 |
Monday, July 13, 2009
Monday,
July 13, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, churches are the new
targets in Iraq, BBC airs a documentary exploring the assualts on
Iraq's LGBT community, Mike Mullens visits Iraq, ABC's Bob Woodruff
covers it, and more. Starting with war
resistance. Last week in the US, a group of activists rallied for US
war resister Kimberly Rivera, the first female resister to publicly
seek asylum in Canada, at the Canadian Consulate in San Francisco.
They gathered petitions and rallied outside at noon before presenting
the petitions. Bill Carpenter (Indybay Media) offers a report with video. David Solnit, co-author with Aimee Allison of Army Of None,
explains in the reception area that they have signatures for Kimberly
"who is a US soldier who's facing deportation" from Canada. From the
video, I believe that's Joanne Cherep that approaches them. (I could be
wrong.) David Solnit: Hi. My name's
David Solnit, I work with a peace group called Courage to Resist and we
have a bunch of folks with peace and human rights groups and we've
gathered 6,000 signatures in support of Kimberly Rivera and so we would
like to present them. Except for
Adrian Wilson, all present were US citizens. Wilson noted, "I'm a
Canadian citizen and I'm here representing unconventional action in the
Bay and I just wanted to request that PM [Stephen} Harper grant asylum
to any and all Americans who are seeking refuge." Below is the letter
6,000 people signed on to. Rt. Hon. Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada
Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Jason Kenney
Please
act immediately to stop the deportation of Kimberly Rivera, her husband
and their three children by implementing the Canadian Parliament's
resolutions to allow U.S. war resisters to stay in Canada.
I
am writing from the United States to ask that you abide by the House of
Commons resolution -- reaffirmed February 12, 2009 -- to create a
program to allow war objectors, including U.S. resisters, to apply for
permanent resident status in Canada and to cease all deportation and
removal proceedings against them.
The recent flurry of
deportation orders to war resisters, including Kimberly Rivera, and the
forcing out of Robin Long, Cliff Cornell and Chris Teske, flaunted
Canada's longstanding tradition of providing sanctuary to war
objectors. Upon their forced return from Canada to the U.S. military,
Robin and Cliff were sentenced to 15 and 12 months imprisonment
respectively. Future resisters face even stiffer sentences.
When
more than 50,000 Americans refused to fight in Vietnam and emigrated to
Canada, Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau declared, "[They] have my
complete sympathy, and indeed our political approach has been to give
them access to Canada. Canada should be a refuge from militarism."
On
June 3, 2008, the House of Commons first voted to uphold this rich
tradition by passing a historic resolution to allow war resisters to
apply for permanent residence status in Canada and to halt the
deportation of conscientious objectors. In addition to this
parliamentary motion, according to a recent poll, nearly two of three
Canadians also favor allowing U.S. war resisters to stay. Furthermore,
many wonderful Canadians have opened their homes and hearts to U.S. war
resisters.
I ask that the Canadian government respect the
democratic decision of Parliament, the demonstrated opinion of the
Canadian citizenry, the view of the United Nations, and millions of
Americans by immediately implementing the motion and cease deportation
proceedings against Kimberly Rivera, Jeremy Hinzman, Patrick Hart, Dean
Walcott and other current and future war resisters. Aasmah Mir:
Since the invasion six years ago a steep rise in sectarian violence has
claimed thousands of victims throughout the country but this could just
be the tip of the iceberg because murders and attacks against the
lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered community are also on the
increase but often go unreported. So what is happening to gay people
inside Iraq? We've spoken to a range of people -- to those still inside
the country and to those who fled to different parts of the world. The
names of victims appearing in this program have been changed to protect
their identities. Researchers from the US-based Human Rights Watch recently spent several months investigating the treatment of gay people in Iraq. Scott Long: Today we're going to look at a new issue for us -- Aasmah
Mir: The director of the organization LGBT program, Scott Long,
outlined some of their findings at a briefing in New York. Scott
Long: I'm going to start by reading a testimony, or part of a
testimony, from a man we spoke to who was 35-years-old. He actually
developed a severe speech impediment from strain and grief. This is
what he told us: "It was late one night in early April and they came
to take my partner at his parent's house. Four armed men barged into
the house. they were masked and wearing black. They asked for him by
name. They insulted him and they took him in front of his parents. He
was found in the neighborhood the day after. They had thrown his
corpse in the garbage, his genitals were cut off and a piece of his
throat was ripped out. Since then, I've been unable to speak properly.
I feel as if my life is pointless now. I don't have friends other than
those you see. For years, it's just been my boyfriend and myself in
that little bubble by ourselves. I have no family now. I can't go
back to them." Aasmah Mir: Back in Britain, I went to see asylum seeker Ali Hilli who runs a group called Iraqi LGBT. Aasmah Mir: Hello Ali. Ali Hilli: Hello Ashram, how are you? Aasmah Mir: I'm fine thank you. How are you?
