but we are seeing a definite improvement thanks to the multiple strategies we are employing." That's a section of the interview, click here to read it in full.
In his opening statements at this morning's hearing, Ike Skelton declared of Iraq, ". . . Iraq, which has been our major focus for the last five years, seems to be trending in a positive direction. Violence is down significantly and provincial elections have been conducted." This as Xinhua reports, "Two Iraqi politicans were shot dead and a third was injured by gunmen in the volatile city of Mosul." Abdul Kareem al-Sharabi (National Dialogue Front -- Sunni) was shot dead today, Ahmed Fathi (Iraqi Islamic Party -- Sunni) was shot dead "late on Wednesday" and Akram Khalaf of the National Movement for Reform and Development was left injured in a shooting today. As the violence mounts, some continue to wrongly cite those 'wonderful' elections and all the 'peace' they demonstrate.
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a gas cylinder bombing in Karbala which claimed 7 lives and left thirty-five people injured, a Mosul car bombing which claimed the lives of 4 police officer and left three people injured and a Baquba roadside bombing that left three people injured.
Meanwhile Philippine's GMA reports, "Vice President Noli de Castro on Thursday identified the unfortunate worker as Vergine Elias Jamil, a caretaker of the Philippine chancery since November 1985. Jamil and two other companions were killed by unknown assailants on the night of Feb. 5, said De Castro, who is also the presidential adviser on overseas Filipino workers (OFWs)." Xinhau explains that Iraqi Vergine Elias Jamil "was killed by unknown assailants inside her home last woman"
Today the UK Ministry of Defence announced: "It is with regret that the Ministry of Defence must annouce the death of a soldier from 1st Batallion The Princess of Wales's Royal Regiment in Basra, Iraq, today, Thursday 12 February 2009. The soldier died during a shooting incident in the early hours of the morning at the Contingency Operation Base." The death brings the number of UK soldiers killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 179 (and, yes, their supposed 'withdraw' was supposed to mean the end of British military deaths) while the number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war currently stands at 4244,
Two excerpts from my new book The Gamble are running in the Washington Post Sunday and Monday. There also are some cool on-line only things -- not just another excerpt, but also a great video about how one officer, Capt. Samuel Cook of the 3rd Armored Cavalry, conducted counterinsurgency operations in one part of Iraq last year. (To read more about how Cook talked an insurgent leader into cooperation, read this excerpt from the book, a section called "The Insurgent Who Loved Titanic.")
Military planners have been mulling the shape and size of the "post-occupation" force ever since it became clear in mid-2007 that the surge was working tactically. Such a long-term presence would have four major components. The centerpiece would be a reinforced mechanized infantry division of 15,000 to 20,000 soldiers assigned to guarantee the security of the Iraqi government and to assist Iraqi forces or their U.S. advisers if they can get into fights they can't handle. Second, a training and advisory force of close to 10,000 troops would work with Iraqi military and police units. In addition, there would be a small but significant Special Operations unit focused on fighting the Sunni insurgent group al Qaeda in Iraq. "I think you'll retain a very robust counterterror capability in this country for a long, long time," an American official in Iraq said in 2007. Finally, the headquarters and logistical elements to command and supply such a force would total more than 10,000 troops, plus some civilian contractors. Again, this would amount to a long-term committment in the area of 35,000 troops.
Interestingly, that is about the figure that Gen. [Ray] Odierno [top US commander in Iraq] cited in my last interview with him for this book in November 2008. Asked what the U.S. military presence would look like around 2014 or 2015 -- that is, well after President Obama's first term -- Odierno said, "I would like to see a . . . force probably around 30,000 or so, 35,000," with many training Iraqi forces and others conducting combat operations against al Qaeda in Iraq and its allies. To justify such a force, Odierno or [Gen David] Petraeus could read back to Obama the statement the candidate made in July 2008, not long before that trip to Iraq: "My 16-month time line, if you examine everything I've said, was always presmised on making sure our troops were safe," Obama had told reporters in North Dakota. "And my guiding approach continues to be that we've got to make sure that our troops are safe and that Iraq is stable." Indeed, they could argue that the last word is overambitious, because it will be a long time before anyone can confidently call Iraq stable.
In other news, US war resister Cliff Cornell turned himself at Fort Stewart Tuesday. Frenchi Jones (Coastal Courier) reports he's been processed back to active-duty and quotes military spokesperson Kevin Larson stating, "He has been assigned to the 1st Brigade Combat Team. He is getting a barracks space, drawing uniforms, getting a new ID and having his pay re-started because for all intents and purposes he is once again a part of the 3rd Infantry Division."
Later that day, in a similar spirit of telling old lies and avoiding old truths, President Obama used his very first press conference to label Iran and its alleged quest for nuclear weapons as the pre-eminent threat to peace and stability in the Middle East. Helen Thomas, the most senior reporter in the White House press corps, and the only one to stand up to Obama's predecessor, asked point-blank whether any other countries in the Middle East possessed nuclear weapons. It isof course common knowledge that Israel has hundreds of nukes aimed at every capital in the region from Tripoli to Teheran. No less a member of Obama's cabinet than Robert Gates at his confirmation affirmed that Israel has nukes, but it suited the new president to refuse to answer the question, to ignore Thomas's follow-ups, and to filibuster for four or five minutes in some other direction.
Tens of millions who voted for this president imagined they'd get real change. But the reality is dawning on many that what we're getting is a lot more of the same. We have a president who repeats discredited lies about "rogue regimes" with nuclear weapons, while he ignores Israel, a genuine 21st century apartheid state, which has menaced its neighbors with nuclear weapons for more than thirty years.
Obama volunteered at some point during the press conference, that the moment the true import of his new job sank into him was when he hadto sign letters notifying the families of American dead, "ourheroes," as he called them. The president made no mention of hisdecision, on this third day of office, to launch drones and cruisemissiles into Pakistan. Those missiles killed 17 people, includingseveral children. The drones were probably launched fromAfghanistan, and remotely piloted by stateside military personnel. Those dead, including the children, got no letters of regret from thepresident, and seemed not to register in the president's public calculus. After all, they were not American heroes.
The election is over. Those unconditional Obama defenders who answer the president's critics with "well what did you want, McCain?" are doing what their president says he won't do. They are living in the past, looking backward instead of forward. It's time to hold the current president and his actions up to the cold light of day, to evaluate his performance in light of his promises and our legitimate expectations for peace and justice. It's time those of us who stand for peace and justice stop protecting the president. We may soon need to be protected from him.
Lastly, Feminist Wire Daily reports: The Health Care for Women Resolution was reintroduced in both chambers of Congress yesterday by co-chair of the Congressional Caucus on Women's Issues Representative Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) and Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI). If passed, the resolution would help to ensure the needs of women would be met in national healthcare reform.In a press release, Representative Schakowsky said "our resolution calls on Congress to pass a national healthcare reform bill within 18 months that directly addresses the healthcare needs of women." Senator Stabenow added "women must have affordable health care that they can rely on through their life transitions, including starting a family, working part-time or full-time, divorce, or caring for a sick or elderly parent."
Also yesterday, a Columbia University report (see PDF), entitled "Women's Health and Healthcare Reform," was released. This report calls for the linkage of family planning and prenatal care to women's medical care, ensuring that women receive accurate and complete healthcare information, that their healthcare is confidential, and that integrated reproductive healthcare is available across women's lifespans. |
Posted at 03:25 pm by thecommonills
Permalink
Kurds to increase number of women on provincial councils
The US government announced:
"The Department of Defense announced today the death of a soldier who
was supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom. Sgt. James M. Dorsey, 23, of
Beardstown, Ill., died Feb. 8 in Kamaliyah, Iraq, in a non-combat
related incident. He was assigned to the 1st Battalion, 66th Armor
Regiment, 1st Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, Fort Hood,
Texas. The circumstances surrounding the incident are under
investigation." They made that announcement Monday. Citing that
announcement this morning, AP notes,
"The death raises to at least 4,244 members of the U.S. military who
have died in the Iraq war since it began in March 2003." ICCC also has 4,244 as their count. If it seems like we're doing a slow walk through, we are. ICCC lists this month's deaths: | 09-Feb-2009 | 4 | | US: 4 | UK: 0 | Other: 0 |
|
|
| US | NAME NOT RELEASED YET | Mosul - Ninawa | Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack |
| US | NAME NOT RELEASED YET | Mosul - Ninawa | Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack |
| US | NAME NOT RELEASED YET | Mosul - Ninawa | Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack |
| US | Sergeant Joshua Ward | Mosul - Ninawa | Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack | | 08-Feb-2009 | 2 | | US: 2 | UK: 0 | Other: 0 |
|
|
| US | Specialist James M. Dorsey | Baghdad | Non-hostile |
| US | Specialist James M. Dorsey | Baghdad (Kamaliyah) | Non-hostile | | 06-Feb-2009 | 1 | | US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 0 |
|
|
| US | Specialist Christopher P. Sweet | Balad Ruz - Diyala | Non-hostile | | Total | 7 | | US: 7 | UK: 0 | Other: 0 |
|
And as you can say, currently Dorsey is mistakenly listed twice. With AP
having the same count (they do their own count), the 4,244 is most
likely correct but due to the above, we're walking it through slowly.  That's Nawal al Samurrai who announced her resignation from Nouri al-Maliki's cabinet Friday. Today Tina Susman and Caesar Ahmed (Los Angeles Times) report
on why al Samari (also spelled Samaraie by some press accounts) quit
her "$10,00 a month" post: It was a for-show post. Parliamentarian Nada
Ibrahim explains, "It's not a real ministry. It's one room with a
woman, no budget, no staff. It's a trick." The reporters note that the
issue "also highlights what many women say is the lip service paid them
by the Shiite conservatives loyal to Dawa and other Shiite parties
dominant in parliament. In August, Inaam Jawwadi, a female member of
parliament from the Shiite bloc, called for Samarai's ministry to be
turned into a Cabinet portfolio, but the proposal went nowhere." The
reporters note the "hundreds of thousands of women widowed since the
U.S.-led invasion of 2003" and report: Her
eyes glistened with tears as she described the frustration of
confronting widows and not being able to offer them anything beyond
promises that she would try to help. She found herself sitting in her
small office appealing to nongovernmental organizations for money to
launch the programs she had envisioned when she took the position in
July."It's shameful for me in Iraq, a rich country, to have to ask NGOs for money," Samarai said.al-Maliki's
band of crooks insist they are not dismissing women or refusing to take
their problems seriously. The reporters write, "Officials have denied
allegations that women's rights have eroded since the rise of the
Shiite power structure. They point out that 25% of seats for the newly
elected provincial councils are reserved for women, and that 33% of
seats in the parliament were set aside for women after the last
national election in 2005." January 14th snapshot: Today Alissa J. Rubin and Sam Dagher (New York Times) report
the latest attack on women's rights in Iraq: Somehow, no one can figure
out how, the rights of women to be represented with 25% of the seats in
the January 31st elections just fell by the wayside. No one can figure
out. It just, in all the talks and discussions, somehow, no one can
figure it out, it just dropped right out. Oops. The reporters explain,
"Early versions of the law, which governs the election of Iraq's 18
provincial councils, included a firm guarantee that women would have at
least 25 percent of the seats -- the same percentage mandated by the
Constitution for the numbers of women in Parliament. In the
male-dominated Arab culture, the framers of the Constitution and the
Americans who were involved in drafting it thought that the quota was
necessary to ensure that women would be represented.But
the provincial election law was changed several times, and the quota
language was gone by the time it went to the Presidency Council, whose
approval is needed for it to become official. It went back to the
Parliament with several unrelated changes and was published in early
October. The lack of a strong guarantee for women's council seats has
begun to gain widespread attention only in the last few days." And good
for Rubin and Dagher but find that topic at any other outlet. Find one
example in the US of the press using their power to amplify. You can't.
And if you're wondering why there's no number listed
above it's because there was no known number. The 25% was cut. A
measure was applied in which a third seat won by a political party with
multiple candidates would go to a woman and what the percentage on that
would be, no one knew and they won't know until the provincial election
results are final. (No, they're still not final.) So, no, al-Malki
thugs, you can't point to the 25% on provincial elections because that
was done away with and no one wanted to fess up and take ownership for
that action. And while al-Maliki's thugs cut the 25% that was supposed to be law, the KRG ups their numbers. Alla Majeed (UPI) reports:
"Kurdish lawmakers Wednesday made amendments to their provincial
elections law to set aside 30 percent of the seats for females,
al-Bayyna of the Iraqi Hezbollah reported Wednesday." Meanwhile the Kurdistan Regional Government offers a discussion on human rights: Interview with Dr Yousif Mohammad Aziz, Minister for Human Rights  | Human
rights are a focus of the Kurdistan Regional Government's work and one
of Prime Minister Barzani's guiding principles. Human Rights Minister
Dr Yousif Mohammad Aziz explains to KRG.org the challenges and steps
that the KRG is taking to protect and promote human rights.
