Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "The Republican Dream""

And the war drags on . . .

Sandra Bullock's blockbuster passes the $100 million mark

11 dead, seventy-one reported wounded in Iraq

US military kills truck driver, Grannies get bitchy

Iraq snapshot

The violence and the disputed region in the north

"Negligence by these forces caused this catastrophe," said Jaafer Teafari, 34, an unemployed laborer. "The Qala area is well protected, so how were the terrorists able to enter and strike?"

That's from Nada Bakri's "Explosions Kill 50 in Iraq, Raise Fears of Sectarian Strife" (Washington Post) on yesterday's violence which includes the twin bombings in Tal Afar. Mike Tharp (McClatchy Newspapers) offers this context, "Mass bombings continued for a second day Thursday throughout Iraq, killing dozens of people and wounding more than 130 in at least three cities a week after the U.S. military withdrew combat forces from Iraq's major cities." Ned Parker and Usama Redha's "In self-policed Iraq, bombings kill 54" (Los Angeles Times) covers the back and forth blaming:


Provincial council member Yahya Abed Majoub, a member of the Sunni Arab Iraqi Islamic Party, blamed the attack in Tall Afar on political factions as well as neighboring countries.
"There are groups who want to ignite sectarian and ethnic tensions all over Iraq. Nineveh is just the starting point," Majoub said. "There is a political agenda from inside and outside related to the election."
Kurdish officials blamed the attack on the group Al Qaeda in Iraq. They lashed out at the U.S. military, however, saying it had allowed security to deteriorate by withdrawing. The Kurds have viewed the American forces as a partner and a check on Arab ambitions in the provinces adjoining Iraqi Kurdistan.


In today's New York Times, Steven Lee Myers and Campbell Robertson's "Insurgency Remains Tenacious In North Iraq" whose key characteristic appears to be the continued low-balling of fatalities. For example, going with 12 for Wednesday's bombings in Thursday morning's paper (as happened in NYT) was understandable in that the article could have been filed before the final toll was in. An article appearing in this morning's paper on yesterday's violence, an article written yesterday (Thursday) has no excuse for still not having the death toll from Wednesday correct. But that's the New York Times, always heading the undercount. We'll note this from the article:

The persistent violence in Mosul and Nineveh underscores the broader turmoil afflicting Iraq. But it also reflects the region's unique mixture of insurgency and ethnic tensions between Kurds and Arabs, as well as a proliferation of criminal gangs, that makes the north the most dangerous part of the country.
That was supposed to change last spring, when 4,000 American troops joined more than 25,000 Iraqi security personnel to clean out Mosul's neighborhoods one by one. Just as significantly, a Sunni Arab political bloc won in January’s provincial elections, giving the Arab citizens of the north proportional representation for the first time and, it was hoped, defusing antigovernment sentiment and support for insurgents. It has not turned out that way.

Along with undercounting, the article stands out for suddenly noticing things that others have long been noting. (Including Mosul being the target of violence and the targeting of the police.) And you really have to laugh at this coming from the New York Times: "Much of the death toll in Iraq these days results from large, high-profile attacks that can skew perceptions of day-to-day violence. The attacks in Mosul, though, are just as often small, directed and constant, with a toll that accumulates inexorably even as it draws less attention." If it's not a large high profile attack, the paper ignores it. That's why the violence in Mosul has largely gone uncovered by the paper. The targeting of the police, for example, became the story of the weekend and yet the paper never noted it until today. It was a slow and steady targeting. And then the paper wants to claim that perceptions are skewed about the violence because of high profile attacks?

No, the only the violence gets covered is if it's a high profile attack. When it's not, it goes uncovered and the paper pretends everything's 'safe' and 'peaceful' in Iraq. It's not the attacks that are skewing perceptions, it's bad reporting.



On the front page of this morning's New York Times, Sam Dagher's "Kurds Lay Claim To Land and Oil, Defying Baghdad" that some strong points and some strong problems. First, I grasp that anytime you write about the Kurdish region, it's up for misunderstanding. Making basic points of fairness here leads to e-mail drive-bys from people who assume I am pro-KRG or anti-KRG. I'm neither. The KRG exists and it exists without my say-so and neither requires nor needs it. So I grasp that simple statements can easily be misconstrued on this issue -- by readers in the US and outside. And I grasp that efforts at fairness can upset some groups. But the news needs to strive towards fairness and Dagher's article fails that test.

This is the statement that matters: "Iraq's federal Constitution allows the Kurds the right to their own constitution, referring any conflicts to Iraq's highest court."

The Kurds have the right to their own constitution. That's not debatable. Nor do we need fretting from Nouri al-Maliki or any Iraqi MP. Fairness is that any power the Constitution outlines can be exercised without need for a tizzy or uproar.

The Kurds creating their own Constitution is within their rights. Whether or not some in the KRG area feel they'll have time to know it before July 25th really isn't an issue. Not one for outsiders. July 25th is when the region holds their elections (they did not hold elections January 31st -- and it's interesting to note how much time the press spent/favored on those elections and how little attention the international press has given to these elections). A body has ruled that the Constitution cannot be voted on by the people in the region July 25th (they now hope to have it August 11th or before September). But bringing the aspect of oh-I-don't-have-time-to-read into it is just nonsense because the article already sets up that Nouri's opposed to the Constitution that Iraqi MPs are and by tossing in that useless information, the paper appears to be taking sides.

I doubt anyone is ever ready for any vote. Myself included. I know the referendums, I know the statewide (and national offices) but there's always at least one local office I have no idea on. Boo-hoo. That's the way it goes. Had the constitution been put before the people, as the KRG wanted, you can be sure it would have been printed in newspapers in the region. You can be sure it would have been available. And those who cared to inform themselves would do so and those who didn't care (as well as those who didn't have the time) wouldn't inform themselves. They might, as I do on a local office, ask friends for input before deciding their own vote. They might just skip that section of the ballot. Or they might just mark something on their ballot without caring.

That's the way it goes in every election around the world. When you've already weighted the argument to one side, and the paper had long before it began whining that voters wouldn't know what was in the constitution, including that nonsense is taking a side. And it's also flaunting ignorance because, again, the constitution, were it being included in the July 25th vote, would be publicized and widely printed.