Ali Hilli: Good thank you.
Aasmah Mir: Thanks very much for talking to us. Aasmah
Mir: While I was with him, Ali showed me some of the shocking video
evidence of torture his group has been collecting. The images he showed
me concerned attacks on transsexuals Aasmah
Mir: People were -- had their heads shaved. In this video we see one
of the victims, his name is Ali also, he was a member of our group in
Najaf, a trans person lived all his life as a transwoman. They took
him away. They had his head shaved. And they distributed this video
everywhere in Iraq and we still don't have an idea Aasmah
Mir: And that's what we can actually see right now, he's sitting on a
stool, dressed in female clothes, long hair and someone is shaving his
head. Ali Hilli: Yes and uh it's so degrading. Aasmah
Mir: Yeah. How do you feel when you watch this kind of video because
obviously you probably see a lot of it. This is the first time I've
seen anything like this and, you know, obviously I'm quite shocked by
it. But you, you must see this stuff all the time. Do you still feel
shocked by it or are you almost becoming -- getting used to it in a
kind of way? Ali
Hilli: No, I will never get used to atrocities against humanity. If I
see the video for the first time, I'm quite shaken because the only
thing that I-I afraid to catch is the moment of death. This is what I-I
don't want to see in my life. I-I can - I can bear anything, I can
accept anything but to kill a human? I just can't. Aasmah
Mir: We were granted exclusive access to one of the so-called safe
houses set up and funded and managed by the London-based Iraqi LGBT
group. On the outskirts of Baghdad, in an anonymous street behind
heavily curtained windows we found Kassim a man in his late thirties.
Kassim describes himself as a woman in a man's body. He's had a
lifetime of trouble coming to terms with his gender identity. Kassim's
been the victim of violence on several occasions most recently earlier
this year Kassim:
One day, um, someone stopped his car by me and he said "Taxi" and I
said, "Why? Why taxi?" Where are you going? And I said I was going to
this certain place. He took me to an empty house and put a white
blindfold on my eyes and then put a gun to my head and I said, "Just
give me a time to pray to God before you kill me." And he said, "I
won't give you time to pray." And he threatened me and I wasn't moving
because I was afraid that he would kill me with the gun and then
finally he said, "Okay, I'll let you go for this time but your day will
come where you will die Aasmah Mir: Amil's a young Iraqi man whose seeking asylum in London. A gay friend of his was killed by extremists in Iraq. Amil:
I used to have a friend, he was student with me and they find out he
was gay and they kill him and they chop him like a -- like a lamb or I
couldn't or I can't - I can't hardly say because it was really awful.
They kill him and they chop it him and they put him in front of the
institute, the one I was studying, to show and to scare the people to
not be gay or homosexual. Hossein
Alizadeh: The most horrendous form of torture that I have heard and
seen is what happened during March and April in Iraq. Members of the
Iraqi Shi'ite militia al-Mahdi group, they went around posted lists,
names of the people who were supposed to be gay and when they arrest
them they basically use glue to shut down their digestive system -- the
anus. Others who managed to escape go to the hospitals and the
hospitals refuse treatment to those people because, again, they look
gay or they're perceived to be gay. So we had numerous cases -- I can
tell you about fifty or sixty cases I've heard -- that have been
tortured in that way. Aasmah Mir: Rasha Moumneh is the Middle East researcher for Human Rights Watch Rasha
Moumneh: You know some of the gay men have actually talked about
internet entrapment, a lot of men would be kidnapped, blackmailed for
money. We've talked to people whose partners have been killed in the
most brutal of ways. Aasmah Mir: And it appears that it is not just people who are gay, bi or transsexual who find themselves the target of violence Ali
Hilli: Anyone who's gay, who looks like gay, or have an effeminate
behavior, certain Western dress, we've heard of so many examples of
people who were, they were even married with children Aasmah
Mir: There seems to have been an increase in violence in recent months
but according to the London-based Iraqi LGBT the killings and torture
go back a long way. They claim more than 600 people have been executed
since 2003. Ali
Hilli: There are so many other areas like villages, little towns, also
big cities, we can't have people reach to or investigate about
incidents. Also sometimes security situation is quite very
complicated, people can't travel often to check or find out what's
happening in certain areas. So I believe the number is far more higher
than 600. Aasmah
Mir: Gay people are seeking sanctuary from the violence in Iraq in all
parts of the world. At a secret location by the banks of the Seine in
Paris we met Omar a twenty year old gay man who just weeks earlier had
been facing death in Iraq. A small, slightly built young man, who looks
younger than his age, told us his story. At times clearly traumatized. Omar:
I was arrested and I was in retention and there I found five other gay
persons. We suffered torture. There was the electrical way -- to use
electricity to torture us. And there's a position where my head is
down through my legs -- and my head is down, it's something horrible.