What are role and responsibilities of the KRG Human Rights Ministry?
Our
main responsibilities are the promotion and protection of human rights
in the Kurdistan Region, and the observation and follow-up of human
rights cases.
In
many Western countries, governments do not have human rights
ministries. Why did the KRG decide to establish the ministry in 2003?
In fact the UK, for example, does have a minister of state whose remit includes human rights.
Civil
society and local human rights non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in
the Kurdistan Region are not as strong as those in the West and are
still evolving. The ministry has the authority and manpower to tackle
human rights problems, and can work directly with the Council of
Ministers and the Prime Minister to resolve them. Once our civil
society and our emerging democracy are as developed as in the West,
NGOs should be solely responsible for campaigning for human rights.
What role do local NGOs play in human rights?
Besides
the international NGOs, there are a large number of local human rights
NGOs in the Kurdistan Region but not all of them are active. We know
that effective and active NGOs will help to develop our democracy, so
we have made the active local NGOs members of our ministry's advisory
board, along with UNAMI and UNICEF.
When we first
established it two years ago, the advisory board met monthly and now
meets every three months to discuss all human rights issues and
concerns. The NGOs have also provided some useful ideas on how to
tackle issues related to human rights. Earlier this month on the 60th
Anniversary of the Declaration of Human Rights, we awarded five local
NGOs to recognise their achievements and encourage them in their work.
What are the greatest challenges that the Kurdistan Region face in terms of human rights?
One
of our biggest challenges is preventing violence against women. Other
challenges are street children and underage labour; terrorism and
dealing with terror suspects according to the law. Another challenge is
to raise the public's awareness of international human rights laws. I
believe that since 1991, we have made some progress in these areas.
What are you doing to prevent and punish violence against women?
We
are making great efforts to prevent it and have established at least
six mechanisms to deal with it. Every three months the Prime Minister
and Council of Ministers meets to devise preventative and judicial
policies and monitor progress.
Second, I supervise a
committee that includes representatives of the ministries for women,
justice, civil society, interior, religion, education and social
affairs. We meet every month to define the steps that each of these
ministries must take. For example, the Religious Affairs Ministry is
responsible for ensuring that clerics and religious figures in their
sermons explain that honour crimes and violence against women are
anti-Muslim practices.
Third, the Interior Ministry has
established a special directorate in Dohuk, Erbil and Suleimaniah, and
hopes to open more in other towns in the Kurdistan Region. These
special directorates offer threatened women protection and advice, and
work with the ministries of justice, health and human rights to prevent
and investigate violence against women.
Fourth, Dohuk,
Erbil and Suleimaniah now each have a Violations Board made up of a
general prosecutor, forensic scientist and representatives of the human
rights and interior ministries. They ensure that the judicial process
is followed properly and rapidly in cases of honour killings and
domestic violence.
Fifth, we provide centres and shelters
for threatened women who are protected until the threat has been
removed, and are helped to find work and return to their communities.
Lastly,
we have amended several laws relating to women. Honour killings are now
punished as harshly as other killings and are not viewed as
'honourable' under the law. We have also removed old Iraqi laws that
allowed men to 'punish' and beat their wives, and changed the law in a
way makes it difficult for men to have more than one wife – limiting
the practice to only exceptional circumstances.
Are there any statistics on violence against women?
The
government statistics show a large increase in the number of women
coming forward for protection because of the new specially dedicated
directorates and the success of our campaign to raise awareness of the
issue. The positive sign is that the number of honour killings is
decreasing. Of course the presence of such crimes is still appalling
and our aim is to eliminate honour killings altogether, but we are
seeing a definite improvement thanks to the multiple strategies we are
employing.
What is the KRG doing to protect press freedom?
The
media law that was passed in September 2008 is a change in the right
direction, as it has completely removed imprisonment as a punishment
for libel or slander. The law also refers specifically to journalism
standards set out in a paper presented to the UN by the International
Federation of Journalists.
What is your view of the courts and judicial system?
One
of the biggest problems we face is the judicial system. The courts,
judges and general prosecutors need to be reformed and some violations
of human rights are even caused by the judicial system. At the
celebration the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, Prime Minister Barzani said that in 2009 more steps should be
taken to improve the rule of law.
What provisions has the KRG made to protect minorities in the Kurdistan Region?
Every
minority has seats in the Kurdistan National Assembly, our regional
parliament, and have ministerial posts in the cabinet. Minorities have
their own schools where they teach in their own language and have full
freedom of religion. I believe that minorities enjoy full rights in
Kurdistan because we ourselves are a minority in Iraq and are very
aware and sympathetic of their needs and rights.
What about the accusations that Kurds are expropriating land from Christians?
If
this has happened, it has certainly never ever been a KRG policy. On
the contrary, many Christians have moved to Kurdistan from other parts
of Iraq for security and protection. If individuals have illegally
expropriated land, the courts would look at the deeds and return the
property to the rightful owner.
The
Kurdistan Region has been threatened by terrorist groups, but it has
remained relatively secure and stable thanks to the work of the
security forces and police and the cooperation of the public. However,
from 2003 many terrorism suspects were detained without charge or
trial. What is the KRG doing to tackle this?
Many
people - more than 700 - were detained without charge, as at the time
[2003] there was no terrorism law under which they could be charged,
and there were two administrations in Kurdistan. Since the unification
of the two administrations into a unified cabinet in May 2006 and the
passage of the anti-terrorism law in July 2006, we have worked hard to
solve this problem and from the outset I have personally visited the
prisons where they were held and we listened to the opinions of
international NGOs. We worked with the Ministry of Justice, Interior
Ministry and security forces to solve most of the cases so that from
more than 700, now there are just nine held without charge. We are
working hard on those nine cases and talking to experts so that none of
them are held without charge.
Kurds
suffered genocide and we hope this will never happen again to any of
the peoples of Iraq. What can the KRG do to ensure that no group is
ever targeted again for genocide?
The high court in
Baghdad, the Iraqi parliament and the Kurdistan National Assembly
(parliament) decided that the campaign against the Kurds was genocide.
In the 20th Century genocide was perpetrated many times and in
different continents, even though each time we said 'never again'. I
twice attended the regular session of the UN Commission on Human Rights
in Geneva. The Armenian representative at the session prepared a draft
UN resolution to take practical action to prevent genocide in the
future, and I supported this global initiative. It is also vital to
educate people in Iraq and around the world on human rights and the
prevention of genocide. Meanwhile violence continues today with Reuters reporting
a Mosul car bombing which has claimed the lives of 4 police officers
with an additional five injured, "Abdul-Kareem al-Sherabi, a senior
member of the Sunni Arab secularist party National Dialogue Front" has
been shot dead in Mosul and 8 pilgrims have been killed in a Kerbala roadside bombing (eighteen wounded). Iraq's Foreign Ministry notes:  11 February, 2009
Foreign Minister Meets Iranian Counterpart in Baghdad
His
Excellency Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari met on Wednesday 11/2/2009,
at the Foreign Ministry headquarters with Mr. Minoshehar Mottaki,
Iranian Foreign Minister and his accompanying delegation visiting Iraq
for discussions that concern the two countries .
Minister Zebari
and his Iranian counterpart discussed in a closed meeting the political
aspects and issues that concern the relations between the two
countries. Minister Zebari congratulated the Iranian Foreign Minister
on the thirtieth anniversary of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, and
praised his efforts in resolving outstanding issues between the two
countries, such as borders, water and oil.
His Excellency
Minister Zebari stated that the path was paved and open for the
development of relations between the two countries in all fields and
the need for continued support for Iraq's Government, adding that Iran
was one of the first countries that supported the new Iraq and its
national government since the formation of the interim Governing
Council after the fall of the former regime.
On his part, Mr.
Mottaki expressed his pleasure at being in Baghdad, adding that one of
the major reasons for his visit is to convey an invitation from Iranian
President Ahmadi Nejad to His Excellency President Jalal Talabani to
visit Iran in the near future, and praised the efforts of His
Excellency Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari in the development of
relations between the two countries, especially during the past three
years in reaching high levels, commending the efforts of the
Ambassadors of both countries in developing them. Mr. Mottaki
congratulated the Government and people of Iraq for the success of the
provincial elections and its high participation rate in addition to
security and stability in the country, describing it as a translation
of the will of the Iraqi people for self determination.
The two
foreign ministers held a press conference attended by many local, Arab
and foreign media where they touched on the nature of Iraq and Iran's
relations and their growing stages in addition to future projects
between the two countries.
The meeting was attended Foreign
Ministry Undersecretaries and Ambassadors and the Iraqi ambassador in
Tehran and Iran's ambassador in Baghdad.
Foreign Minister
Mottaki arrived this morning to Baghdad International Airport heading a
large delegation which was received by Mr. Labeed Abbawi, Foreign
Ministry Undersecretary, and senior officials from the Ministry. In
the US, Serving Our Troops organized a meal for 8,000 soldiers and
their families -- the soldiers will deploy to Iraq in two months -- no, the illegal war is not ending. The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com. iraqthe los angeles times tina susmancaeser ahmed alaa majeed
Posted at 06:59 am by thecommonills
Permalink
NYT undercounts Iraq to beef up Afghanistan
If it bleeds it leads? Not so much. Not when you're the New York Times
-- a paper that it is now obvious will never recover from selling the
illegal war. Today, Richard A. Oppel Jr. and others -- no link TO
GARBAGE -- team up to tell you "AT LEAST 20" dead in Afghanistan!!!!!
And to grab that headline the pimps have to include not just a bombing
that killed 8 -- wow, 8!!!!! -- but two who were shot in one incident
for a whopping ten people!!!!! And fifty-seven were wounded!!!!!
Throughout Afghanistan!!!!!! Front page news or 'news'. A16 (national edition), Steven Lee Myers offers " Security Talks About Iraq Not Needed, Iran Signals." Golly. Nothing must have happened in terms of violence in Iraq yesterday. Oh wait, yesterday's snapshot
notes 27 deaths. 27 deaths -- 16 from one double bombing. Yeah, that
would trump "AT LEAST 20" dead. As for the number wounded in Iraq
yesterday? 47 just from the double-bombing in Baghdad. That's before
you count up all the others (including "Awakening" Council members
wounded in shootings). Translation, Afghanistan is NOT front page news
if the point is violence. But the paper that LIED to the American
people to start the illegal war CONTINUES TO LIE and wants your morning
take-away to be, "Afghanistan violent! Iraq, calm." It's bulls**t. And
shame on Myers for taking part in that nonsense. Shame on him for
contributing to the deception and the lies. One of the few things the
current NYT division in Iraq has going for it is that none of them sold
the illegal war. All those losers are elsewhere now. (And the selling
includes the garbage Dexy and John
produced -- the half-truths and evasions that led people to believe
things were going great for the first two years of the illegal war.) " Bombs targeting Shiite pilgrims kill 20, injure 60 in Iraq" -- that's the headline in the Los Angeles Times. Monte Morin and Saif Hameed open with:
Attacks
targeting Shiite pilgrims bound for the holy city of Karbala rocked
Baghdad on Wednesday, leaving 20 dead and more than 60 injured,
government officials said.