Did they have the right to write their own constitution? Yes, they did. That should have led the article. Instead, it led with how Americans are fretting about tensions and how Nouri's opposed to it and how some Iraqi MPs are (a lot of Iraqi MPs were outraged by it). And then, it briefly notes what the actual law is before turning to various groups to trash the constitution for various reasons.

That's not reporting. And it's not fair and this is a volatile region so care needs to be taken.

Care was not taken.

That includes in the last two paragraphs which are devoted to Gareth Stansfield. I would be very curious to read his full quote because the two sentences fit the article's alarmist tone; however, they do not reflect Stansfield's manner of speaking -- which is usually more weighted and thoughtful than the paper's quote indicates.

Dagher writes:

Kurdish officials defended their efforts to adopt a new constitution that defines the Kurdistan region as comprising their three provinces and also tries to add all of hotly contested and oil-rich Kirkuk Province, as well as other disputed areas in Nineveh and Diyala Provinces. Iraq's federal Constitution allows the Kurds the right to their own constitution, referring any conflicts to Iraq's highest court.

No where in that paragraph -- or elsewhere in the article -- is it noted that any disputes are the fault of the centeral government in Baghdad. These issues were supposed to have been resolved long ago. They have not been. Nouri spent the weekend floating the idea that maybe Kirkuk could be resolved with a vote before killing that at the start of the week.

The issues need to be resolved. The issue of Kirkuk was Constitutionally mandated to be resolved by November 2007 (in the 2005 constitution). Not only that but Nouri agreed to the White House's 2007 benchmarks and those benchmarks included resolving the Kirkuk issue.

Nouri agreed to that, he signed off on it.

He hasn't done his job.

Where in the article is that noted or made clear?

It isn't.

It's those pesky Kurds, in such a rush, and, my, how greedy!

That's how the article reads (headline is from the print version, by the way). I don't live in Kirkuk. Who ends up with it isn't really a pressing concern of mine. But you can't pretend to explore the topic and ignore the fact that the issue was supposed to have been addressed four years ago and that Nouri has been the impediment there for three years. You should note that the United Nations attempted to graft an agreement and Nouri was again the problem. But you are required to note that the issue was supposed to have been resolved long ago and that Nouri agreed, in 2007, to resolve it when he signed off on the White House benchmarks.

You might need to note that the paper reported in June of 2007 (Damien Cave), "The future of oil-rich Kirkuk was left in limbo, with Kurds holding out for a referendum scheduled for the end of this year that they hope will grant them control."

Furthermore, the paper is accepting the boundaries set by the central government and those boundaries have always been in dispute, even in Saddam's time. The areas are disputed on both sides. It's not just the Kurds disputing the boundaries.

And it needs to be noted that the Kurdish elections take place July 25th . . . with none of the drum rolls or breathless panting the New York Times offered non-stop in the lead up to the January 31st elections -- elections that the repeatedly forgot to note were not taking place across Iraq.

Turning to TV, this week on NOW on PBS:

Once one of the most dangerous and violent cities in the West Bank, Jenin was the scene of frequent battles between the Israeli military and Palestinian fighters, and the hometown of more than two dozen suicide bombers.

The Weekly Q
Does the U.S. relationship with Israel help our national security?
Yes
No
Not sure
Survey software by SurveyGizmo
Send this Weekly Q to a friend!
Today, however, there's been a huge turnaround. Jenin is now the center of an international effort to build a safe and economically prosperous Palestinian state from the ground up. On Jenin's streets today, there's a brand new professional security force loyal to the Palestinian Authority and funded in part by the United States. But can the modest success in Jenin be replicated throughout the West Bank, or will the effort collapse under the intense political pressure from all sides?

This week, NOW talks directly with former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, the international community's envoy to the region and an architect of the plan. We also speak with a former commander of the infamous Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade in Jenin about his decision to stop using violent tactics, and to residents of Jenin about their daily struggles and their hopes for the future.
To Blair, the Jenin experiment can be pivotal in finally bringing peace to the Middle East. He tells NOW, "This is the single most important issue for creating a more stable and secure world."
This show is part of Enterprising Ideas, NOW's continuing spotlight on social entrepreneurs working to improve the world through self-sustaining innovation.
Next week NOW on PBS reports from inside the Israeli Defense Force to get the Israeli perspective on peace in the Middle East.
Next week NOW on PBS reports from inside the Israeli Defense Force to get the Israeli perspective on peace in the Middle East.

That begins airing tonight on most PBS stations as does Washington Week which finds Gwen sitting around the table with James Barnes (National Journal), Ceci Connolly (Washington Post), Doyle McManus (Los Angeles Times) and Deborah Solomon (Wall St. Journal). Bonnie Erbe sits down with Melinda Henneberger, Eleanor Holmes Norton, Kay James and Genevieve Wood on PBS' To The Contrary. Check local listings, all three PBS shows begin airing tonight on many PBS stations. And turning to broadcast TV, Sunday CBS' 60 Minutes offers:

Kill Bin Laden
The officer who led the army's Delta Force mission to kill Osama bin Laden after 9/11 reveals what really happened in Tora Bora, Afghanistan, when the al-Qaeda leader narrowly escaped. Scott Pelley reports. | Watch Video

---

Eyewitness
Lesley Stahl reports on flaws in eyewitness testimony that are at the heart of the DNA exonerations of falsely convicted people like Ronald Cotton, who has forgiven his accuser, Jennifer Thompson. (This is a double-length segment.) | Watch Video

---

60 Minutes, Sunday, July 12, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.

On NPR's The Diane Rehm Show, Steve Roberts fills in for Diane Rehm. The first hour (domestic) includes E.J. Dionne (Washington Post), Dante Chinni (Christian Science Monitor) and Karen Tumulty (Time magazine). The second hour (international) features Andrei Sitov (Itar-Tass), Farah Stockman (Boston Globe) and Tom Gjelten (NPR). The Diane Rehm Show begins airing on most NPR stations (and streaming online) live at ten a.m. EST.