While you have another mean of torture using the belts -- you cannot
imagine -- a normal person cannot imagine such torture. Aasmah
Mir: I'm Aasmah Mir and you're listening to Gay Life After Saddam on
BBC Radio 5 live. So what was life like for gay, lesbian, bisexual and
transgendered people before the fall of Saddam Hussein Scott
Long: There was no possibility of leading a particularly public gay
life. There are reports from Amnesty International that 2002 as Saddam
was attempting to sort of shore up his Islamist credentials, before the
invasion, he passed decrees mandating the death penalty for
prostitution and for homosexual conduct. We haven't actually seen
those decrees and we can't confirm what they contain. Aasmah Mir: This Iraqi student who wishes to remain anonymous now lives in New York Anonymous:
I had a pretty, you know, reasonable gay lifestyle under the table --
in terms of, you know, circle of friends, gatherings, get-togethers,
we'd get together at homes. Before the war, there were a couple of
bars, a couple of clubs that on weekends are pretty much publicly gay
and everybody knew about it and we used to go and hang out there and
that's fine as long as we don't take that out in the streets. Aasmah
Mir: Ali Hilli was a young gay men in Iraq during the 1990s. He has
fond memories of the underground gay scene that flourished without much
interference in Saddam's Baghdad. Ali
Hilli: Well we had - we had lots of theater actually plays that we were
-- people always have to refer to the gay character which is always
taken as a sense of humor in shows. We used to go to -- to see lots of
theaters and plays. I don't know, for some reason there is always a
gay character in these plays and I quite like it because I know some of
the actors who are really gay themselves and we enjoy it because they
really make the most of it. They camp it up. And there were lots
of gay famous singers. Aasmah Mir: Kassim remembers a better life under Saddam . Kassim:
Life was good, everything was okay. There were clubs, cafeterias and
we could choose where we sat. We could choose any place to sit and
meet other gays and frankly compared to the current situation the
times under Saddam were much better. Aasmah
Mir: Haider is an Iraqi seeking asylum in England. He's been living in
Huntersfield. He left Iraq shortly after the US invasion six years
ago. Haider:
If you respect yourself and live and you don't cause any problems
nobody is going to kill you we didn't hear of anybody being killed
because of his sexuality in Saddam's regime. Now after that, everything
got worse, everything got fluctuated. I fled from Iraq in 2003 because
of one of the worst experiences I've had in my life. I was kidnapped
for 9 days, they took me in a small car and they send me about to a
place about half an hour. I was. I was eye-folded, they call it. [.
. .] on the border of Baghdad. One of the officers there, he raped me.
And then he said "if you're going to tell anyone from the rest of the
gang, I will kill you directly." I was scared. Just a one meal a day
which is not enough. They were always telling us that they were going
to kill you. If you missed it you have six days to listen online
and note that first five minutes of the podcast are headlines and the
program starts around 5:42 into the podcast. The next section is where
ignorance is really flaunted as 'average' Iraqi men 'explain'
'reality.' Such as it's wrong to have sex with a guy who is a man --
as opposed to a guy who is a woman? You'll hear non-stop ignorance and
hatred in that section. After that the issue of responsibility for the
violence is raised and then is there a role for the US, UK, etc. It's
a powerful program and those who are able to stream it should. Violence swept through Iraq over the weekend and a new feature, reported by Iran's Press TV, was the targeting US Ambassador Chris Hill with a roadside bomb in Dhi Qar. Jomana Karadsheh (CNN) explains,
"The Shiite Arab-dominated province was among the first handed over to
Iraqi security forces, and was the scene of periodic clashes between
Iraqi security forces and a militia loyal to anti-American Shiite
cleric Muqtada al-Sadr in 2007." Aamer Madhani (USA Today) adds,
"A USA TODAY reporter was traveling in a separate U.S. convoy a few
minutes behind Hill's in Nasiriyah, a relatively peaceful city where
Hill had just finished meeting with local political leaders." No one
was reported wounded or killed in the bombing and no one should bother
to even think about if if the US State Dept's reaction is any clue. In
a shameful press briefing today Ian Kelly, State Dept spokesmodel,
never raised the issue and an increasingly disinterested press corps
never asked. Iraq's not one of their 'issues' apparently and Kelly
seems to forget that Chris Hill is under the State Dept umbrella. The
bombing targeting Hill wasn't the only one but the State Dept press
corps doesn't give a damn about Iraq and Ian Kelly couldn't find it
with two hands and a flashing lights illuminating its borders. So the
new 'hot' target in Iraq was yet another issue the State Dept didn't
tackle. It needs to be noted that this administration repeatedly
pushes the previous one's talking point about lack of progress on
Iraq's political scene. So why isn't that asked of at each State Dept
briefing? Because the reporters just don't give a damn. Naamua Delaney: Michael you also talked about the mass exodus of Christians from Iraq. How many are left at this point?