The attacks ended a monthlong lull in
violence that accompanied Iraq's parliamentary elections, when security
was at an all-time high in the capital. The bloodshed also appeared to
be timed to the climax of an annual 40-day period of mourning for
Shiite Muslim faithful, a period in which Sunni Arab insurgent attacks
had become commonplace in the years after the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of
Iraq." Attacks Kill 16 In Iraqi Capital" is the headline in the Washington Post for Qais Mizher and Ernesto Londono's article which opens: Two
car bombs targeting a bus station in a Shiite neighborhood in southwest
Baghdad killed at least 16 people Wednesday, Iraqi authorities said.One
of the bombs detonated inside the main bus stop in the Bayaa district
about 3:30 p.m., and the second exploded just outside in a busy
commercial area, an Iraqi Interior Ministry official said. The official
said the blast inside the station killed two people and the one outside
left at least 14 dead. He spoke on the condition of anonymity because
he is not allowed to talk to reporters. He said more than 40 people
were wounded in the bombings, which happened in close succession.Mahdi
Ali Hadi, 29, a taxi driver who was outside the gate of the bus station
when the blasts occurred, said passengers started running for cover as
security guards fired their weapons in the air. " String of bombings threatens relative calm in Iraq" is McClatchy's headline to Trenton Daniel and Laith Hammoudi which informs: More
than a dozen Iraqis were killed and 43 were wounded Wednesday in
back-to-back car bombings at a bus station in a Shiite Muslim
neighborhood in south Baghdad, police said.[. . .]The
attacks came a little more than a week after Iraq held provincial
elections in 14 of its 18 provinces. Election officials are expected to
release final results in the coming weeks.Around
3 p.m. Wednesday, bombs in a parked car and a van detonated in the
crowded bus depot in the Bayaa neighborhood, killing 16 civilians and
wounding 43 others, police said. The area is a popular shopping
destination.The U.S.-led Multi-National Corps in Iraq put the death toll in a second depot attack at eight dead and 33 injured.(The byline says "Leith," we're assuming it's a typo.) To read any other outlet is to be aware just how violent yesterday was in Iraq. To read the New York Times
-- home to the bad writing of Michael Gordon, Judith Miller, John F.
Burns, Dexter Filkins and other 'creative' types -- is to be under the
impression that Afghanistan was far more violent yesterday than Iraq.
(And for anyone who says, "It's not a competition," yes, it is. It is a
competition for media resources and media attention. And Iraq, with
147,000 US troops still on the ground, is being treated as the war
ended when no such thing happened and no such thing is happening
anytime soon.) The following community sites updated last night: -
-
-
-
Looking back 10 hours ago -
-
Tugboat Annie 10 hours ago -
-
-
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com. iraqthe new york timessteven lee myersthe washington post monte morinsaif hameedmcclatchy newspaperstrenton daniel laith hammoudilike maria said pazkats kornersex and politics and screeds and attitudethe daily jotcedrics big mixmikey likes itruths reportsickofitradlzoh boy it never ends
Posted at 06:53 am by thecommonills
Permalink
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Wednesday, February 11, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, officials continue to be targeted in Iraq, Iraqis seeking asylum in the US are asked 'interesting' questions, and more.
Starting with war resistance. Michael Amsel (Asbury Park Press) reports on Daniel Marble who was been AWOL from the US army for two years starting in July of 2006 and turned himself in at Fort Knox February 2nd. Amsel reveals that he began rethinking things while on leave, "That was my first chance to really reflect on what my actual job would be in combat, which is to kill people. You go through this vigorous daily training shooting targets and human silhouettes and you become a machine to some point. You don't have clear thoughts about what you are doing. Once I seriously thought about killing people, I was not comfortable with it. I couldn't bring myself to go back." Instead of being discharged, Danile's been sent to Fort Bragg and his lawyer, Larry Hildes, believes he will most likely be ordered to deploy to Iraq or Afghanistan. Asbury Park Press has set up a forum where readers can discuss Daniel Marble's decisions. Yesterday US war resister Cliff Cornell turned himself in. Frenchi Jones (Coastal Courier) reports, "Arkansas native Cliff Cornell stood outside the gates of Fort Stewart Tuesday afternoon trying to stop the tears streaming down his un-shaven face." Jones quotes Cliff's attorney James Branum explaining, "He was tired of looking over his shoulder. . . . He just wanted it to be over. We're going to go for less than six months. He stood up for what he believed in. Cliff might have broken the law, but in the end he did the right thing. The truth of the matter is, he's really a sweet guy, someone who was scared and probably should have never been in the military." Darrell Bellaart (Nanaimo Daily News) quotes Cliff's adopted mother Annie Nichols stating, "He just called us from the base about five minutes ago. He's doing OK. Of course they have their pressures -- they're the military. He's only being charged with being AWOL which is a good thing. And we'll know more later as the process goes along." Cliff's attorney states that the AWOL charge is standard ("basically it's a form letter") at this point and does not reflect whether or not additional charges will follow. Lyndell Nelson (WSAV) reports, "When asked if he would do it all over again, Cornell said, 'Yeah, because I am not over there taking part in this illegal war, I'm not over there killing innocent people or taking part in the torturing that is goin on'." Dee Knight (Workers World) reports US war resister Chris Teske, who -- like Cliff -- was facing a deporation from Canada, "crossed the British Columbia-Washington state boarder unassisted on Jan. 22 at an undisclosed location." Susan Lazaruk (The Province) quotes Chris declaring the day before he left, "I'm completely shocked that this is happening. I hope everything goes well when I cross the border tomorrow."
We are organizing a Mass March on the Pentagon on Saturday, March 21, and it is important that you and your family, friends, co-workers and fellow students put on your marching shoes that day. People are coming from all over the country. Simultaneous demonstrations are taking place in San Francisco and Los Angeles.
Why are we still marching even after the war criminal George W. Bush has left office? Because the people must speak out for what is right. More than 1 million Iraqis have died and tens of thousands of U.S. troops have been wounded or killed.
The Iraq and Afghanistan war will drag on for years unless we act now. The cost in lives and resources is criminal regardless of whether the Democrats or Republicans are in charge of the government.
[. . .]
If Bush's war and occupation of Iraq was an illegal action of aggression -- and it was -- how can the new government say that it can only gradually end the war over a number of years? The Iraqis don't want foreign military forces running their country. No one would!
The Pentagon has employed 200,000 foreign contractors (mercenaries) and 150,000 U.S. troops to maintain the occupation of Iraq. They have no right to be there. A few thousand are being brought out of Iraq only to be redeployed to occupy Afghanistan, and the fools in the media proclaim "the war is winding down." That is not true.
President Obama decided to keep the Pentagon just as it was under Bush. He even selected Bush appointee Robert Gates to keep his position as chief of the Pentagon. Gates announced that the new administration would double the number of troops sent to Afghanistan. That is certainly not the "change" most people though was coming following the end of Bush's tenure.
Meanwhile United for Playgrounds and Naptime wants you to tell . . . Congress to end the illegal war. Yeah, you tell Congress because Leslie Cagan won't let you tell Barack to end it. Someone tell Leslie no cookies and punch when she gets off her mat at the end of naptime. Wide awake and not hiding is IVAW's Matthis Chiroux who offers' " I Have a Date With the Army!" (World Can't Wait):
March 12, I'll attend a board hearing in St. Louis, Missouri, to determine what the nature of my discharge from the Individual Ready Reserve will be. The Army has alleged "misconduct" and they're shooting for a "general discharge," but I'm pushing for "honorable," as my refusal to deploy was not an act of misconduct.I will attend this hearing in uniform as ordered, but only for the purpose of these administrative proceeding. I'm not contesting the fact that I did not report as ordered to deploy to Iraq. However, I intend to paint a clear picture of my convictions to the military, and I seek to corroborate them with first hand accounts of occupation. No person is bound to act against the dictates of conscience, let alone their understanding of the law. I know the occupation of Iraq and further, the Global War on Terror, to be an illegitimate and ultimately murderous campaign waged for economic gain, fueled by misinformation and greed. I know it to be in violation of not only international law, but the U.S. Constitution. Far more importantly, it is against the dictates of my own conscience, and never again will I compromise my humanity to support or ignore the crimes of my government. I will be working closely with Iraq Veterans Against the War to plan what we hope will reflect a Winter Soldier event in the form of our members testifying under oath to the military about their experiences in the Global War on Terror.I seek only truth to be heard and considered by the military. If reconciliation is possible, I seek that, as well. [. . .] We are continuing to gather funds needed to cover travel expenses and accommodation for those who will be testifying. I hope anywhere from 15 to 30 veterans, military family members, Iraqi civilians and constitutional experts will appear before my board. Please consider making a donation to my defense campaign either through my website, matthisresists.us, or through ivaw.org.
In Iraq, Gina Chon (Wall St. Journal's Baghdad Life) reports on the process Iraqis applying for refugee admittance into the United States go through which includes some "ridiculous and strange" questions: "Friends of mine have been asked whether they would try to instigate a coup d'etat or a revolution if they moved to the U.S. A sampling of other eyebrow-raising questions are as follows: Are you a member of al Qaeda? Would you think about financing al Qaeda if you moved to the U.S.? Are you a member of Mahdi Army (the militia linked to anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtdad al-Sadr)? Would you be willing to work as a spy? For America or al Qaeda? My friends were bewildered by these queries. Even if their answer was 'yes,' did the people asking the questions really believe they would get honest answers?" Earlier this month the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees reported on the Iraqi refugees in Egypt, Syria and Jordan: "While many Iraqi refugees have been following the provincial elections closely, some people are either not interested or pessimistic, seeing no real benefit in the exercise." An Iraqi man in Damascus says, "The elections carry no significance. The country is destroyed and people care only for their personal gains, positions." An Iraqi women in Cario states, "Most of my family members have either been killed, kidnapped or are now refugees scattered across the globe. I am not going to return to Iraq. . . . Do you think it matters to me who will win the provincial elections? It does not matter, at least to me." Meanwhile in Iraq, attacks on various ethnic and religious minorities continue to add to the refugee crisis. Marc Santora and Alan Cowell (New York Times) report a Christian woman was shot dead in Mosul. Last fall's assault on Iraqi Christians in Mosul resulted in a mas exodus for many weeks. Assyria Times reports the Assyrian Universal Alliance has written US President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden about the plight of Iraqi Christians. This is the text of their letter to Barack:
On behalf of the Assyrian Universal Alliance and its affiliates worldwide, it gives me great pleasure to extend my warmest congratulations on your historical inauguration as President of the United States of America. At the same time, I would like to take the opportunity to thank you and Vice President Joseph Biden for your continuing support of the Assyrian people; however, our work is not finished and our nation urgently needs your help.
We recognize the significance of your election and take this opportunity to equally congratulate the American people for ushering in a bright new chapter in the progress of civil liberties for U.S. citizens. We rejoice with all those who have struggled for a very long time to bring this significant era to fruition. Although the road has been long and difficult, they have kept the dream alive. As a nation that has been in a similar struggle for many centuries, we Assyrians feel a special sense of the joy, relief, and accomplishment that your election carries. As we fight for our survival, we hope that our cry for help will be heard by someone who intimately understands the predicament we face as a nation.
As you know, the situation of Assyrians in Iraq is dire and the recent news from Mosul, the heart of Assyrian ancestral lands, points to alarming deterioration of our nation's status. With so many Assyrians having fled Iraq, the very survival of the Assyrian nation hangs in the balance. Our numbers are dwindling and our communities are being shattered. Should this continue, the world will witness the demise of one of its most ancient and historically significant nations.
We appeal to you to urge the Iraqi government to agree to the essential institution of an Assyrian Autonomous Region in the historical and ancestral Assyrian lands in Northern Iraq as part of modern day Iraq. This newly-formalized Assyrian region which will be administrated and protected by Assyrians under the jurisdiction of Iraq's central government is crucial to the security and survival of our nation and will encourage Assyrian refugees, whether those internally displaced in Iraq or those scattered in Diaspora, to return.
We eagerly await your leadership in promoting the establishment of this Assyrian Autonomous Region and thank you again for your continuing campaign to ensure the survival of one of world's most ancient nations. We look forward to meeting with you to further discuss our situation and implement strategies to secure the future of our people.