We'll note this from Michael Schwartz' "The US takes to the shadows in Iraq" (Asia Times):

Unfortunately, not just for the Iraqis, but for the American public, it's what's happening in "the dark" - beyond the glare of lights and TV cameras - that counts. While many critics of the Iraq War have been willing to cut the Obama administration some slack as its foreign policy team and the US military gear up for that definitive withdrawal, something else - something more unsettling - appears to be going on.
And it wasn't just the president's hedging over withdrawing American "combat" troops from Iraq which, in any case, make up as few as one-third of the 130,000 US forces still in the country - now extended from 16 to 19 months. Nor was it the re-labeling of some of them as "advisors" so they could, in fact, stay in the vacated cities, or the redrawing of the boundary lines of the Iraqi capital, Baghdad, to exclude a couple of key bases the Americans weren't about to give up.
After all, there can be no question that the Obama administration's policy is indeed to reduce what the Pentagon might call the US military "footprint" in Iraq. To put it another way, Obama's key officials seem to be opting not for blunt-edged, former president George W Bush-style militarism, but for what might be thought of as an administrative push in Iraq, what Vice President Joe Biden has called "a much more aggressive program vis-a-vis the Iraqi government to push it to political reconciliation".
An anonymous senior State Department official described this new "dark of night" policy to Christian Science Monitor reporter Jane Arraf in this way: "One of the challenges of that new relationship is how the US can continue to wield influence on key decisions without being seen to do so."
Without being seen to do so. On this General Odierno and the unnamed official are in agreement. And so, it seems, is Washington. As a result, the crucial thing you can say about the Obama administration's military and civilian planning so far is this: ignore the headlines, the fireworks, and the briefly cheering crowds of Iraqis on your TV screen. Put all that talk of withdrawal aside for a moment and - if you take a closer look, letting your eyes adjust to the darkness - what is vaguely visible is the silhouette of a new American posture in Iraq. Think of it as the Obama Doctrine. And what it doesn't look like is the posture of an occupying power preparing to close up shop and head for home.

Plugging a friend's movie.



The Hurt Locker opens today in San Francisco, Dallas, Chicago, Atlanta, Austin, Oahu, Portland, Phoenix, Salt Lake City, San Diego, Minneapolis, Denver, Toronto and DC. The amazing film directed by Kathryn Bigelow is winning raves all over. Ann Hornaday's "'Locker' Serves as Iraq Tour De Force" (Washington Post):


"War is a drug," writes Christopher Hedges in the epigraph that precedes "The Hurt Locker." Someone else described war as "interminable boredom punctuated by moments of stark terror." Director Kathryn Bigelow comprehends both those observations and conveys them in this captivating, completely immersive action thriller. "The Hurt Locker" just happens to be set in Iraq in 2004, but, like the best films, transcends time and place, and in the process attains something universal and enduring. "The Hurt Locker" is about Iraq in the same way that "Paths of Glory" was about World War I or "Full Metal Jacket" was about Vietnam -- which is to say, utterly and not at all. "The Hurt Locker" is a great movie, period.

From Mick LaSalle's "'The Hurt Locker' shows Bigelow's skill" (San Francisco Chronicle):

She uses handheld cameras in "The Hurt Locker" not to make viewers dizzy or to instill excitement that isn't there but to create a subtle sense of being alongside the characters. Her camera doesn't shake. It breathes. It pulses. The camera becomes the viewer's eyes, not those of a spastic cameraman. Through such intuitive means, Bigelow takes an audience from the opening credits into a state of fierce attention and total empathy within about 60 seconds.
Notice how quickly Bigelow conveys the charm and humanity of Guy Pearce, a soldier called upon to neutralize a bomb in the movie's first scene. Notice also how the direction and Mark Boal's screenplay inject a workaday quality into this tense moment. Throughout "The Hurt Locker," the human element is central, so that whenever something happens, it feels personal.


The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

iraq
the new york times
sam dagher
steven lee myers
campbell robertson
the washington post
nada bakri
the los angeles times
ned parker
usama redha
michael schwartz

60 minutes
cbs news
to the contrary
bonnie erbe
now on pbs
npr
the diane rehm show
pbs
kathryn bigelow
ann hornaday
mick lasalle

Release of prisoners

Yesterday, the US released five Iranian diplomats that they had imprisoned for over two years. At the US State Dept, Ian Kelly was at a loss for words other than to repeat "concerns" over the release. Nouri al-Maliki greeted the five diplomats warmly and allowed them to call their families. The five then moved on to the Iranian embassy in Baghdad. In today's New York Times, Steven Lee Myers' "American Military Releases 5 Iranians Detained in Iraq" covers the release and notes, "Mr. Maliki, who has both cultivated ties with Iran and criticized its interference in Iraqi affairs, clearly sought to exploit the situation diplomatically." The more telling observation in the article, however, is this: "It was not clear why Mr. Maliki's government chose now to ask for the release of the men, who had been held for two and a half years; it could have done so any time since January under the security agreement terms. Even senior Iraqi officials seemed to know little about the release."

But Myers writes in a vacuum and, if that's not clear, notice how Damien McElroy's "Barack Obama threatened by Iraq prisoner release" (Telegraph of London) immediately provides the context that the New York Times refuses to:


Iran's foreign ministry had called for their release as recently as a week ago and had the support of Baghdad in pressing its claims. My colleague, Toby Harden exclusively revealed last week that US senators were up in arms against President Barack Obama after the release of a prominent militia leader to launch a process that could free British hostages.
With about 10,000 mostly Sunni Muslim prisoners left in American-run detention facilities in Iraq, the pitfalls are not limited to the examples above but also the global fight against extremist al-Qaeda linked terrorists. If people released start turning up on the Afghanistan battlefield there will be anger but if there is a link to a plot in America or Europe there will be uproar.

The release he's referring to, the previous one, was the release of two brothers who were said to be the ringleaders of an attack on a US base in Iraq (the attackers entered with the help of Iraqi police and posed as Iraqi security forces) that resulted in the death of 5 US service members. It's the release that no one really wants to talk about in the US press (the Christian Science Monitor has been the exception there). The brothers were released in a deal that was supposed to allow their organization to release 5 British hostages they'd held for over two years. Two of the five were released. Or rather their corpses were. From Toby Harnden's "US accused of negotiating with Iraqi terrorists over murdered hostages" (Telegraph of London):

Senior Republicans have expressed concern about the release of Laith al-Khazali, a member of the Shia group Asaib al-Haq, as part of a reported deal to gain the release of five British hostages held since 2007.
It appears that any deal went badly wrong as the bodies of Jason Creswell, from Portlethen near Aberdeen, and Jason Swindlehurst, from Skelmersdale, Lancashire, were handed over to the British Embassy in Baghdad last month, two weeks after he was freed.
The accusations have been made in a letter to President Barack Obama from Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama and Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona and Republicans on Capitol Hill have said they could soon push for public hearings on the issue.