Michael
Ware: Well that's very difficult to say. There's no precise figures on
what was originally the Christian population in this country; however,
most people seem to agree it was around a million Christians in Iraq.
Most people now seem to agree that anything from 600,000 to 800,000 of
that million have fled. Indeed we know that just say last October there
were reports that in the northern city of Mosul which is one of the
last urban strongholds of al Qaeda in Iraq as many as a thousand
Christian families left the city and left the country at that time
after they faced a threat from Islamic militants to convert or to die. From
summer to fall of 2008, Iraqi Christians in and around Mosul were
targeted. Yesterday's attack on Iraqi Christians in Baghdad was the
most visible attack on Iraqi Christians in months; however, it is a
slow and steady trickle of weekly and daily attacks that have gone on
since the start of the illegal war. Steven Lee Myers (New York Times) observed
that Sunday's "worst attack" was when "a car bomb exploded just before
dusk outside the Church of Mariam Al-Adra, or the Church of the Virgin
Mary, part of the Chaldean Catholic Church in Iraq, in central
Baghdad. The blast, which reverberated across the city, damaged the
church and scorched cards near a park on Palestine Street. The blast
killed and wounded Christians and Muslims." Doreen Abi Raad (Catholic News Service) reports,
"Chaldean Auxiliary Bishop Shlemon Warduni of Baghdad, Iraq, had just
finished celebrating Mass at Our Lady of the Sacred Heart Chruch and
was talking to parishioners in the courtyard. Moments later, while he
was in his office, a bomb exploded on the road that runs alongside the
church." Doreen Abi Raad quotes Bishop Warduin stating, "We had been
praying for peace during the Mass. [. . .] all the little children (had
been) praying in the church. Then they ran outside to see the death,
the destruction, to see the war. It was hell. We cry: Why? Why?
What is our fault? That we are Christians?" Pope Benedict XVI has
called out the assaults on Sunday. L'Osservatore Romano (Italian article, and note the photo the charred car outside the church) reports
that the Pope states he "prays for a conversion of the heart of those
responsible for the violence and encourages the authorities to do all
that is possible to promote peace for all of the Iraqi population."
The report notes that since the fall of Saddam's regime, Iraq's
Christian community has been the target of a series of attacks with
August 2004 being the most serious when there were four attacks in
Baghdad and two in Mosul which led to at least ten dead and fifty
wounded. October 16, 2004 saw five attacks on houses of worship in
Baghdad and surrounding areas. Under Saddam, the report states, the
Christians in Iraq enjoyed safety and a reletaive freedom and some held
important positions in the government like Tareq Aziz who was the
Deputy Prime Minister prior to the start of the illegal war. (Since
Marach of this year, he has been serving a fifteen year prison
sentece. He had been held by the US military since 2003. In 2007, Cardinal Emmanuel Delly made a Christmas plea for his release.)
The most high profile assault on a single Christian individual was
probably the kidnapping and murder of Archbishop Paulos Faraj Rahho. From the March 13, 2008 snapshot: Archbishop
Paulos Faraj Rahho is dead. He was leaving the Catholic Church in
Mosul when he, his driver and two others were stopped on February 29th
and the Archbishop was kidnapped while the three others were shot
dead. Throughout the kidnapping, Pope Benedict XVI has issued mutliple
appeals for the Archbishop to be released. The kidnappers had
requested a ransom and then increased the amount they were asking for.
After that contact appeared to break off. Reuters reports
that the Archbishop's corpse was discovered in Mosul today "half-buried
in an empty lot" and "Police said it was not clear whether Rahho, 65,
had been killed or died of other causes. He appeared to have been dead
a week and had no bullet wounds, police at the morgue in Mosul said.