Meanwhile Marc Santora and Alan Cowell (New York Times) report on puppet of the occupation Nouri al-Maliki's attention-seeking stunt in the midst of French President Nicolas Sarkozy's visit to Iraq and they laughably assert puppet Nouri al-Maliki is attempting to go from client-state to equal partner with the US -- and doing so by insulting US vice president Joe Biden (see yesterday's snapshot). Hilarious. Are your sides aching yet? The reporters strive for stand-up with this one-liner: "Mr. Maliki also contended Tuesday that his government had fixed the missteps of the Americans after the invasion, like the American decision to dismantle the pre-war Iraqi Army." The Baathists? What has al-Maliki done? Not a damn thing. The White House benchmarks were signed off on by al-Maliki personally. He has had over two years to do something. One of them was about the Baathists. Paul Bremer (with the White House signing off -- including Colin Powell who now loves to whisper to reporters that it was all Bremer) disbanded the Iraqi military and did so as part of his Baathist purge. There was no reason for that and it was a mistake. It has been seen as a mistake by most for many years now. One of the benchmarks was to fix Bremer's de-Baathification policy (which would be de-de-Baathification). Though al-Maliki finally got around to pointing at a law, it's never been implemented and it had no checks or balances. And when rumors surfaced at the start of the week that al-Maliki was in talks with former Baathists to bring them into the government, what did he say? (This was specifically Baath officials from Saddam's regime who are now exiles -- and, no, no domestic outlet bothered to report on these rumors or al-Maliki's on-the-record response.) al-Maliki stated it wasn't true and it couldn't be true because the Iraqi Constitution would have to be changed first. The Iraqi Constitution would have to be changed first? And he wants to claim he's fixed US mistakes? The puppet was installed by the US. The puppet sits on billions while Iraqis suffer. Biting the hand that's fed him is never a trait to strive for and for those who missed the reports of Nouri Talking To Baathists, here's one example. Ma'ad Fayad's " Iraqi Dawa Party Official: No dialogue with Armed Groups" ( Asharq Alawsat) and al-Ibadi is Haydar al-Ibadi who is spokesperson for Dawa (Nouri's party): Al-Ibadi categorically denied that any official in the state spoke to Baathist leaders whether inside Iraq or abroad. He explained: "The Iraqi constitution does not allow this. Besides, the public' general mood does not support the Baath Party because it committed a lot of crimes during and after the rule of the [former] regime." He added: "The Baathists have committed a lot of crimes and killed a large number of Iraqis since 2003 to date. It is they who allowed the Al-Qaeda Organization to enter the country and who were involved in the killing of hundreds of Iraqis." He asked: "So, how can such a party rejoin the political process?" However, Al-Ibadi noted: "There are Baathists who returned to their jobs and who live a normal life without any problems. But they did so as Iraqis, not as members of the Baath Party, which is known for being a conspiratorial military party that does not believe in democracy and does not allow the establishment of a democratic rule." He added: "Permission for the return of the Baath Party to political action needs a constitutional amendment, and I very much rule out the possibility of such a move."
Progress! cried Nouri yesterday. But Michael Christie (Reuters) reports the US will turn over all Iraqi prisoners at some point in 2010. This would be the prisoners that were supposed to be turned over to Iraq on January 1st of this year. And staying with Nouri's laughable claims yesterday of all the 'progress,' James Denselow (Guardian) observes, "While no state in the Middle East has a particularly exemplary record of governance, the Iraqi state is still the most dangerous, fragile, deeply divided and incapable. Maliki's government still cannot deliver event he most basic of services (electricity and clean water supply or a safe environment for refugees to return.)" As further proof of how Nouri can't deliver, look at some of today's violence. McClatchy's Laith Hammoudi reports the driver for Brig Gen Sabah (national police) was wounded in a roadside bomb attack, Raghad Abdul Hussein's car was targeted in Baghdad with a sticky bombing (a civilian was wounded -- Hussein works in a government ministry) and in Diyala Province a home invasion was launched on police Capt Sallal al Timimi's house with one guard being killed and a roadside bombing leaving a police officer arriving in the area dead. Reuters notes two were killed in the home invasion as well as the polic officer -- by the bombing -- when he arrived to provide assistance and that Raghad Abdul Hussein (Raad Hussein Abdullah, in their report) was murded in the Baghdad attack.
That's far from today's only reported violence but those are officials targeted -- all in one day -- and Nouri's not been able to 'fix' that either.
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 Baghdad car bombings (one after the other) that claimed 16 lives and left forty-three people wounded, a Baghdad roadside bombing that left 1 person dead and four more wounded, three other Baghdad roadside bombings that left 1 person dead and seventeen wounded, a Babil roadside bombing which claimed the lives of 2 police officers (three more wounded), a Mosul roadside bombing which claimed 1 life, a second Mosul roadside bombing that wounded one person, a Mosul grenade attack that wounded one person. On the double bombing, Monte Morin and Saif Hameed (Los Angeles Times) explain it was a bus station and quote eye witness Ammar Hussein, stating, "I lost consciousness, and when I woke up I saw that my left leg was bleeding, I was taken to a hospital and was crying the whole time because I don't know what happened to my friend." In addition, Xinhua reports a Mosul 'suicide' car bombing that has claimed the life of 1 Iraqi soldier with five additional people left wounded and a police source tells Xinhua, "A suicide bomber drove his explosive-laden car into a joint U.S. and Iraqi Army patrol in the Hadbaa neighborhood in northern Mosul."
Shootings?
Corpses?
In the US, Katharine Q. Seelye (New York Times) reports that Secretary of Defense Robert Gates suggested today that he was open to allowing the media to photograph the flag-draped coffins of fallen soldiers as their bodies and remains are returned to the United States" and that "he was ordering a review of the military policy that bars photographers from taking pictures of the return of the coffins". Mike noted Reuters report last night: "U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates on Tuesday ordered the Pentagon to review its ban against news media photos of the flag-draped coffins of U.S. military dead returning from combat zones overseas." For those who missed Monday's press conference:
QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President. You've promised to send more troops to Afghanistan. And since you've been very clear about a time table to withdraw our combat troops from Iraq within 16 months, I wonder what's your time table to withdraw troops eventually from Afghanistan? And related to that, there's a Pentagon policy that bans media coverage of the flag-draped coffins from coming into Dover Air Force Base. And back in 2004, then-Senator Joe Biden said that it was shameful for dead soldiers to be, quote, snuck back into the country under the cover of night. You've promised unprecedented transparency, openness in your government. Will you overturn that policy, so the American people can see the full human cost of war?
MR. OBAMA: [. . .] Now with respect to the policy of opening up media to loved ones being brought back home, we are in the process of reviewing those policies in conversations with the Department of Defense. So I don't want to give you an answer now, before I've evaluated that review and understand all the implications involved. CNN's Ed Henry asked him about the coffins and above was Barack's response on that. He LIED. We are in the process of reviewing those polices? There was no review going on until Gates ordered one yesterday unless every news outlet mangled the story. Barack stood before the nation and lied claiming there was already a review in process. When might Barack have moved on that issue? An issue that should have been addressed before he ever took office? He's been called on to change the policy since before he was sworn in. Rebecca noted Paul Bedard and Nikki Schwab's " Lautenberg to Obama: Don't Hide Our Fallen Troops at Dover Air Force Base" ( US News & World Reports): President Obama is under more pressure this week to let media cameras cover the arrival of war dead at Dover Air Force Base. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, in a letter to Obama provided to Whispers, said, "I respectfully urge you to work to bring an end to the misguided policies of the past that seek to hide the sacrifice of our soldiers and the public recognition and pride that should accompany it." The policy is controversial on all sides: Some claim the government wants to soften the impact of many coffins being pictured at once; others say taking pictures is disrespectful. Lautenberg has been outspoken on the issue for several years and pushed for a reversal of the policy in 2004, in the middle of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Officials say that Lautenberg, a Democrat from New Jersey, and the administration have been discussing the policy. "Throughout our nation's history, it has been a tradition for our nation to honor fallen military men and women when their flag-draped caskets are flown home from war operations overseas. Seeing these returning caskets prompts a national sense of shared pain and sacrifice, as well as gratitude and pride," the senator said in the letter.We are in the process of reviewing -- that's what he said. Not we're going to start a review. He said the review was under way. It was not. Liar. And don't say, "We'll he meant he was reviewing whether or not to review . . ." He deliberately misled. It was a lie. Like a student who didn't do his homework, stalling for time, Barack lied. Ann Scott Tyson (Washington Post) notes: Critics of the Pentagon policy view it as a means for blocking images that underscore the human cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as preventing coverage that honors those killed. Obama was asked about the issue in Monday's news conference and said, "We are in the process of reviewing those policies in conversations with the Department of Defense, so I don't want to give you an answer now before I've evaluated that review and understand all the implications involved."
So, when do we march? We have an administration that has officially upheld the lawlessness of the previous administration. The same people who took to the streets or at the very least engaged in righteous indignation over Bush administration actions should not silently sit by and allow Obama to do the same things.
It isn't too soon to protest. He told us right away that there is no change we can believe in. We don't have to wait for bombs to fall on Iran or for more prisoners to be denied their human rights.
It is not only acceptable but imperative that we speak up now. We must say that Iran has the right to have nuclear power or nuclear weapons or satellites or anything else it wants without being threatened by the United States. We must say that the continuation of Bush administration human rights abuses will not be excused under the guise of giving Obama one hundred magical days to learn his new job.
It is time to take not only Obama to task, but faux progressives to task as well. They are the Obamites who claimed they would hold his feet to the fire if we would just shut up and let him get elected. It is time to protest against them too and call them out for being the hypocrites they are.
That means a lot of protesting needs to be done. Why waste time when Obama isn't wasting any. We must get started now.
In music news, Mike noted a new album, The Good Things, in his entry last night. It's Schuyler Fisk's new album and you can find out more info at her MySpace page. She's immensely talented and I know her mother. We'll note her debut album and MySpace page which provides you with an opportunity to hear some of the album's new tracks. The album is available for downloading at Amazon and iTunes.
And finally, in honor of Betty's much missed magazine Movieline, today we offer Guess Who Don't Sue. 1) _____ currently runs a CIA cut-out and poses as a 'progressive' but is bothering the Agency as she attempts to grab some headlines in her advanced years (poor dear, doesn't have a great deal of time left to find fame) by jabbering away about topics that have rightly raised eyebrows in the last few days. She spent two decades outside the US sleeping -- for the US government -- with a variety of men and she and her husband were paid back with cushy 'progressive' covers in the US for their 'golden years'. But fame can be a . . . Well, a CIA agent. Too bad for her, payback can be as well. And she's the talk of the DC. Not in a good way.
|
Posted at 03:31 pm by thecommonills
Permalink
al-Maliki and the Baathists
March
12, I'll attend a board hearing in St. Louis, Missouri, to determine
what the nature of my discharge from the Individual Ready Reserve will
be. The Army has alleged "misconduct" and they're shooting for a
"general discharge," but I'm pushing for "honorable," as my refusal to
deploy was not an act of misconduct.I
will attend this hearing in uniform as ordered, but only for the
purpose of these administrative proceeding. I'm not contesting the fact
that I did not report as
ordered to deploy to Iraq. However, I intend to paint a clear picture
of my convictions to the military, and I seek to corroborate them with
first hand accounts of occupation.No
person is bound to act against the dictates of conscience, let alone
their understanding of the law. I know the occupation of Iraq and
further, the Global War on Terror, to be an illegitimate and ultimately
murderous campaign waged for economic gain, fueled by misinformation
and greed. I know it to be in violation of not only international law,
but the U.S. Constitution. Far more importantly, it is against the
dictates of my own conscience, and never again will I compromise my
humanity to support or ignore the crimes of my government.I
will be working closely with Iraq Veterans Against the War to plan what
we hope will reflect a Winter Soldier event in the form of our members
testifying under oath to the military about their experiences in the
Global War on Terror.I seek only truth to be heard and considered by the military. If reconciliation is possible, I seek that, as well.[. . .]We
are continuing to gather funds needed to cover travel expenses and
accommodation for those who will be testifying. I hope anywhere from 15
to 30 veterans, military family members, Iraqi civilians and
constitutional experts will appear before my board. Please consider
making a donation to my defense campaign either through my website, matthisresists.us, or through ivaw.org.The above is from Matthis Chiroux' " I Have a Date With the Army!" (World Can't Wait) and that event is next month. Yesterday, US war resister Cliff Cornell turned himself in at Fort Stewart. Lyndell Nelson (WSAV) reports: When
asked if he would do it all over again, Cornell said, "Yeah, because I
am not over there taking part in this illegal war, I'm not over there
killing innocent people or taking part in the torturing that is going
on."The warrant for
Cornell's arrest was desertion, but there is no word on whether charges
will be pressed. A spokesperson for Fort Stewart says Cornell has been
assigned to the first brigade combat team and his commander will decide
what the next step will be. The Fayetteville Observer is among those running the updated article by Russ Bynum (AP): Cornell's
lawyer, James Branum of Lawton, Okla., said Cornell was assigned to a
unit after meeting with military police, but it was still unclear if
the Army would hold him in pretrial confinement. "He was visibly
shaking when they came to pick him up," Branum said. Meanwhile the Asbury Park Press is having an online discussion. About? From their introduction: After
enlisting in the Army and completing intensive training, Pfc. Daniel
Marble of Seaside Heights returned home in August 2006 for a two-week
break and then went AWOL for two years. He was arrested Jan. 23 on a
warrant issued by the Army. Three days later, he received a fax that
stated he would be processed out of the military if he returned to Fort
Knox, Ky., the following day. But instead, he was told to report to
Fort Bragg, N.C., where he turned himself in Thursday. He could be
deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, but he says he does not want to go
because he is against killing. "I am simply not capable of taking a
life," said Marble. "I don't want to kill someone and live with that
for the rest of my life." He is now waiting to learn his fate.Again, the discussion is ongoing online. In Iraq today, Reuters reports a Baghdad car bombing that has claimed 5 lives and left twenty people injured. Xinhua reports
a Mosul 'suicide' car bombing that has claimed the life of 1 Iraqi
soldier with five additional people left wounded and a police source
tells Xinhua, "A suicide bomber drove his explosive-laden car into a
joint U.S. and Iraqi Army patrol in the Hadbaa neighborhood in northern
Mosul." Yesterday 1 Iraqi Christian woman and five police officers ("at
least") were shot dead in Mosul. Marc Santora and Alan Cowell (New York Times) report that in the New York Times
in their article on Nicolas Sarkozy's visit to Iraq. The reporters
laughably assert puppet Nouri al-Maliki is attempting to go from
client-state to equal partner with the US and doing so by insulting US
vice president Joe Biden. Hilarious. One's reminded of Senator Barbara
Boxer pointing out the US reception in Iraq versus the Iranian
reception and her correcting US Ambassador Ryan Crocker when he
attempted to claim otherwise. The reporters strive for stand-up with
this one-liner: "Mr. Maliki also contended Tuesday that his government
had fixed the missteps of the Americans after the invasion, like the
American decision to dismantle the pre-war Iraqi Army." The
Baathists? What has al-Maliki done? Not a damn thing. The White House
benchmarks were signed off on by al-Maliki personally. He has had over
two years to do something. One of them was about the Baathists. Paul
Bremer (with the White House signing off -- including Colin Powell who
now loves to whisper to reporters that it was all Bremer) disbanded the
Iraqi military and did so as part of his Baathist purge. There was no
reason for that and it was a mistake. It has been seen as a mistake by
most for many years now. One of the benchmarks was to fix Bremer's
de-Baathification policy (which would be de-de-Baathification). Though
al-Maliki finally got around to pointing at a law, it's never been
implemented and it had no checks or balances. And when rumors surfaced
at the start of the week that al-Maliki was in talks with former
Baathists to bring them into the government, what did he say? (This was
specifically Baath officials from Saddam's regime who are now exiles --
and, no, no domestic outlet bothered to report on these rumors or
al-Maliki's on-the-record response.) al-Maliki stated it wasn't true
and it couldn't be true because the Iraqi Constitution would have to be
changed first. The Iraqi Constitution would have to be changed
first? And he wants to claim he's fixed US mistakes? The puppet was
installed by the US. The puppet sits on billions while Iraqis suffer.