Warren P. Strobel and Mike Tharp's "U.S. military didn't want to release Iranians held in Iraq" (McClatchy Newspapers) notes:

Kelly acknowledged misgivings about the release, and its impact on U.S. military personnel in Iraq. "That is a big concern of ours, is the safety of American forces. And we . . . have of course made our concerns known to the Iraqi government," he said.
Kelly and other U.S. officials said the release did not involve a quid pro quo with Iran and was not a part of the Obama administration's attempts to engage that country's leaders.
Rather than re-arrest the five, the Iraqi government granted them a meeting with Maliki and then reportedly turned them over to Iran's embassy in Baghdad,


Yesterday, UNESCO released [PDF format warning] "FINAL REPORT on Damage Assessment in Babylon" about the damages to the historical archaeological site as a result of the US' decision to construct a base on the site, Camp Alpha, which was running from April 21, 2003 through December 22, 2004. Alix Kroeger files a video report for BBC that can be seen here. On a related topic, art, we're not highlighting Leo Paz' report. We're not interested in promoting the self-promoting woman who helped install Barack through deciet and trickery. If he'd left her out of the report (and there was no reason to include her other than to allow her to yammer on -- not about the exhibit but about herself), we might highlight it. But I'm not interested in that liar.
Equally true is that the State Dept issued a report last week that noted the number of Iraqi refugees admitted in the last fiscal year so if you're going to cite the numbers, you've got the official ones right that and don't have to say "approximately" anything according to an NGO.

On the topic of numbers, the Dept of Defense issued the following yesterday:


The Army released suicide data for the month of June today. Among active-duty soldiers there were no confirmed suicides and nine potential suicides. In May, the Army reported one confirmed suicide and 16 potential suicides among active-duty soldiers. Since that time, seven have been confirmed and nine remain under investigation.
There have been 88 reported active-duty suicides in the Army during calendar year 2009. Of these, 54 have been confirmed, and 34 are pending determination of manner of death. For the same period in 2008, there were 67 confirmed suicides among active-duty soldiers.
During June 2009, among reserve component soldiers not on active duty, there were no confirmed suicides and two potential suicides; to date, among that same group, there have been 16 confirmed suicides and 23 potential suicides currently under investigation to determine the manner of death. For the same period in 2008, there were 29 confirmed suicides among reserve soldiers not on active duty.
"Every soldier suicide is different and tragic in its own way," said Brig. Gen. Colleen McGuire, director, Army Suicide Prevention Task Force. "Our current research and prevention efforts are identifying common denominators that lead soldiers to take their own life. It's often a combination of many factors that overwhelm an individual.
"Although suicide can impact anyone, we're finding that male soldiers, in combat-arms occupational specialties, between ages 18 and 27 are more vulnerable," McGuire said. "That's why we're looking at existing programs and other institutional safety nets to see what works, and what needs to be changed to enhance the support network of trained leaders and behavioral healthcare providers who can identify and treat risk factors before young soldiers get to the point where they feel there’s no way out."
The Army will complete the second phase of a three-phased service-wide suicide stand-down and chain teach program, July 15, 2009. Phases one and two included an interactive training program, that features a video, and a small unit leader training effort which began on February 15, 2009. The third phase of the Army program will include sustained annual suicide prevention training for all soldiers, emphasizing common causes of suicidal behavior and the critical role Army leaders, friends, co-workers and families play in maintaining behavioral health.
The Army's Suicide Prevention Task Force will continue implementation of the Army Campaign Plan for Health Promotion, Risk Reduction and Suicide Prevention to further enhance suicide prevention and behavioral health programs that directly affect our Army community and save soldiers’ lives.
Soldiers and families in need of crisis assistance should contact Military OneSource or the Defense Center of Excellence (DCOE) Outreach Center. Trained consultants are available from both organizations 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year.
The Military OneSource toll-free number for those residing in the continental U.S. is 800-342-9647, their Web site address is http://www.militaryonesource.com. Overseas personnel should refer to the Military OneSource Web site for dialing instructions for their specific location.
The DCOE Outreach Center can be contacted at 866-966-1020, via electronic mail at Resources@DCoEOutreach.org and at http://www.dcoe.health.mil/resources.aspx.
The Army’s most current suicide prevention information is located at
http://www.armyg1.army.mil/hr/suicide/ .

Tony Perry (Los Angeles Times) reports Robin Long was released from Miramar Marine Corps Air Station's brig yesterday "after serving 12 months of a 15-month sentence." Long is a war resister who self-checked out and went to Canada where he attempted to be granted asylum. Not only did that not happen, he was imprisoned and whisked across the border back to the US in violation of his rights and those of his child -- his child is a Canadian citizen.

The following community sites updated yesterday:

• 
  Cedric's Big Mix

  Barry and his dresser

  9 hours ago
• 
  The Daily Jot

  THIS JUST IN! CELEBRITIES NEED DOWN TIME!

  9 hours ago
• 
  Thomas Friedman is a Great Man

  Talking post

  10 hours ago
• 
  Mikey Likes It!