He was dressed in black trousers and a blue shirt." AP reports,
"After two weeks of prayers and searching, officials at the
archbishop's church received a phone call from the kidnappers on
Wednesday, informing them that he had died and where he was buried,
Monsignor Shlemon Warduni, the auxillary bishop of Baghdad, told The
Associated Press." Spero News notes,
"In a letter to the Patriarch of Babylon of the Chaldeans, His
Beatitude Emmanuel III Delly, Cardinal [Francis] George called today's
killing 'callous' and one which 'demonstrates the particularly harsh
realities faced by Christians in Iraq and the lack of security faced by
all Iraqis'." Chaldean.org notes,
"The Chaldean community around the world stand numb and in disbelief as
news of Archbishop Paulos Faraj Rahho of Mosul is dead. Outcry from
world leaders swayed no influences as fanatical terrorists proved once
more that no women, children, medical providers, and now spiritual
leaders are safe from their killing spree." They also note that the
ransom requests led to requests by the Church to speak to the the
Archbishop and that's what led to their being informed he was dead and
"had been dead for at least five days before his body was found this
morning by some members of the Church, following information provided
by the kidnappers themselves." Frances Harrison (BBC) notes,
"Archbishop Paulos Faraj Rahho is thought to be the highest-ranking
Chaldean Catholic clergyman to be killed in the violence in Iraq."
March 11th, US House Rep Jeff Fortenberry raised the kidnapping of the
Archbishop in an open hearing (by two subcommittees, click here). Today
Iraq attempted to 'respond' to the bombings. There's only one response
ever, the same response Nouri's done over since being installed by the
US in 2006: crackdown. Aseel Kami, Tim Cocks and Richard Balmforth (Reuters) explain Mosul is now under curfew while, at present, nothing different is taking place in Baghdad. CNN notes
that another church has been bombed today, this one in Mosul (the
curfew doesn't appear to have helped, now did it?) with three children
(possibly more) left injured. Nada Bakri (Washington Post) reports that while Mosul is under crackdown, security has been "tightened" in Baghdad while Tilkaif and Hamdaniyah have a car ban. The United Nations Secretary-General's Special Representative for Iraq, Ad Melkert, stated today
that, "This campaign is aimed at terrorizing vulnerable groups and
preventing the peaceful coexistence of different religious groups in
what is one of the world's cradles of religious and ethnic diversity."
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) notes
that the bombing today in Mosul was between a church and a mosque and
that three boys were wounded and a Baghdad roadside bombing left three
police officers and four civilians injured. Meanwhile ABC News notes that Bob Woodruff has returned to Iraq and the "first report will air tonight on World News with Charlie Gibson". In January 2006, Bob Woodward was co-anchor, with Elizabeth Vargas, of ABC's World News Tonight. A roadside bombing severely injured him and he had a very difficult recovery. David Zurawik (Baltimore Sun) explains Woodruff's report won't air tonight due to a sandstorm and that his first report is now expected to air on Tuesday night. Brian Stelter (New York Times) notes
Woodruff is with the press corps covering Adm Mike Mullen's trip. Bob
Woodruff's recovery was rightly news and his return trip to Iraq is as
well. However in the bulk of the reports (I know of at least twenty
that we're not linking to) the focus is on Bob Woodruff who, honestly,
won't have much time to absorb the trip until he returns due to his
schedule (and temperament). If reporters were attempting to cover the
stress right now, I would assume the person to call would be Lee Woodruff, author most recently of Perfectly Imperfect: A Life in Progress, who
is no doubt proud of her husband but would understandly be more than a
little ill at ease as she waits for his return. Again, Bob Woodruff's
first report is scheduled to air Tuesday evening on ABC World News Tonight. Again, he is part of the press corps traveling with the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mike Mullen whom, Andrew Gray (Reuters) reports
is grounded in the oil-rich city of Kirkuk due to the sandstorms and
that he has met with leaders in Kirkuk. Mullen summed up the
'interaction' thusly: "My message to them today was: we're leaving and
you'd better figure it out." On the issue of Kirkuk, Waleed Ibrahim (Reuters) reported
yesterday that the status of Kirkuk "is now seen as the leading long
term threat to Iraq's stability as sectarian violence dies down"
and that Kirkuk does not appear likely to be getting a vote anytime
soon and cites the Speaker of Parliament, Ayad al-Samarai, declaring
that instead of open election, Arab and Turkmen MPs are advocating for
a number of seats set aside for each ethnic group in the city. Moving over to England, Matthew Weaver (Guardian) notes
that Iraqi Baha Mousa's death at the age of 26 while in British custody
in September 2003 is the subject of a public inquiry in England
which began today and that, "A central issue of the inquiry is why five
'conditioning techniques' -- hooding prisoners, putting them in stress
positions, depriving them of sleep, depriving them of food and water,
and playing white noise -- were used on Iraq detainees. The
techniques, inflicted on IRA suspects, were banned in 1972 by then
prime minister, Edward Heath." The Telegraph of London offers that
Baha "was beaten to death" while in British custody, "sustaining 93
separate injuires, including fractured ribs and a broken nose." The Telegraph also notes
that the inquiry was shown video of Corporal Donald Payne yelling and
screaming, "shouting and swearing at the Iraqis as they are force to
main painful 'stress position'." Julian Rush (Channel 4) offers a video report of the hearing thus far and what the inquiry is supposed to explore over the next year. BBC explains the Sir William Gage led inquiry will explore four segments: •
The history of "conditioning" techniques, like hooding, used by UK
troops while questioning prisoners from Northern Ireland in the early
1970s to the invasion of Iraq in March
2003 • What happened to Mr Mousa and other Iraqi detainees • Training and the chain of command • Events since 2003 and any recommendations for the future Moving to the US, last week, the US army released their latest suicide data (for the month of June). Gregg Zoroya (USA Today) reports
this morning, "Army commanders are failing at the day-to-day task of
monitoring troubled young soldiers in their barracks back home, which
is helping push suicides to record numbers, the head of the Army's
suicide task force [Brig Gen Colleen McGuire] says." James Dao (New York Times) tracks
Iraq War veteran Damian J. Todd's attempts to get his claims filled by
the VA in order to put a human face on the non-stop, never-ending
delays by the VA. Dao notes that the VA's unprocessed claims are "now
over 400,000, up from 253,000 six years ago, the agency said."