Biting the hand that's fed him is never a trait to strive for. For those who missed the reports, here's one example. Ma'ad Fayad's " Iraqi Dawa Party Official: No dialogue with Armed Groups" ( Asharq Alawsat) and al-Ibadi is Haydar al-Ibadi who is spokesperson for Dawa (Nouri's party): Al-Ibadi
categorically denied that any official in the state spoke to Baathist
leaders whether inside Iraq or abroad. He explained: "The Iraqi
constitution does not allow this. Besides, the public' general mood
does not support the Baath Party because it committed a lot of crimes
during and after the rule of the [former] regime."He
added: "The Baathists have committed a lot of crimes and killed a large
number of Iraqis since 2003 to date. It is they who allowed the
Al-Qaeda Organization to enter the country and who were involved in the
killing of hundreds of Iraqis." He asked: "So, how can such a party
rejoin the political process?"However,
Al-Ibadi noted: "There are Baathists who returned to their jobs and who
live a normal life without any problems. But they did so as Iraqis, not
as members of the Baath Party, which is known for being a
conspiratorial military party that does not believe in democracy and
does not allow the establishment of a democratic rule."He
added: "Permission for the return of the Baath Party to political
action needs a constitutional amendment, and I very much rule out the
possibility of such a move."Iraq's Foreign Ministry notes Sarkozy's visit: President Nicolas Sarkozy, accompanied by Foreign Minister Mr. Bernard Kouchner arrived on 10/2/2009 to Baghdad .
The
French guest was received with of an official welcoming ceremony at the
Peace Palace by His Excellency President Jalal Talabani. Official talks
between the two sides were held attended by members of the Presidency
and the Foreign Minister. The talks focused on ways to develop
relations between Iraq and France in the fields of reconstruction,
energy and defense, then the two presidents held a press conference to
explain the positive results of talks.
During his brief first
visit, the French president met with Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and
held detailed discussions on the mechanics of activating the diplomatic
presence, and the opening of French consulates in Arbil and Basra, and
commercial and military missions, as well as cooperation in energy,
investment and strengthening defense cooperation.
It was decided
that the French Prime Minister and Foreign Minister would visit with a
delegation of French businessmen to Baghdad in the coming months. The
meeting was attended by Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari and several
advisers of the Prime Minister. In conclusion a press conference
between the French President and Iraqi Prime Minister was held .Joy notes Christine Smith's " Welcome to Obama's 'New Era of Peace'" ( Information Clearing House): So
much for the peace activists who supported Obama - how deluded could
they be? To have expected (or "hoped") for anything different was a
daydream.Just like any
warmonger, just like Bush, Obama put to use the same old policy of
attacking and rationalizing the killing of Pakistanis. The death count
as yet being reported is 22 (see ABC news & Press TV.)What
a start to Obama's idea of an American "role in ushering in a new era
of peace" which he spoke of in his inaugural address. Sadly, it is only
the beginning of what will be continual bloodshed by the U.S.
government under Obama's presidency.[. . .]Keep in mind, Obama didn't keep it hidden that he would continue such policies, no indeed. I highly recommend the following "St. Pete for Peace" webpage with its list of Obama quotations and positions.Though
the world can expect no change, we as Americans can expect more
retributive and vindictive anger waged against us, not for our way of
life, but for our way of imposing our will upon others. Obama, like
past presidents, will make sure he keeps those "wars" going, with the
missile attacks on Pakistan an ominous sign of what is to come.Back to Iraq, Ken Silverstein (Harper's) steers people to Eli Lake's Washington Times report
that Iraq is on another shopping spree buying US tanks, planes and
helicopters with some "equipment . . . not to be delivered until 2012"
when the US will allegedly be out of Iraq (the US won't be) according
to the treaty masquerading as a Status Of Forces Agreement. I haven't
read Lake's report but the arrival dates are not surprising and press
conferences in the Green Zone throughout 2008 repeatedly noted that
Iraq's military -- air division -- wouldn't be ready to solo in 2012. In more news of military hardware, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency notes this M-NF annoucement: Jan.
25 marked the transfer of the 4,000th armored M1114 Humvee to the
Government of Iraq. This milestone is part of a program to produce
Mission Capable Complete Humvees for issue to Iraqi Security Forces and
to provide on-the-job training to Iraqi mechanics.The
program is based here at Camp Taji and managed by Multi-National
Security Transition Command -- Iraq logistics personnel with
augmentation from Army Materiel Command, Tank and Automotive Command in
conjunction with Multi-National Corps -- Iraq and other coalition
partners who are providing M1114s for the program. and this one: The
Iraqi Army (IA) received thousands of armored humvees from the U.S.
military as part of an ongoing effort to enhance the IA’s combat
effectiveness. Administered
by Multi-National Security Transition Command -- Iraq, the program is a
joint-effort between the U.S. Army and the U.S. Air Force with the
intent to turn over 8,500 of the vehicles to the Iraqis by July 2009. The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com. iraqcliff cornellmatthis chirouxdaniel marblelyndell nelsonchristine smithashbury park pressma'ad fayadthe new york timesmarc santoraalan cowellken silverstein
Posted at 07:05 am by thecommonills
Permalink
Barack's first public lie as president
Defense
Secretary Robert Gates suggested today that he was open to allowing the
media to photograph the flag-draped coffins of fallen soldiers as their
bodies and remains are returned to the United States."If
the needs of the families can be met and the privacy concerns can be
addressed, the more honor we can accord these fallen heroes, the
better," Mr. Gates told reporters.He
said he was ordering a review of the military policy that bars
photographers from taking pictures of the return of the coffins, most
of which go through Dover Air Force Base in Delaware, and set a "short
deadline" for a decision.The above is from Katharine Q. Seelye's " Gates Orders Review of Policy on Soldiers' Coffins" and it went up online at the New York Times website yesterday. It doesn't appear to be in the paper which is too bad because the story needs a lot more space. Mike noted Reuters report last night: U.S.
Defence Secretary Robert Gates on Tuesday ordered the Pentagon to
review its ban against news media photos of the flag-draped coffins of
U.S. military dead returning from combat zones overseas. Needs a lot more space? Monday's press conference:
QUESTION:
Thank you, Mr. President. You've promised to send more troops to
Afghanistan. And since you've been very clear about a time table to
withdraw our combat troops from Iraq within 16 months, I wonder what's
your time table to withdraw troops eventually from Afghanistan?
And
related to that, there's a Pentagon policy that bans media coverage of
the flag-draped coffins from coming into Dover Air Force Base. And back
in 2004, then-Senator Joe Biden said that it was shameful for dead
soldiers to be, quote, snuck back into the country under the cover of
night.
You've promised unprecedented transparency, openness in
your government. Will you overturn that policy, so the American people
can see the full human cost of war?
MR. OBAMA: [. . .] Now with
respect to the policy of opening up media to loved ones being brought
back home, we are in the process of reviewing those policies in
conversations with the Department of Defense. So I don't want to give
you an answer now, before I've evaluated that review and understand all
the implications involved. CNN's Ed Henry asked him
about the coffins and above was Barack's response on that. He LIED. We
are in the process of reviewing those polices? There was no review
going on until Gates ordered one yesterday unless every news outlet
mangled the story. Barack stood before the nation and lied claiming
there was already a review in process. When might Barack have
moved on that issue? An issue that should have been addressed before he
ever took office? He's been called on to change the policy since before
he was sworn in. Rebecca noted Paul Bedard and Nikki Schwab's " Lautenberg to Obama: Don't Hide Our Fallen Troops at Dover Air Force Base" ( US News & World Reports): President Obama is under more pressure this week to let media cameras cover the arrival of war dead at Dover Air Force Base. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, in a letter to Obama provided to Whispers,
said, "I respectfully urge you to work to bring an end to the misguided
policies of the past that seek to hide the sacrifice of our soldiers
and the public recognition and pride that should accompany it." The
policy is controversial on all sides: Some claim the government wants
to soften the impact of many coffins being pictured at once; others say
taking pictures is disrespectful. Lautenberg has been outspoken on the
issue for several years and pushed for a reversal of the policy in
2004, in the middle of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.Officials
say that Lautenberg, a Democrat from New Jersey, and the administration
have been discussing the policy. "Throughout our nation's history, it
has been a tradition for our nation to honor fallen military men and
women when their flag-draped caskets are flown home from war operations
overseas. Seeing these returning caskets prompts a national sense of
shared pain and sacrifice, as well as gratitude and pride," the senator
said in the letter.We are in the process of
reviewing -- that's what he said. Not we're going to start a review. He
said the review was under way. It was not. Liar. And don't say, "We'll
he meant he was reviewing whether or not to review . . ." He
deliberately misled. It was a lie. Like a student who didn't do his
homework, stalling for time, Barack lied.
Ann Scott Tyson (Washington Post) notes: Critics
of the Pentagon policy view it as a means for blocking images that
underscore the human cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well
as preventing coverage that honors those killed. Obama was asked about
the issue in Monday's news conference and said, "We are in the process
of reviewing those policies in conversations with the Department of
Defense, so I don't want to give you an answer now before I've
evaluated that review and understand all the implications involved." The Committee to Protect Journalists is calling on Barack to stop US detentions/imprisonments of journalists. Maria Sanminiatelli (AP) notes
that CPJ sent Barack a letter in January requesting he address the
issue because it has encouraged "other countries" to also
detain/imprison journalists. Neil MacFarquhuar (New York Times) adds:
"Paul Steiger, chairman of the committee and a former Wall Street
Journal editor, also called on the government to thoroughly investigate
the killings of 16 reporters by American forces in Iraq since the 2003
invasion." Related, CPJ has new publication:
Criminal
gangs force Latin American journalists to censor their work. Asian
governments emulate China's media control model. In the Middle East, a
regional pact threatens satellite TV. These alarming developments are
recounted in CPJ's worldwide survey, Attacks on the Press.