  War Hawks, CIA

  10 hours ago
• 
  Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude

  gordo and british escapades

  10 hours ago
• 
  SICKOFITRADLZ

  Quick

  10 hours ago
• 
  Ruth's Report

  Barack's attempts to bury universal health care

  10 hours ago
• 
  Oh Boy It Never Ends

  John Pilger, Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Senator Burris

  10 hours ago
• 
  The World Today Just Nuts

  More wisdom from Bill Bennett's Book of Virtuous Weight Loss

  10 hours ago
• 
  Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills)

  Abortion rights

  10 hours ago

The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

iraq
the new york times
steven lee myers
the telegraph of london
damien mcelroy
toby harnden
alix kroeger
bbc news
the los angeles times
tony perry
warren p. strobel
mcclatchy newspapers
mike tharp
the world today just nuts
kats korner
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
thomas friedman is a great man
the daily jot
cedrics big mix
mikey likes it
ruths report
sickofitradlz
oh boy it never ends

I Hate The War

Iraq snapshot

July 9, 2009.  Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces a death, Nouri al-Maliki launches a verbal attack on the KRG (while setting himself up as a law-abiding-martyr), 5 Iranians are finally freed, Thomas E. Ricks pimps 'miracle cures' and more.   Yesterday violence made a strong impression in Iraq even if the press wasn't paying attention.  (See Timothy Williams' article in today's New York Times which reduces the deaths to an aside saved for the final paragraph of the article and note that Williams was one of the few reporting on Iraq that you could find in a US paper today.)  If the ongoing, never-ending illegal war has demonstrated anything over the last six years and counting, it's that reality always crashes into the latest wave of Operation Happy Talk.  Jamal al-Badrani (Reuters) counts 50 dead in Iraq today from bombings in northern Iraq and Baghdad.  Ned Parker and Usama Redha (Los Angeles Times) report on two suicide bombers in Tal Afar where one bomber detonated outside the home of a police officer causing a crowd to gather, at which point, the second bomber detonated. Nada Bakri (Washington Post) adds that the police chief states the bombers wore police uniforms and, "The first suicide bomber managed to sneak inside the house of a counter-terrorism officer and blew himself up, causing the home to collapse. The attack took place in a neighborhood called al-Qala, inhabited by mostly Shiites. When neighbors gathered to help the family trapped inside, a second suicide bomber struck, increasing the bloodshed." Caroline Alexander (Bloomberg News) explains, "Tal Afar, a mostly Turkmen town about 30 miles (48 kilometers) west of Mosul, has been targeted by militans before.  In March 2007, it was hit by one of the deadliest single attacks since the U.S.-led invasion of 2003 when a suicide truck bomb killed more than 150 people." Jomana Karadsheh and CNN count 35 dead and sixty-five injured from the two bombings.  The two Tal Afar bombings were not the only reported violence today . . .   Bombings?   Laith Hammoudi and Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) report a Baghdad market bombing which claimed 7 lives and left twenty injured, a Baghdad roadside bombing which left five people injured, a Baghdad sticky bombing which injured two people, a Baghdad bicycle bombing which left four people injured, two Baghdad bombings which claimed 9 lives and left thirty-five people wounded and a Ramadi car bombing which claimed the life of the bomber and left four police officers wounded.  Reuters notes a Mosul roadside bombing which injured one person and a Kirkuk roadside bombing which claimed 1 life and left three injured.   Shootings? Reuters notes one woman and one man were wounded in a Mosul attack by unknown assailants and 1 Iraqi soldier was shot dead in Kirkuk.   Today the US military announced: "BAGHDAD – A Multi-National Division–Baghdad Soldier died July 8 after being found unresponsive at a Coalition forces facility. The Soldier's name is being withheld pending notification of next of kin. The names of deceased service members are announced through the U.S. Department of Defense Official Web site at http://www.defenselink.mil/ . The announcements are made on the Web site no earlier than 24 hours after notification of the service member's primary next of kin. MND-B will not release any additional details prior to notification of next of kin and official release by the DoD. The incident and cause of death are currently under investigation." It's the first US service member announced death in Iraq for the month and it brings the total number of US service members killed in the illegal war to 4322.     "I don't know the exact percentage but I'm sure it's well over 70% that want the US out as soon as possible," explains Mike Tharp in a video posted at McClatchy.  He's speaking with Paul Jay for The Real News Network (click here for the clip at TRNN).  Tharp states, "They've seen the last six years as an occupation, not as a liberation, not as bringing freedom and democracy to Iraq but instead the loss of tens of thousands of Iraqi lives as well as over 4300 American troop losses, a trillion dollars spent by the US, I don't know what estimates are put on the damage done to the Iraqi society and economy but it's incalcuable."  On the topic of the physical damage done to Iraq . . .   Today the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) has issued [PDF format warning] "FINAL REPORT on Damage Assessment in Babylon."  The twenty page report prepared by the International Coordination Committee for the Saveguarding of the Cultural Heritage of Iraq explores the damage done by the US' decision to install a military base on an archaeological site in Babylon after the issue was raised by Iraq's Minister of Culture.  The report explains the historical context:   Babylon is unquestionably one of the most important archaelogical sites in the world.  It was the capital city of two of the most famous kings of antiquity, Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC) who introduced one of the world's first law codes, and Nebuchadnezzar (604-562 BC) who built the Hanging Gardens of Babylon, one of the Seven Wonders of the World.  Alexander the Great chose Babylon as his new capital but died before he could implement this plan.  The existence of Babylon is first mentioned in cuneiform texts of the Akkadian period (2371-2230 BC), but the city did not become significant until the time of Hammurabi.  It was substantially enlarged in the Neo-Babylonian period (626-539 BC) when it became the largest city of the contemporary world.  Although its location was forgotten for centuries the fame of Babylon survived through a number of historical and religious texts.  In view of the historical and archaelogical significance of Babylon, recent allegations of damage to the site during its occupation as a military camp are particularly serious.   Since 1935, Bablyon has been listed as an archaeological site. In 2003, the US invaded and the Iraq War started, the Hammurabi and Nebuchadnezzar museums were looted ("Fortunately, the objects in the two museums were plaster replicas rather than the origianls").  April 21, 2003, the US military created Camp Alpha -- a US base that continued through December 22, 2004 during which time the US military and contractors such as KBR "directly caused major damage to the city by digging, cutting, scraping, and leveling." Nine trenches and two pits were dug including on areas that had not been excavated. This was true of cuts, scrapings and leveling efforts by the US military and contractors as well. In addition the report notes:   The Ishtar Gate serves as a ritual gate leading into the northern part of the inner city.  