Actually, they're a lot higher. The June 25th snapshot
notes that day's House Veterans Affairs Subcommittee on Economic
Opportunity hearing on the Post-9-11 GI Bill which requires new
payments starting August 1st. [If you qualify or think you may for the
new education benefits, you can refer to the VA's GI Bill website
as a resource. For those with limited internet access or who would
prefer the human interaction, the toll free number is 1-888-GI-BILL-1
or 1-888-442-4551. The Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) has a webpage that
gives you a historical overview and also allows you to locate a VFW
service officer who can assist veterans with the application process.]
The VA's Director from the Office of Education Service Keith Wilson
testified that, due to the number of applications which had come in up
to that point, there might be a last minute crunch of applications as
people rushed to put their paperwork through in order to qualify for
the fall semester. Dao notes, "Veterans advocates say the actual
backlog is nearing one million, if minor claims, educational programs
and appeals of denied claims are factored in." As Winona says to Ethan in Reality Bites, "Where were you?" To draw attention to Iraq on the sixth anniversary, Rebecca
instituted a number of community roundtables in the weeks leading up to
the anniversary. They took place each Friday night and were posted at
the sites of all participating. One week, Rebecca led us in an
additional roundtable. " Selling out the women of Afghanistan," " Afghanistan," " Afghanistan women get forgotten" " Afghanistan roundtable," " US designates Gulbuddin Hekmatyar a Terrorist," " afghanistan roundtable," " Afghanistan," " Afghanistan in the Kitchen," " Talking Afghanistan," " The Afghanistan Roundtable," " Roundtabling Afghanistan," " Friday night movie post on Tuesday," " Afghanistan roundtable," " Iraq and Afghanistan," " Afghanistan," " Ron DLC Kirk," " Iraq, Hillary, Isaiah, etc" and " Anti-feminist Barack Obama." From the opening of that roundtable: Rebecca:
[. . .] Why a roundtable? Why now? Middle of the week when we all have
things to do. We're doing this on Ava and C.I.'s dinner time, for
example. Kat's as well but she's not planning on going back out and
speaking about Iraq tonight. Kat, Ava and C.I. are on the road -- with
Wally of The Daily Jot
-- speaking out against the illegal war in and on Iraq. Ruth's been
taking care of her grandson all day, Trina's been taken care of her
granddaughter, I've been taking care of my daughter, Betty worked all
day and has three children, Dona was in classes all day, Elaine was
seeing patients all day, Marcia was working hard -- and almost had a
heart attack, as Ava and C.I. always say, "we'll get to it." The point
being -- and I hope I didn't leave anyone out -- we're all busy. We all
have other things to do. Ava and C.I. are taking notes, therefore
unable to really eat dinner. Elaine said she'd type this up and she's
tired. We're all tired. But we're doing a roundtable because it's
become necessary. On Sunday, Little Barry Obam-bam could be found in the New York Times floating diplomatic ties between the US and the Taliban. That's what it was, get serious. Third Estate Sunday Review addressed it with "Editorial: Ms. magazine gets punked"
and that was written by Jim, Jess, Wally and Ty, who aren't with us,
and Dona, Ava, C.I., Kat and Betty, who are with us. It's only getting
worse as the week continues, Little Barry's Big Plan to make out with
the Taliban. I understand he's going to give it up for them, lose his
cherry. But I'm going to toss to Marcia to explain how it just got out
of control today. Marcia?
Marcia:
As I explained to Rebecca, I was at work when my boss starts screaming
for me. At the top of her lungs. I didn't think it was financial --
example, "We're closing!" And my own work hadn't been any problem. Plus
my boss isn't a screamer. So I hurry into her office convinced she's
just learned that one of her parents have died or that she's got only a
few months to live or something. She was on the phone with a friend who
had called to tell her about this "disgusting radio show" and how they
were pushing the Taliban as a good thing. My boss couldn't believe it
but then her friend was trying to remember the name and couldn't..