"Today, the greatest threats to freedom of the press are more insidious
than a generation ago because they are intended to induce a climate of
fear and self-censorship," writes Carl Bernstein in the preface. The following community sites updated last night: The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com. iraqthe new york timeskatharine q. seelyepaul bedardnikki schwabthe washington postann scott tysonmaria sanminiatellineil macfarquharcnned henrylike maria said pazkats kornersex and politics and screeds and attitudethomas friedman is a great manthe daily jotcedrics big mixmikey likes itruths reportsickofitradlzoh boy it never ends
Posted at 07:03 am by thecommonills
Permalink
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Tuesday, February 10, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, al-Maliki slams Joe Biden, the ACLU speaks out, Cliff Cornell turns himself in, and more.
Daniel Sandate: Well, like a lot of other soldiers, the military seemed the last resort [. . .] to stay on my feet. My father had just died and I inherited his house and, after a series of events -- mostly my fault, I just was tired of living that every day life. I just got out of jail, actually, a few days before I went to the recruiters and the marine recruiter asked me if I had ever been arrested and he asked me a series of other questions and they ended up flat out rejecting me in like five minutes. They said, "Get out of our office, we don't want you!" And so, I walked directly, right across the hallway, to the army recruiters, they were all in the same building. And they asked me the same questions and I gave them the same answers and basically they said, "Yeah! Sure, we'll take you. There's absolutely no problem at all. All you need is just to get a waiver and you'll be in.
Sandate tried suicide countless times, using drugs, rat poison, even slicing his tongue in half, hoping he'd bleed to death. He was diagnosed with bipolar disorder, depression and attention deficit disorder. He never finished high school. He did a lot of drugs.
He says he told everything to military recruiters. The Marines wouldn't take him; the Army gave him a waiver. He was 24.
Later he went to Iraq, where he survived three attacks and cleaned up masses of dead bodies. Along the way, he herniated a disc in his back. Instead of immediately treating his injury, the Army put Sandate through a bureaucratic nightmare. He became suicidal again. Then he took an online friend's offer to desert and live with her in Canada. Together, they grew marijuana to help Sandate with his phyiscal pain and mental instability. But Sandate says he felt guilty for abandoing his comrades, and blamed his girlfriend. The relationship crumbled. Alone again, Sandate slit one of his wrists in his Canadian apartment.
His attorney James Branum explains the route back to the US in this video, "You went from Brantford, Onatrio later to Niagra Detention Center, eventually was deported into the US and from there he was transported to Colorado Springs where he was held in the county jail in pre-trial confinement." In this video, Branum explains that Robin Long and Daniel were the first two US war resisters to be forcefully deported from Canada and Daniel speaks about the back surgery he had while in the military.
Which brings us to Cliff, also represented by Jim Branum. Gary McCollum co-owns the Village Food Market where Cliff worked and he told the Nanamio Daily News, "He was a wonderful worker, it is very sad that he had to leave and that the U.S. arrested him. He won a national award for us for setting up the best display in the country last November. I know the entire store missed him and he got a great deal of support from across Gabriola [Island]." Today Cliff turned himself in at Fort Stewart. Russ Bynum (AP) quotes him explaining yesterday, "I'm nervous, scared. I'm just not a fighter. I know it sounds funny, but I have a really soft heart." Project Safe Harbor's Gerry Condon continues to call on US President Barack Obama to grant amnesty to all war resisters. Former US presidents Gerald Ford created a process for Vietnam war resisters (draft dodgers and deserters) to seek asylum and Jimmy Carter provided amnesty to all Vietnam draft dodgers. AP notes, "His lawyer says Cornell has been assigned to a unit after meeting with military police, but it's not clear if the Army will hold him in pretrial confinement."
IVAW's Afghanistan Resolution and National Mobilization March 21st
As an organization of service men and women who have served in Iraq, Afghanistan, stateside, and around the world, members of Iraq Veterans Against the War have seen the impact that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have had on the people of these occupied countries and our fellow service members and veterans, as well as the cost of the wars at home and abroad. In recognition that our struggle to withdraw troops from Iraq and demand reparations for the Iraqi people is only part of the struggle to right the wrongs being committed in our name, Iraq Veterans Against the War has voted to adopt an official resolution calling for the immediate withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan and reparations for the Afghan people. (To read the full resolution, click here.)
To that end, Iraq Veterans Against the War will be joining a national coalition which is being mobilized to march on the Pentagon, March 21st, to demand the immediate withdrawal of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan and further our mission and goals in solidarity with the national anti-war movement. This demonstration will be the first opportunity to show President Obama and the new administration that our struggle was not only against the Bush administration - and that we will not sit around and hope that troops are removed under his rule, but that we will demand they be removed immediately.
For more information on the March 21st March on the Pentagon, and additional events being organized in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Orlando, to include transportation, meetings, and how you can get involved, please visit: www.pentagonmarch.org or www.answercoalition.org.
Yesterday President Barack Obama held his first 'press conference,' calling on pre-selected journalists. Not one asked about Iraq despite the fact that the Iraq War hits the 6 year mark in March, despite the fact that approximately 147,000 US troops are stationed in Iraq, despite the fact that four US service members died in Mosul yesterday, despite all that and more, Iraq wasn't a 'worthy' topic. Sports stars on steroids was considered a 'national issue' to ask about, but an ongoing war, not one damn question. Barack was asked if he would allow photos of flag draped coffins returning to Dover. He needed 'more time'. Really? When George W. Bush banned it, he did so quickly. The practice of hiding the dead is not an American practice or policy. There is nothing to review, you simply overturn Bush's ban. Barack's not interested in that. Today he added more insults to the military. Yunji de Nies (ABC News) reports that Barack declared today, "I am so proud of you guys and grateful for you. You guys are doing very important stuff." As de Nies points out, these were military "men and women in uniform". Not that a sexist like Barack easily understands but "guys" have penises. His remarks were insulting. Maybe he thinks it a plus that he didn't call the women "sweeties"? 102 service women have died serving in Iraq.
Joe Biden is the vice president of the United States. He's in the news today as thug Nouri al-Maliki tries to see if the new White House puppet masters will be easier to jerk around than the previous ones. Thug Nouri is blasting Biden. Waleed Ibrahim (Reuters) quotes al-Maliki stating Biden is "out of date" for stating that the lack of progress in Iraq means (Biden) "I think our administration is going to have to be very deeply involved. We are going to have to get in there and be much more aggressive in forcing them to deal with these issues." al-Maliki whined, "Such a speech is out of date, because the government of Iraq knows its responsibilities and acts accordingly in a strong way." While such b.s. no doubt has Patrick Cockburn reaching around inside his shorts and heavy panting, the adult world grasps that al-Maliki hasn't done a damn thing.
The 'surge' was rammed through -- over Democratic (verbal) objection -- with the understanding that it was being done to give the Iraqi government the room to maneuver and accomplish some of the needed tasks. The 'surge' resulted in no action on the part of the government. The Iraq Parliament STILL does not have a speaker. De-de-Baathification measures (passed by the Parliament) have still not been implemented. April 2, 2008, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a hearing entitled "Iraq After The Surge." From that hearing, exchange between US Senator Barbara Boxer and Council on/for/of/from Foreign Relations Stephen Biddle:
Barbara Boxer: Did you just say that Maliki uses the Iraqi security forces as his militia? Did you say that?
Biddle: Yes.
Barbara Boxer: If that's true and Maliki uses his military as a force to bring about peace -- that's scandalous and that we would have paid $20 million to train [it] and someone that we consider an expert says it's a militia, that's shocking.
[. . .] Boxer wanted Biddle to explain his remarks and explain how the US could still be a peacekeeping force in Iraq while they were engaging warlords in Iraq which boils down to taking sides. ("You cannot count" on them, Boxer pointed out of the warlords on the US dime.) She rejected as offensive Biddle's suggestion that that sitting down with warlords was an answer. "There is no good solution to this nightmare," she pointed out, "so why not just figure out a way to tell the Iraqis, 'We've spilled the blood, now it's your turn.'"
April 8th, Gen David Peteraeus and US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker took their song and dance to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and from that day's snapshot:
She wanted to know about the training, all the training, that had gone on and then on again. "We've done a lot for the Iraqis just in terms of the numbers themselves," Boxer declared. "I'll tell you what concerns me and most of my constituents, you said -- many times -- the gains in Iraq are fragile and reversable. . . . So my constituents and I believe that" after all the deaths, all the money, "you have to wonder why the best that you can say is that the gains are fragile and reversable." Noting the lack of military success and Hagel's points, Boxer pointed out that nothing was being done diplomatically "and I listened carefully to Senator Hagel and Ambassador Crocker -- from the answer you gave him, I don't get the" feeling that the White House has given anything, it's still "the status quo. She then turned to the issue of monies and the militias, "You are asking us for millions more to pay off the militias and, by the way, I have an article here that says Maliki recently told a London paper that he was concerned about half of them" and wouldn't put them into the forces because he doubts their loyalty. She noted that $182 million a year was being paid, $18 million a month, to these "Awakening" Council members and "why don't you ask the Iraqis to pay the entire cost of that progam" because as Senator Lugar pointed out, "It could be an opportunity" for the Iraqi government "to turn it into something more long term." This is a point, she declared, that she intends to bring up when it's time to vote on the next spending supplamental. Crocker tried to split hairs.
Boxer: I asked you why they couldn't pay for it. . . . I don't want to argue a point. . . I'm just asking you why we would object to asking them to pay for that entire program giving all that we are giving them in blood and everything else?
What's al-Maliki done? Since emerging from hiding after the US military went into Iraq. al-Maliki's just another pathetic Iraqi exile installed by the US government and the puppet might want to consider that before snapping and pretending he's actually accomplished a damn thing because outside of terrorizing the press, al-Maliki hasn't done much but fatten his own bank account and it's past time an independent auditor was sent to Iraq. Remember that when the puppet leaves and -- yet again -- we hear, "Where did the money go? Where did it go?" If the puppet's feeling so strong, why doesn't he order the US military out of Iraq? (He won't because the moment they leave, his 'power' crumbles.) " Goodbye Pasha" indeed.
Nawal al-Samarraie, the Iraqi Minister of Women's Affairs, resigned from her post last week largely due to lack of funds for her office. Her budget was slashed from $7,500 to $1,500 a month after a drop in oil prices. Al-Samarraie told the Associated Press, "I reached to the point that I will never be able to help the women. The budget is very limited ... so what can I do?"
The Iraqi State Ministry of Women's Affairs was founded after the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq, but has achieved little progress since. On a daily basis, women in Iraq face homelessness, lack of jobs, domestic violence and the possibility of detention during US and Iraqi military sweeps.
Other Iraqi ministries have faced similar budget cuts, yet Iraqi women's rights activist lawyer Safia al-Suhail told IRIN that "when we talk about the women of Iraq, we are talking about nearly 65 percent of the population. They need a national and comprehensive strategy to help them enjoy their legal, health, and social rights." Al-Suhail urged Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to deny al-Samarraie's resignation and instead help form an independent commission for women with a bigger budget, according to the Associated Press. However, al-Maliki signed al-Samarraie's resignation the day it was submitted
Al-Samarraie told IRIN, "my office is inside the Green Zone with no affiliated offices in other provinces and not enough funds to hold conferences, invite experts for studies and implement development plans." "How can I work and serve women under such circumstances?" Al-Samarraie plans to travel to an international conference in Turkey concerning Iraqi women. She said she would consider returning to her job and told the Associated Press that "maybe with the next government it will be a priority."
The resignation comes as Naseer al-lly (Asharq Alawsat) notes that "dozens of widows" are being refused assistance by family members and quotes Bosaina Mahmoud Abbas, Director of the Eve Relief Organization, stating Diyala Province "is currently suffering from a problem that warns of an imminent danger, and this is the swelling of the size of the number of widows, divorced women, and unemployed women who are forced to marry elederly men in order to ensure their own livelihood, and the livelihood of their children. But the question is: who guarantees that the new husband will actually support the widows and her children? . . . I recently met dozens of widows who complained that their late husbands families has disowned them and their children. Such a phenomenon is dangerous. Iraqi society in the past was known for family interconnectivity and social integration, to the point that you would find relatives supporting afflicted family members. But now families disown their own children due to the hardship of life. And so there is only one option and that is to get the government to focus on supporting the families of the victims of terrorism. It is a terrorist victims right to have the support of the government."
Meanwhile Deborah Haynes and Sonai Verma (Times of London) report that "a British manager for the services company Kellogg Brown and Root" is accused of an inappropriate sexual relationship with an Iraqi women working for the British embassy and that the manager "was also accused of sexual harassment more than 18 months ago by an Iraqi cleaner and two cooks at the embassy." The reportes quote the cleaner who charged sexual harassment a year and a half ago stating today, "I was in the British Embassy and under the British flag and I was oppressed but nobody did anything about that."