The damage to the gate includes smashed bricks on nine of the bodies of the animals adorning the gate.  These animals depcit the legendary dragon-snake, the symbol of Marduk, the god of the city of Babylon.  [. . .] Major damage can be observed in the southern part of the Proecessional Way, which was rediscovered during the Babylon Revival Project excavations in 1979.  Starting from the Nabu-sha-Hare Temple, the effects of heavy vehicle wheels are clear, breaking the paving of the street.  Three rows of 2-ton concrete blocks were placed in the middle of the Processional Way on top the paving by heavy vehicles, which is itself an encroachment.  These blocks were removed by helicopter on November 29, 2004 to prevent further damage to the Processional Way.  In addition, a row of HESCO containers with soil taken from the eastern wall of the sacred precinct were placed on the way, and barbed wire was attached by steel stakes to the wall itself and in the middle of Processional Way.  There is also a cut in the wall itself with a length of 2.5 m, a depth of 50 cm, and a height of 1.5 m.   UNESCO's director of the Office for Iraq Moahmed Djelid states, "In view of Babylong's historical and archaeological significance, recent allegations of damage to the site during its military use were particularly serious.  The report is key because it establishes a description of damages on which there is international agreement.  Without pointing fingers, we now have a clear picture of the situation.  It provides the starting-point for the major challenge of restoration and conservation."   In related news, CBC reports nearly seventy stolen Iraqi artificats were recovered and returned by the Dutch government.  Mike Corder (AP) adds, "Dutch Education, Culture and Science Minister Ronald Plasterk said the ancient artifacts were surrendered by Dutch art traders after police informed them they were stolen. U.S. customs authorities and Interpol had alerted Dutch officials that the items were being sold here."    In other diplomatic news, five Iranian diplomats were rounded up by US forces in Iraq in January of 2007 and have been held ever since in indefinite detention/imprisonment. BBC News reports they have been released.  Mike Tharp (McClatchy Newspapers) goes with the number four (four diplomats) and reports they were not released to Tehran but to Iraqi officials and then they met with Nouri al-Maliki. Philippe Naughton (Times of London) quotes Hassan Ghashghavi, spokesperson for Iran's Foreign Ministry, stating, "They called their families from there.  They are in good health. They will be handed over to our embassy within hours.  They were innocent and arrested against all international regulations under the Vienna convention."  They are: Mohsen Bagheri, Majid Dagheri, Mahmoud Farhadi, Majid Ghami and Abbas Jami.  Liz Sly and Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) quote Hoshyar Zebari, Foreign Minister of Iraq, stating the five are "happy and safe."  At the US State Dept today, spokesperon Ian Kelly continued the pattern of the Bush administration by insisting they were not diplomats, stating they were connected to Iranian paramilitary forces (Iranian Revolutionary Guard) and declaring that, along with turning the five over to the Iraqi government, they passed on "our concerns".  Kelly stated the hand-off took place after Iraq requested it and that it went "to our obligations under the US - Iraq Security Agreement."   Yesterday's snapshot included: " Alsumaria reports that despite claims that a vote on Kirkuk might be able to take place before the elections now scheduled for January, no suche elections will be happening.  AP adds, 'On Wednesday, Iraqi officials said the Kurdish-run north of the country could not vote this month on a draft constitution, a document perceived by Iraqi Arabs as an effort to expand Kurdish authority at the expense of the central government'."  The most recent [PDF format warning] US State Dept status report on Iraq (July 1st) explained that the constitution passed the Kurdish Parliament June 24th with 96 members voting for it and that the members of the Iraqi Parliament immediately objected to the planned July 25th vote (same time the KRG holds their elections) and to the Constitution itself.  Gina Chon (Wall St. Journal) interviews Nouri al-Maliki and quotes him stating the KRG is guilty of "provocations" and then declaring, "I am struggling for the unity of Iraq, and Iraq cannot be divided into two."  Chon doesn't note it, but that is a "provocation" from Nouri because the KRG already considers itself independent of the central government in Baghdad.  Chon reveals that US forces are currently sending drones all over Kurdistan in an attempt to spy (she doesn't use the word "spy") on the region and how Iraqi and Kurdish forces interact.  Chon quotes al-Maliki on the non-progress between the KRG and the central government in Baghdad stating, "We are upset, but we are not worried because there is a constitution and we can tell (the KRG) they are violating it."  Again, that's a "provocation."  The KRG does not feel they are violating it with regards to land disputes or anything else.  In terms of the oil rich Kirkuk, the KRG isn't violating anything because the Constitution said that an election was to take place to determine Kirkuk's fate.  That's 2005.  It's now 2009.  The election has never taken place and al-Maliki just this week refused to allow it again.  Who is violating the Constitution of Iraq?   And who's played the Quiet Game?  As noted last week, former US House Rep and 2008 US presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney was imprisoned by the Israeli government.  Margaret Kimberly (Black Agenda Report) notes what some focused on while ignoring McKinney:   While Cynthia McKinney languished in an Israeli jail, black leaders mobilized to say and do absolutely nothing. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton were busy advising Michael Jackson's family, too busy apparently to deal with any other issues. Perhaps that explains their silence on the subject of McKinney and Maguire. McKinney's former colleagues in the Congressional Black Caucus must have also been similarly occupied. They too went out of their way to say and do nothing about the illegal and immoral treatment of someone they should have defended very publicly.            The silence from the corporate media is, sadly, not at all surprising. The complete surrender of black American leadership is also sad and also not surprising, but is nonetheless disgraceful, and should not pass without comment. Cynthia McKinney was one of the first victims of the corporate takeover of the Congressional Black Caucus. She was targeted for defeat in 2002 by Zionists and other powerful forces determined to get rid of one of the few truly progressive members of congress.           The silence from the corporate media is, sadly, not at all surprising. The complete surrender of black American leadership is also sad and also not surprising, but is nonetheless disgraceful, and should not pass without comment. Cynthia McKinney was one of the first victims of the corporate takeover of the Congressional Black Caucus. She was targeted for defeat in 2002 by Zionists and other powerful forces determined to get rid of one of the few truly progressive members of congress.                 The black caucus could have responded in any number of ways to prevent falling prey to McKinney's fate. They might have insured electoral success by mobilizing their supporters, resurrecting movement politics and exposing the forces who would seek to undermine popular will. Instead they chose to capitulate, to go along to get along. They decided not to put up a fight for themselves or for their constituents, who were left without the representation they thought they were getting when they made their choices on Election Day.                      