Finally, she remembered the name of the host, Amy Goodman.
I
include all that because (a) if anyone wants to go to town on the
highlight we're about to note, do so with my blessing and (b) we need
to realize that the time to speak out was in March, not July. And if
you're only now speaking out, you should be speaking out even
stronger. And if you can't mention Barack -- you know I'm damn tired,
DAMN TIRED, of these closeted Communists. I don't know why they love
Barry and I don't know who they think they fool by being "out" in
political circles but closeted on air and in print. I guess we're
supposed to believe Pacifica's just an oasis of "independent" voters?
So cowardly craven Sonali Kolhatkar finally wants to speak up for
Afghanistan women. FINALLY. And don't give me that s**t about how
she's spoken out before. Her ass has been silent since Barack chose to
get in bed with the Taliban. She hasn't said a damn word until this
month. With Mariam Rawl, she offers (at ZNet): As
humanitarians and as feminists, it is the welfare of the civilian
population in Afghanistan that concerns us most deeply. That is why it
was so discouraging to learn that the Feminist Majority Foundation has lent its good name -- and the good name of feminism in general -- to advocate for further troop escalation and war. On
its foundation Web site, the first stated objective of the Feminist
Majority Foundation's "Campaign for Afghan Women and Girls" is to
"expand peacekeeping forces." First
of all, coalition troops are combat forces and are there to fight a
war, not to preserve peace. Not even the Pentagon uses that language to
describe U.S. forces there. More importantly, the tired claim that one
of the chief objectives of the military occupation of Afghanistan is to
liberate Afghan women is not only absurd, it is offensive. Waging
war does not lead to the liberation of women anywhere. Women always
disproportionately suffer the effects of war, and to think that women's
rights can be won with bullets and bloodshed is a position dangerous in
its naïveté. The Feminist Majority should know this
instinctively. Here
are the facts: After the invasion, Americans received reports that
newly liberated women had cast off their burquas and gone back to work.
Those reports were mythmaking and propaganda. Aside from a small number
of women in Kabul , life for Afghan women since the fall of the Taliban
has remained the same or become much worse. Under
the Taliban, women were confined to their homes. They were not allowed
to work or attend school. They were poor and without rights. They had
no access to clean water or medical care, and they were forced into
marriages, often as children. Today,
women in the vast majority of Afghanistan live in precisely the same
conditions, with one notable difference: they are surrounded by war.
The conflict outside their doorsteps endangers their lives and those of
their families. It does not bring them rights in the household or in
public, and it confines them even further to the prison of their own
homes. Military escalation is just going to bring more tragedy to the
women of Afghanistan .
You
can agree with their essay if you want to be STUPID. If you want to be
a FOOL. Feminist Majority Foundation is making a fool of itself, no
question. And we've called them out (and I know Eleanor Smeal but that
never stops me from calling her out). But what a ridiculous piece of
trash column from Sonali. Feminist Majority Foundation is the ultimate
target? Really? You want to play that? Are
you telling me that Eleanor Smeal is directing the Afghanistan War?
Strange, I thought it was Barack Obama. You know, the man your
closeted Communist won't call out for reasons that you need to explain
to your listening audience. Sonali, you're a damn joke and you made
yourself one. This column where you finally, FINALLY, speak out for
Afghanistan women is so damn weak and pathetic it's as if a small
toddler wrote it with a crayon. Grow the hell up, you political closet
case, you're a damn embarrassment for yourself and others and I don't
have the time and the women of Afghanistan damn sure don't have the
time. You either grow the hell up and learn to call out the president
directing this illegal war of aggression or shut your damn ass because
you're not helping anyone. You're just embarrassing yourself. What an
idiot. What a coward. What a fool. Closets are for wardrobes, dear.
Here's another tip, when you're calling out people getting cozy with
the wrong side in Afghanistan and doing it four months late, you need
to write a lot more strongly. Get off your knees and stand the hell
up, you embarrass us all. Should
the US antiwar movement be attending rallies sponsored by the National
Endowment for Democracy (NED) claiming to support the opposition
movement in Iran? According to the group Stop War on Iran, this is
exactly what United for Peace and Justice (UFPJ) and other antiwar
groups are doing. If so, are they really supporting the leftist and
progressive elements of that opposition or are they naively providing
cover for those in the United States power elites who would love to see
a regime friendly to Washington ruling in Tehran? Recently, UFPJ urged
its members to attend rallies called by a group that goes by the name
of United for Iran on July 25, 2009. While I believe the intentions of
the antiwar organizations calling on folks to join these protests come
from a genuine desire to see an end to the Tehran government's
repression, the fact that some of the Iranian dissident groups in Iran
and in exile take their money and guidance from the NED and other
US-propaganda operations compromises the antiwar groups' position.