Steven Lee Myers and Sam Dagher (New York Times) offer that Anbar thug Sheik Risha is very happy to display photos of himself with George W. Bush and Barack Obama -- a thug's gotta' have friends -- and having intimidated the 'election' 'commission' into results he liked, he now declares that his weapon of choice is "papers and evidence." The reporters note he "did not recant his earlier threats of violence". The reporters note:
Khalid al-Alwani, a senior official of the Iraqi Islamic Party in Anbar, called the accusations a smear campaign. He insisted that the party's slate in Anbar won nearly 40 percent of the votes, not the 15.9 percent that was announced. The party issued a statement on Sunday accusing Sheik Ahmed and Mr. Mutlaq of practicing "intimidation and extortion" in order have the results declared in their favor. It vowed to "reclaim what is rightfully theirs."
Another of the party's backers called for more drastic action. Sheik Hakem al-Saad, a leader of one of the largest tribes in Anbar, called for the firing of the police chief and army commander and the declaration of a state of emergency. He accused the Awakening leader of sowing discord and inciting violence.
"Ahmed Abu Risha is a bandit and thief," he said.
From election crimes to some of today's reported daily violence . . .
Bombings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad sticky bombing on the car of a bodyguard to Iraq's Shia vice president Adel Abdul Mahdi -- two people were wounded, a Baghdad mortar attack that claimed 1 life and left four people injured and a Mosul car bombing that left three police officers injured. To the sticky bombing, Reuters adds, "Reuters Television footage showed the badly wounded guard lying motionless. Eye witnesses said he died but police did not confirm that. Police initially said the guard worked for Vice President Adel Abdul-Mehdi's office, but the vice president's office said he worked for another branch of government."
Shootings?
This week Dahr Jamail (MidEast Dispatches) back in Iraq reports on hospitality. Last week, he reported on the thriving grave digging business including that "in the Al-Adhamiya area of Baghdad, what used to be a park is now a cemetary with more than 5,000 graves. According to the manager, most of the dead are never counted. . . . Such graveyards, and there are many, raise questions about the real death toll in Iraq."
Iraq is moving to stop foreigners from visiting their country apparently as a result of the Italian visitor. The New York Times' Baghdad Bureau Blog offers more details -- from an Iraqi correspondent -- on the Italian tourist and the correspondent notes, "I found it very strange that he had got to the city so easily. Falluja resident have badges that allow them to get in the city. Those who are not locals of Falluja are usually there on missions."
Meanwhile Thomas E. Ricks has a new book out on Iraq. Tim Rutten (Los Angeles Times) reviews Ricks' new book The Gamble and notes, "This is contemporary history of a vivid and urgent sort, and Ricks has produced a book that deserves to be read by any American who realizes that something other than today's economic news also is of vital interest to the nation." Michiko Kakutani (New York Times) also reviews the book today and notes, "Mr. Ricks writes as both an analyst and a reporter with lots of real-time access to the chain of command, and his book's narrative is animated by closely observed descriptions of how the surge worked on the ground, by a savvy knowledge of internal Pentagon politics, and by a keen understanding of the Iraq war's long-term fallout on already strained American forces." From Rick's " The right way to do Iraq, and the wrong way" ( Foreign Policy): Two excerpts from my new book The Gamble are running in the Washington Post Sunday and Monday. There also are some cool on-line only things -- not just another excerpt, but also a great video about how one officer, Capt. Samuel Cook of the 3rd Armored Cavalry, conducted counterinsurgency operations in one part of Iraq last year. (To read more about how Cook talked an insurgent leader into cooperation, read this excerpt from the book, a section called "The Insurgent Who Loved Titanic.")FYI, Ricks is of the opinion that the US cannot leave Iraq and clearly everyone in this community (including me) disagree with that call. But that's an opinion expressed in the book and not what his book's about. It's offering a serious look at events on the ground in Iraq and it is as strong a read as his previous book Fiasco (my opinion).
Turning to the US, the ACLU issued the following yesterday: Justice Department Stands Behind Bush Secrecy In Extraordinary Rendition Case (2/9/2009) FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: (212) 549-2666; media@aclu.org NEW YORK – The Justice Department today repeated Bush administration claims of "state secrets" in a lawsuit against Boeing subsidiary Jeppesen DataPlan for its role in the extraordinary rendition program. Mohamed et al. v. Jeppesen was brought on behalf of five men who were kidnapped and secretly transferred to U.S.-run prisons or foreign intelligence agencies overseas where they were interrogated under torture. The Bush administration intervened in the case, inappropriately asserting the "state secrets" privilege and claiming the case would undermine national security. Oral arguments were presented today in the American Civil Liberties Union's appeal of the dismissal, and the Obama administration opted not to change the government position in the case, instead reasserting that the entire subject matter of the case is a state secret. The following can be attributed to Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director of the ACLU: "Eric Holder's Justice Department stood up in court today and said that it would continue the Bush policy of invoking state secrets to hide the reprehensible history of torture, rendition and the most grievous human rights violations committed by the American government. This is not change. This is definitely more of the same. Candidate Obama ran on a platform that would reform the abuse of state secrets, but President Obama's Justice Department has disappointingly reneged on that important civil liberties issue. If this is a harbinger of things to come, it will be a long and arduous road to give us back an America we can be proud of again."The following can be attributed to Ben Wizner, a staff attorney with the ACLU, who argued the case for the plaintiffs: "We are shocked and deeply disappointed that the Justice Department has chosen to continue the Bush administration's practice of dodging judicial scrutiny of extraordinary rendition and torture. This was an opportunity for the new administration to act on its condemnation of torture and rendition, but instead it has chosen to stay the course. Now we must hope that the court will assert its independence by rejecting the government's false claims of state secrets and allowing the victims of torture and rendition their day in court." Totally non-related but we'll note Sandra Bulluck's Q&A with In Style readers -- just because it's Sandra.
|
Posted at 03:17 pm by thecommonills
Permalink
Cliff Cornell to turn himself in at Fort Stewart today
US war resister Cliff Cornell tells AP's Russ Bynum,
""I'm nervous, scared. I'm just not a fighter. I know it sounds funny,
but I have a really soft heart." Cornell turns himself in at Fort
Stewart later today. And that's about all (other than the photo) to
recommend from that bad article which (a) doesn't grasp what Jimmy
Carter did (what Carter did would help no present day war resister --
Carter did nothing for those who self-checked out, only for those who
did not show up for induction) and so much more. We'll just hold our
tongue on the amusing moment (not related to Cliff) and note a better AP article can be found here. In the US, Courage to Resist noted the following last week: | Iraq War resister Cliff Cornell deported from Canada |  |  |  |
Press release by friends of Cliff Cornell. February 4, 2009
[ Donate to Cliff's legal defense here ] AWOL GI held in county jail, to be transferred to Fort Stewart
U.S.
war resister Cliff Cornell surrendered himself to U.S. border police on
Wednesday after being ordered to leave Canada. He was promptly arrested
for being AWOL from the U.S. Army, and is now being held at the Whatcom
County Jail in Bellingham, Washington, twenty miles south of the
U.S.-Canada border. Cornell's attorney and supporters expressed outrage at the arrest: "Clifford
Cornell came back to the United States so that he could voluntarily
return to his old unit at Fort Stewart (Georgia),” stated attorney
James Branum. “He stated this intention to the Border Patrol, both
verbally and in writing, by way of a letter I drafted on his behalf. I
am disappointed that the Border Patrol chose to arrest my client and
place him into a county jail with general population prisoners. This
should not have happened." Cornell,
28, fled to Canada four years ago after his Army artillery unit was
ordered to Iraq. But despite a popular outcry to provide sanctuary to
soldiers who refuse to fight in illegal wars, Canada’s Conservative
government is pressing ahead with deportations. Cornell, an Arkansas
native, had come to call British Columbia home. But he now faces a
possible court martial and imprisonment in the United States. "Cliff
Cornell should not be going to jail," said Gerry Condon, director of
Project Safe Haven, a war resister advocacy group. "He had the guts to
follow his conscience and obey international law," continued Condon.
"President Obama should grant amnesty to Cliff Cornell and all war
resisters." Cornell is the second
Iraq War resister to be held in the Whatcom County Jail. He follows
Robin Long, who was deported from Canada in July. Long is now serving a
15-month prison sentence at Miramar Naval Consolidated Brig near San
Diego.
"We want Bellingham to be a Sanctuary City for war
resisters," said Gene Marx of Veterans For Peace, "not a way station
for war resisters being sent to prison." Bellingham is known for being
a progressive city, having passed two anti-war resolutions through its
city council. A public vigil in
support of Cliff Cornell will be held outside of the County jail on
Thursday from 10 am -- 1pm, organized by the Whatcom Peace and Justice
Center. A defense fund for Cliff Cornell has been established by Courage to Resist, a war resister support group. To donate: www.couragetoresist.org/cliffcornell
CONTACT: Marie Marchand, Executive Director, Whatcom Peace & Justice Center
(360) 734-0217 (office); (434) 249-5957 (cell), WhatcomPJC@fidalgo.netThis e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it Gene Marx, Bellingham Veterans For Peace, Chapter 111, 253-653-4423 (cell) Gerry Condon, Project Safe Haven, 206-499-1220 (cell), projectsafehaven@hotmail.comThis e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it Courage to Resist, 510-488-3559 The move to make Bellingham a sanctuary city has already led the right-wing student newspaper, The Western Front, to whine in an editorial
that their city needs to "stop being liberal for liberal’s sake" -- and
it never gets deeper than that. Link provided laughter purposes only.
We covered Cliff in several snapshots last week and he's noted in " US war resisters Andre Shepherd and Cliff Cornell" ( Third Estate Sunday Review). In the US the Chicken Sop for the Soul doesn't go down so easy.  Last night Barack held a hilariously bad (and staged?) press conference
that avoided the issue of Iraq completely. Shame on Barack, shame on
the press. Ed Henry of CNN did ask about the flag draped coffins being
hidden from sight ("And related to that, there's a Pentagon policy that
bans media coverage of the flag-draped coffins from coming into Dover
Air Force Base. And back in 2004, then-Senator Joe Biden said that it
was shameful for dead soldiers to be, quote, snuck back into the
country under the cover of night. You've promised unprecedented
transparency, openness in your government. Will you overturn that
policy, so the American people can see the full human cost of war?")
and, as with every other question he was asked, Barack had no answer.
He's 'reviewing' it. What's to review? Not a damn thing. You overturn
the policy and you do it immediately. If you want it
overturned. If you don't, you drag your feet the way Barack has. His
Chicken Sop for the Soul is being rejected by many. The ACLU issued the following yesterday: Justice Department Stands Behind Bush Secrecy In Extraordinary Rendition Case (2/9/2009)FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASECONTACT: (212) 549-2666; media@aclu.orgNEW
YORK – The Justice Department today repeated Bush administration claims
of "state secrets" in a lawsuit against Boeing subsidiary Jeppesen
DataPlan for its role in the extraordinary rendition program. Mohamed
et al. v. Jeppesen was brought on behalf of five men who were kidnapped
and secretly transferred to U.S.-run prisons or foreign intelligence
agencies overseas where they were interrogated under torture. The Bush
administration intervened in the case, inappropriately asserting the
"state secrets" privilege and claiming the case would undermine
national security. Oral arguments were presented today in the American
Civil Liberties Union's appeal of the dismissal, and the Obama
administration opted not to change the government position in the case,
instead reasserting that the entire subject matter of the case is a
state secret.The following can be attributed to Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director of the ACLU:"Eric
Holder's Justice Department stood up in court today and said that it
would continue the Bush policy of invoking state secrets to hide the
reprehensible history of torture, rendition and the most grievous human
rights violations committed by the American government. This is not
change. This is definitely more of the same. Candidate Obama ran on a
platform that would reform the abuse of state secrets, but President
Obama's Justice Department has disappointingly reneged on that
important civil liberties issue. If this is a harbinger of things to
come, it will be a long and arduous road to give us back an America we
can be proud of again."The following can be attributed to Ben Wizner, a staff attorney with the ACLU, who argued the case for the plaintiffs:"We
are shocked and deeply disappointed that the Justice Department has
chosen to continue the Bush administration's practice of dodging
judicial scrutiny of extraordinary rendition and torture. This was an
opportunity for the new administration to act on its condemnation of
torture and rendition, but instead it has chosen to stay the course.