As always, the result of capitulation is more capitulation, and it now spreads beyond the hallowed halls of Congress. The only national action requested by the president of the National Action Network, was a demand for a Michael Jackson postage stamp and a national day of mourning.    Back in the US now, Cynthia McKinney appeared on Democracy Now! yesterday:   CYNTHIA McKINNEY: Well, clearly, we just had a visit to Gaza by President Carter, Former President Carter. Basically, he acknowledged that with the complete and utter devastation that the people of Gaza experienced at the hands of weapons that were supplied to Israel by the United States, he said that unfortunately the Palestinians are treated worse than human beings. I challenge the Israelis to respond to what President Carter had to say.   AMY GOODMAN: Former Congress member McKinney, tell us about the jail. Were you able to reach the Obama administration while you were there?   CYNTHIA McKINNEY: Well, the jail was very interesting. In fact, the first most interesting thing I witnessed was the seemingly endless stream of people of color who are being processed as we were being processed. And on my cell block, there were women from Africa and Asia who thought they were going to Israel because Israel was the Holy Land. And many of them, not all of them, but many of them had United Nations refugee status. They have been certified by UNHCR as refugees, but what they were told as they faced the threats and intimidation from the police is that the United Nations is not in Israel.   [. . .]   AMY GOODMAN: Former Congress member McKinney, we only have ten seconds. But, you've just been deported. What are your plans right now?   CYNTHIA McKINNEY: Well, I would like to see the children of Gaza have the coloring books and crayons that we had on board with us. I would like to see the houses that have been destroyed rebuilt. I would like to see the lives rebuilt for the people of Gaza and I would like to see the people of Palestine have, and enjoy their human rights.   AMY GOODMAN: Do you think president Obama is headed in that direction?   CYNTHIA McKINNEY: I think you can probably answer that as well as we can, because while we were in detention, the Foreign Ministry of Ireland made protests and asked the government of Israel to release its nationals, several Members of Parliament --   AMY GOODMAN: We have 5 seconds.     CYNTHIA McKINNEY: from the United Kingdom --   AMY GOODMAN:  -- 5 seconds --   CYNTHIA McKINNEY: -- also wanted to censure Israel. Nothing from the United States.     Turning to the world of JUNK SCIENCE. Thomas E. Ricks is a journalist.  He forgets that a lot lately.  He forgets it in blog posts where he writes about "we" when referring to the US military, for example.  He forgets it today with one of the dumbest and most disgusting things he could do -- and, yes, I am aware of his highly unprofessional tendency to post cheesecake photos which is surely the middle aged male blogger equivalent of purchasing a sports car.  Thomas E. Ricks is a journalist.  He's not a doctor.  He's not trained in helping anyone.  His training is supposed to be in ferreting out information and attempting to determine whether information is reliable or not.  If so, he's supposed to promote it.  Today he promotes some unnamed marine's anger passed off as 'medical counseling.'  Unlike "Doctor" Thomas E. Ricks, I showed the crap he posted to medical professionals who work with veterans.  The consensus?  The unnamed marine has a problem with what he sees as 'weakness' (any illness) and Thomas E. Ricks didn't even grasp that or what he posted.  After including the lay 'diagnosis,' Tom's babbling about this and that but the guy's already argued -- telling Tom to ask Nate Flick -- that "it should mean he's cured, not that it's always just around the corner".  There's not a cure.  If Thomas E. Ricks had offered the same nonsense on the topic of alcoholism, he'd be the joke of the net today but because there's such a strong desire in this culture to deny sickness, crap like this will be embraced.  PTSD is a diagnosis.  Neither Thomas E. Ricks nor his unnamed marine are experts on science or even the diagnosis they claim to be weighing in on.  Sometimes people just makes asses out of themselves and today it's Thomas Ricks and his unnamed friend.  And shame on him, at a time when veterans' health care is so woefullly underfunded, for promoting the notion that an illness that can be treated but not cured is 'curable' and apparently the fault of the person with PTSD.  And question for Thomas E. Ricks, should the marine kill himself or someone else while Ricks is alive, how much blame will Tom grab?  He should have a huge portion of it because he's encouraged the marine's delusion that he's 'cured'.  Lastly, what kind of an ass prints a medical 'diagnosis' that calls the mind a "bone"?  What kind of a journalist endorses that?  Tom, I know you can't do math for s**t but are you telling me you failed science as well?  The brain's an organ.  Not a bone.  If I recorded a workout video tomorrow, I'd have to include a heads up at the start that people should check with their doctors first but Tom is so sure of himself and he's buddy that he fails to do even that.  It's irresponsible.  Ethically and journalistically.  We may return to this topic tonight.  I've still got calls coming in from people who work with PTSD patients and it's not pretty.  Again, it was irresponsible for Thomas E. Ricks to pimp that Quack Science -- ethically irresponsible and journalistically irresponsible.  As dumb decisions go, it ranks alongside the refusal to allow Dr. David Orgen to testify at Trevor Loope's mental assessment hearing at Fort Drum.  Next up for Thomas E. Ricks: Restoring missing limbs via leeches.   Finally, in snapshot yesterday we noted the Voices of Honor press conference.  The press conference didn't receive the attention it deserved so we'll note US House Rep Patrick Murphy's remarks again and some of the press it did receive. US House Rep Patrick Murphy: My name is Patrick Murphy, I'm a Democrat from the eighth district of Pennsylvania which is Bucks County and far north east Philadelphia. I am now a United States Congressman in my second term but prior to that I was in the military since 1993. I rose up to through the ranks to become a professor at West Point. And then when 9-11 happened, I served on two deployments. My first one with General [David] Petraeus and my second one as a paratrooper with the 82nd Airborne Division in Baghdad from 2003 to 2004. That's why every day I wear the 82nd Airborne pin on my lapel, I don't wear the Congressional pin because 19 of my fellow paratroopers never made it home. I am proud to be the lead sponsor today of the Military Enhancement Readiness Act -- a bill that will finally repeal the discriminatory Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy. Our troops are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan and are stretched dangerously thin. These men and women in our military understand what it takes to serve our country and the values that our military and our nation hold dear. They take an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, yet the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy when it took effect in 1993 has discharged over 13,000 troops -- honorable men and women. That is the equivalent of three and a half combat brigades. They have been discharged not for any type of sexual misconduct but because of their sexual orientation. The policy is not working for armed services and it hurts national security. Attitudes on Don't Ask, Don't Tell have changed -- have changed in our military and have changed in the public at large. Up to 75% of Americans support repeal and the number is even higher in the age bracket of those we are recruiting from 18 years of age to 29. Former senior military leaders agree that it is time to re-evaluate and to repeal the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy. Opponents of lifting the ban arguing that allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly will be detremental to unit cohesion and morale. As a former Army officers and West Point professor, that is an insult to me and to all the troops serving in uniform. In Iraq, my men did not care what race, color, creed or sexual orientation their fellow paratroopers were. They cared, whether they could get the job done. We cared about serving with honor and coming home alive. Over 20 nations, include our two strongest allies, Great Britain and Israel, allow gays and lesbians to serve openly without any determental impact on unit cohesion or morale. Believe me, our heroes serving in the US military are the best fighting forces in the entire world. We are second to none. And we are just as good as those who serve in Great Britain and Israel. Our president, President Barack Obama, has stated that if Congress will get a bill to his desk repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell, he will sign it into law. It is now our job, and my job specifically, to quarterback this through the Congress of the United States to do just that. I cannot tell you today how long it is going to take. All I can tell you is that paratroopers don't quit and paratroopers get the job done. To remove honorable, talented and committed Americans from serving in our military is contrary to the values that our military life holds dear. My time in Iraq and at West Point teaching the next generation of military leaders taught me that our military deserves and expects the best and the brightest that are willing to serve. I stand here today with these honorable and noble veterans. Together we will continue the fight to make our nation and our military stronger. The Voices of Honor website has posted videos from the press conference. Those who are better served by or prefer audio can refer to Free Speech Radio News yesterday (click here for the segment reported by Matt Pearson). Brian Montopoli (CBS News) reports, "The event was a kickoff to the 'Voices Of Honor' national tour sponsored by gay rights groups the Human Rights Campaign and Servicemembers United that features members of the military who oppose the Clinton-era compromise that allows gays to serve only if they keep their sexuality a secret. Murphy's office also helped set up a Web site called www.letthemserve.com." Elida S. Perez (Scripps Howard News Service) notes several speakers at the event and we'll excerpt this section: Alex Nicholson, a former U.S. Army human intelligence collector and founder of Servicemembers United was discharged from the military six months after Sept. 11, 2001 when his commanders found out he was gay. "This is the cost of maintaining Don't Ask, Don't Tell: a multilingual human intelligence collector who speaks Arabic and has an advanced degree," Nicholson said, adding that despite everything, he would go back into the military if the law was repealed. Josh Drobnyk covers the conference here for The Morning Call.  Amanda Ruggeri (US News & World Reports) covered it,  Kat covers it at her site and the other NPC event we attended yesterday -- Mullen's speech, Bob Roehr (Windy City Times) covers the issue and Kilian Melloy covers it for Boston's Edge and notes:   One officer, Lt. Dan Choi, who recently was subjected to a recommendation of discharge for publicly declaring his homosexuality, told readers in an email circulated by The Courage Campaign, "At West Point, I recited the Cadet Prayer every Sunday.     "It taught me to 'choose the harder right over the easier wrong' and to 'never be content with a half truth when the whole can be won.'"   Stan noted Dan Choi's e-mail July 2nd and we'll include it in full:   Dear friend --              I've got some bad news. After 10 years of service to our country--including leading combat patrols, rebuilding schools and translating Arabic in Iraq for 15 months--the Federal Recognition Board issued its recommendation on Tuesday that I be discharged from the Army for "moral and professional dereliction" under the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. The board's decision to fire me is not the end.          Now that this panel of four officers has recommended my discharge, it still must be approved by senior officials in the Army, a process that could take a few weeks to a year. Unless something unexpected happens, it may be just a matter of time before the Army officially fires me. I will not give up, no matter the odds. Because I know that the only way we will win this fight to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is by facing it head on. And I need your help again to keep up the fight. I've made my case to President Obama--supported by more than 140,000 of your signatures. I've made my case to the Army--supported by more than 160,000 of your signatures. And I will continue to make my case until they fire me for good. Now we need to make our case to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Will you join me in asking Speaker Pelosi to strongly support legislation currently in Congress that would repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"?                 Please sign on to our letter before July 4th and I'll personally deliver your signatures to the Speaker ASAP.At West Point, I recited the Cadet Prayer every Sunday. It taught me to "choose the harder right over the easier wrong" and to "never be content with a half truth when the whole can be won." The Cadet Honor Code demanded truthfulness and honesty. It imposed a zero-tolerance policy against deception, or hiding behind comfort.          That's why I can't give up now. I've got to keep fighting. My fellow    servicemembers--and the 70 fellow West Point graduates who have also come out of the closet to join Knights Out, the organization I co-founded to push for repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"--would expect nothing less.            The only way we can win this fight for the truth is if the political cost of discrimination eventually becomes too great for the system to operate successfully. We need to raise the political cost in Congress so that Speaker Nancy Pelosi understands that, as Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall once said, "justice too long delayed is justice denied."          Speaker Pelosi needs to make "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" a priority now and come out strongly in support of legislative action to repeal this discriminatory law. Will you stand by my side now and sign our letter to the Speaker before July 4th? You have my word that I will deliver your signatures to Speaker Pelosi personally.     As I said a few days ago, national security means many things, but the thing that makes us secure in our nation and homes is love. What makes me a better soldier, leader, Christian and human being is love. And I'm not going to hide my love. Love is worth it.       Thank you for your support.                     Daniel W. Choi 1LT, IN                       New York Army National Guard                            P.S. You can also help by joining the Repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell Cause and inviting your friends.                                   iraq mcclatchy newspapers mike tharp the washington post nada bakri the los angeles times ned parker usama redha bbc news the new york times timothy williams caroline alexander bloomberg news sahar issa laith hammoudi liz sly cnn gina chon the wall street journal margaret kimberley democracy now amy goodman  cbs news brian montopoli elida s. perez free speech radio news matt pearson josh drobnyk amanda ruggeri bob roehr kilian melloy