Now we must hope that the court will assert its independence by
rejecting the government's false claims of state secrets and allowing
the victims of torture and rendition their day in court." What
is really appalling is the response to Barack's latest nonsense. Not
the ACLU's response. But, note, for all the right-wing smears, the ACLU
is, and has been, a pretty middle-of-the-road organization. They issued
a very strong statement (above). The Center for Constitutional Rights
is not a middle-of-the-road organization. The best they can muster is Vinnie Warren whining he's disappointed:
"I
could not be more disappointed: In its first real case, the Obama
administration has chosen to continue the Bush administration's policy
of secrecy before justice despite all the uplifting rhetoric about
transparency. The Bush administration invoked the State Secrets
privilege more than any other administration in history to keep
embarrassing cases out of court. The question is, when will Obama roll
back the illegal expansion of executive power he has inherited?"When?
Never unless he's forced to. A point that many were making when no one
would hold Barack's feet to the fire during the primaries or during the
general election. It's a little late for the latest sop Vinnie Warren wants to offer -- late and embarrassing. File Vinnie under " Radicals who became teeny boppers," and let's move back to the real world. Dahr Jamal is back in Iraq and his latest report is " Full Circle:" Among
things that have not changed in Iraq is one that I hope never changes.
After a four-year-long absence, each of my meetings here with former
friends and fresh acquaintances seems to suggest that adversity has
taken its toll on everything except Iraqi hospitality and Iraqi
generosity. I am awestruck to find the warmth of the Iraqi people
miraculously undiminished through grief, loss and chaos.I
first met A (name withheld) in 2004 during my second trip to Iraq. He
had accompanied Sheikh Adnan, a mutual friend, when the latter came to
visit me in Baghdad. Several visits had followed. The two men would
come to my hotel laden with delicious home-cooked meals, of which the
first morsel had to be eaten by me, as per their custom. Their visits
and the times we spent together brought me an experience of love and
brotherhood, the type of which I had rarely known before. More
significantly, those occasions had healed and sustained me as I
grappled with the guilt and raw horrors of the occupation the
government of my country had subjected their land to.When
A came to visit me this time we could not contain our joy as we greeted
each other. "I have gifts for you habibi," he said, and pulled out two
brand new leather jackets, one brown and one black, for me to choose
from. It was only the first of many gifts he brought me.My
compulsion to know the truth behind the invasion and occupation had
brought me to Iraq. I had come nearly empty-handed from an enemy
country and found acceptance among strangers. What I received here is
best described in Emerson's words, "The greatest gift is a portion of
thyself."It had not taken
me long to grasp that habibi, which literally means "the one that is
loved" in the Arab world, is not a mere form of address or a term of
endearment. It encapsulates a way of life, an innate sense of an
inclusive community, alien to the self-focused concept in the United
States of so many, that of "the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness."In today's New York Times, Steven Lee Myers and Sam Dagher offer " After Iraqi Elections, Next Big Test Is Acceptance"
(which actually makes the front page, maybe in an attempt to bury news
of the four US troops killed in Iraq yesterday?). The opening section
(about the first third) is laughable coming from the paper that didn't
lead in reporting the bullying and threats made by Sheik Risha (that
would be the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times).
You notice elements never reported by the paper (such as the fact that
Marines had to patrol Anbar -- previously handed back to Iraqis -- a
development the Washington Post covered last week but the Times
of New York ignored). In fact, the entire first third really reads
like, "This is what Sudarsan, Ned, Ernesto, Tina and others reported at
the Post and LAT last week." Sheik Risha made his threats and got his way. As noted by Marc Lynch (Foreign Policy): The official results in Anbar
are sharply different from the reports of the last few days. The IHEC
tally gave the victory to Saleh al-Mutlak's bloc, followed by Abu
Risha's Awakenings Bloc, followed by the Islamic Party in third place.
This is a surprise. The behavior of the Islamic Party and the
Awakenings bloc over the last few days strongly suggests that they had
the same information about the preliminary results-- that the Islamic
Party had won. This "adjustment" -- if that's what happened -- for now
appears to have defused the crisis over the alleged electoral fraud by
the Islamic Party and the threats of violence by the Awakenings leaders
by denying victory to either of the two main rivals (Abu Risha says
that he's happy with the result). This resolution is very, shall we
say, convenient... and, perhaps, a clever solution to the escalating
confrontation. I'm sure we'll be hearing more about this soon.. the
Islamic Party's website is currently silent on this sudden change in
their electoral fortunes. Where's Nate Silver to analyze the exit poll
data when you need him?So now the Times
wants to show some interest in the story and Sheik Risha whose so happy
to display photos of himself with George W. Bush and Barack Obama -- a
thug's gotta' have friends. Now that he's intimidate the 'election'
'commission' into giving him a victory, he's declaring his weapon of
choice is "papers and evidence." The reporters note he "did not recant
his earlier threats of violence". From the article, we'll note this
section: Khalid al-Alwani, a
senior official of the Iraqi Islamic Party in Anbar, called the
accusations a smear campaign. He insisted that the party's slate in
Anbar won nearly 40 percent of the votes, not the 15.9 percent that was
announced. The party issued a statement on Sunday accusing Sheik Ahmed
and Mr. Mutlaq of practicing "intimidation and extortion" in order have
the results declared in their favor. It vowed to "reclaim what is
rightfully theirs."Another
of the party's backers called for more drastic action. Sheik Hakem
al-Saad, a leader of one of the largest tribes in Anbar, called for the
firing of the police chief and army commander and the declaration of a
state of emergency. He accused the Awakening leader of sowing discord
and inciting violence."Ahmed Abu Risha is a bandit and thief," he said.The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com. iraqruss bynumthe new york timessam dagherstephen farrellcliff cornellcourage to resistdarh jamailacluthe center for constitutional rights
Posted at 07:02 am by thecommonills
Permalink
4 US service members killed yesterday doesn't result in huge coverage
Yesterday the US military announced four deaths from a car bombing in Mosul. Ernesto Londońo and Qais Mizher's " 4 U.S. Troops, Interpeter Killed in Blast in N. Iraq" ( Washington Post) is the most in depth article offered by a US outlet. They explain: An
Iraqi official in Nineveh province, of which Mosul is the capital, said
a person driving a pickup truck loaded with explosives rammed into a
U.S. armored vehicle about 11 a.m. in the city's Jadid district.The official, who was not authorized to speak on the record, said the attack also wounded two Iraqi policemen and a civilian. Tina Susman (Los Angeles Times) adds,
"They were the first American military deaths blamed on hostile action
since Jan. 18, and the attack was the worst since May, when four troops
also died in a single incident." Alissa J. Rubin (New York Times) has nothing
but the military press release and rounds out her report noting
violence in Mosul on Monday: "In one of those attacks, two Iraqi police
officers, both on their day off, were shot to death by unidentified
gunmen. A roadside bomb that appeared to be aimed at an Iraqi Army
convoy exploded, killing a passer-by and a soldier in the convoy, and a
17-year-old girl was shot to death by an unidentified gunman." Trenton Daniel (McClatchy Newspapers) also offers
other Mosul violence: "Two children were wounded in a roadside bombing,
and a mortar attack in downtown Mosul killed three people, two of whom
were police officers. Seven others, including a police officer, were
wounded. Separately, seven people were wounded Monday evening in
northern Baghdad in a mortar attack. In the southern port city of
Najaf, a roadside bomb blew up in front of a police official's home,
but no casualties were reported." It's truly amazing how little
attention the deaths of four US service members in Iraq receives. And
look for it to receive even less attention from Panhandle Media which
is largely incapable of doing its own thinking and takes its cue from
dash-in-and-out-of-Iraq Patrick Cockburn who's fallen in love with
Nouri al-Maliki. A real journalist who covered Iraq is Thomas E. Ricks. Tim Rutten (Los Angeles Times) reviews Ricks' new book The Gamble
and notes, "This is contemporary history of a vivid and urgent sort,
and Ricks has produced a book that deserves to be read by any American
who realizes that something other than today's economic news also is of
vital interest to the nation." Michiko Kakutani (New York Times) also reviews
the book today and notes, "Mr. Ricks writes as both an analyst and a
reporter with lots of real-time access to the chain of command, and his
book's narrative is animated by closely observed descriptions of how
the surge worked on the ground, by a savvy knowledge of internal
Pentagon politics, and by a keen understanding of the Iraq war's
long-term fallout on already strained American forces." From Rick's " The right way to do Iraq, and the wrong way" ( Foreign Policy): Two excerpts from my new book The Gamble are running in the Washington Post Sunday and Monday. There also are some cool on-line only things -- not just another excerpt, but also a great video
about how one officer, Capt. Samuel Cook of the 3rd Armored Cavalry,
conducted counterinsurgency operations in one part of Iraq last year.
(To read more about how Cook talked an insurgent leader into
cooperation, read this excerpt from the book, a section called "The Insurgent Who Loved Titanic.")FYI,
Ricks is of the opinion that the US cannot leave Iraq and clearly
everyone in this community (including me) disagree with that call. But
that's an opinion expressed in the book and not what his book's about.
It's offering a serious look at events on the ground in Iraq and it is
as strong a read as his previous book Fiasco (my opinion). The KRG updates the release noted yesterday morning to add: Kurdistan Regional Government and Qatar sign MOUA
memorandum of understanding (MOU) was signed on Sunday between the
Kurdistan Regional Government and Qatar covering cooperation on
infrastructure, agricultural development, agricultural investment,
tourism and air transport.The
memorandum also refers to the possibility of opening diplomatic offices
in both Qatar and the Kurdistan Region as part of plans to develop
diplomatic and trade ties.Meanwhile Iraq's Foreign Ministry notes: 10 February, 2009Undersecretary for Policy Planning and Bilateral Relations Meets Norwegian DelegationUndersecretary
for Policy Planning and Bilateral Relations Mr. Labeed Abbawi met with
the Norwegian Ambassador Mr. Peter Ridder , the Norwegian non-resident
Ambassador in Iraq Mrs. Mette Raven and Mrs. Anita Crocken Official at
the Norwegian Foreign Ministry on Monday morning 9/2/2008.The
two sides reviewed bilateral relations between the two countries and
ways of strengthening them, as well as the conditions of Iraqi refugees
in Norway. Mr. Abbawi stated that Iraq is working to provide a safe
atmosphere necessary for the reception of refugees and displaced Iraqis
because Iraq needs them in rebuilding their country emphasizing at the
same time on the human nature and voluntarily of the process of Iraqi
citizens abroad.The
delegation made an invitation to Mr. Abbawi to visit Norway for the
opening of the Iraqi embassy in Oslo, and to follow up on the
discussion related to bilateral relations and other common interest.On
his part, Mr. Abbawi reviewed the political and security developments
and the results of provincial elections, adding that the situation in
the country is stable and safe and called on Norwegian companies to
work and invest in Iraq. The meeting was attended by Ambassador Hussein
Moalah, Head of Europe Department and Ambassador Kassem Abdolbaqi Head
of the Legal Department and Deputy Head of Europe Department Mr. Shamil
Abdel Aziz Mohamed. Mette Ravn presented her credentials in 2007. From Norway's offical embassy site: The Ambassador of Norway presents her Letter of Credentials to the President of Iraq | The
Ambassador of Norway, Mrs. Mette Ravn, presented her Letter of
Credentials to the President of Iraq, His Excellency Jalal Talabani, in
Baghdad on the 4th of December 2007. 14/02/2008 :: Ambassador
Ravn expressend Norway’s confidence in the ability of the Iraqi people
to build a strong, unified nation and Norway’s readiness to continue to
assist with the reconstruction of Iraq. Ambassador Ravn, who was
accompanied by First Secretary Hanne Ulrichsen, also met with Foreign
Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Vice President Abdel Abdul-Mehdi, some
resident Ambassadors, and the UN SRSG to Iraq, Staffan de Mistura,
during her visit which lasted five days.
|  The Ambassador presents her Letter of Credentials to President Talabani.  |
The following community sites updated last night: The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com. iraqthe washington post the los angeles timestina susmanthe new york timesalissa j. rubinmcclatchy newspaperstrenton danielthomas e. rickstim ruttenmichiko kakutanilike maria said pazkats kornersex and politics and screeds and attitudethomas friedman is a great mantrinas kitchenthe daily jotcedrics big mixmikey likes itruths reportsickofitradlzoh boy it never ends
Posted at 07:00 am by thecommonills
Permalink
|
|
|
|
|
|
corey flintoff
gina chon