An even closer connection to the NED
funds is that of the apparent US organizer of the United for Iran
rallies, Hadi Ghaemi. Mr. Ghaemi is is the director of the
International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran. This group is a
project of the Dutch Foundation for Human Security in the Middle East.
More important as regards his NED connection is Ghaemi's role as a
former board member of the National Iranian American Council, which has
received over a quarter million dollars in NED grants. While this is
not an indictment of the desire for greater freedoms in Iran expressed
by Ghaemi and his organization, one would think these connections would
give pause to a US antiwar group whose leadership knows only too well
the role groups funded by the NED and other US special funds played in
the period leading up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
Posted at 03:35 pm by thecommonills
Permalink
Sunday's attack on Iraqi churches continue today
Meanwhile,
six bombs exploded outside churches around Baghdad, killing four and
sowing fears among the country's dwindling Christian minority that they
may be subject to a fresh round of persecution now that U.S. forces
have withdrawn from Iraq's cities.
The deaths occurred when a car
bomb detonated outside Virgin Mary Church on Palestine Street in east
Baghdad as worshipers were leaving evening Mass. Sixteen others were
wounded in the attack.
"This is going to make the Christians
scared," said Bishop Shlemon Warduni, who was in his office at the back
of the church when the bomb went off. "They will be scared to come to
services, and maybe more will leave the country."The above is from Liz Sly's " Churches in Iraq targeted in bombings; 4 killed" ( Los Angeles Times)
on yesterday's bombing which saw Iraq's increasingly small Christian
population targeted. From summer to fall of 2008, Iraqi Christians in
and around Mosul were targeted. Yesterday's attack on Iraqi Christians
in Baghdad was the most visible attack on Iraqi Christians in months;
however, it is a slow and steady trickle of weekly and daily attacks
that have gone on since the start of the illegal war. Steven Lee Myers'
" Churches and Envoy Attacked in Iraq" ( New York Times) adds: In
the worst attack, a car bomb exploded just before dusk outside the
Church of Mariam Al-Adra, or the Church of the Virgin Mary, part of the
Chaldean Catholic Church in Iraq, in central Baghdad. The blast, which
reverberated across the city, damaged the church and scorched cars near
a park on Palestine Street. The blast killed and wounded Christians and
Muslims."The terrorists
don't distinguish if they were Muslims or Christians," said Khodor
Mohammed, 71, who was wounded in the back, crying as he spoke. "They
are killing Iraqis. The blood of Christians and Muslims was mixed
today."And the 'response'? There's only one response
ever, the same response Nouri's done over since being installed by the
US in 2006: crackdown. Aseel Kami, Tim Cocks and Richard Balmforth (Reuters) explain Mosul is now under curfew while, at present, nothing different is taking place in Baghdad. The Arab Times presents the continued talking point offered by both the US government and its puppet government in Iraq: The
Iraqi military on Sunday predicted that insurgent attacks, though
declining, could continue for a few years, raising the prospect of
militant violence after the scheduled withdrawal of all US troops by
the end of 2011. The comments by Gen Babaker B. Shawkat Zebari, the
army chief of staff, came several hours after gunmen fatally shot a
government financial officer in northern Iraq and one day after bombs
in Baghdad and a village near Mosul killed 10 people. Violence is
sharply down in the war that began with the US-led invasion in 2003,
but militants still carry out lethal attacks on a regular basis. The US
military completed a withdrawal of combat forces from Iraqi cities to
outlying bases last month as part of a plan to let Iraq take the lead
on ensuring its own security. Zebari said insurgents once held sway in
cities and provinces, but had been whittled down to a few highly
dangerous cells that he expected would continue attacks for "a year or
two or three." He said the Iraqi military would get help from American
forces if needed, but would also rely on assistance from its own
citizens.
Michael Ware (CNN -- video) reports
on yesterday's violence including the attempted attack on US Ambassador
to Iraq Chris Hill (who wasn't hurt). Ware explained, "Here in Iraq a
string of church bombings targeting once more the Christian population
of this country, hundreds of thousands of them have been forced to flee
this nation. [. . .] It can't be stressed strongly enough that this was
going on under the US command on the US watch and it's continuing now.
There's been spikes and spasms of violence throughout the history of
the US led phase of the war. And it is with some regret that I report
that they will continue now under Iraq command of this war." From the exchange that follows his report: Naamua Delaney: Michael you also talked about the mass exodus of Christians from Iraq. How many are left at this point?Michael
Ware: Well that's very difficult to say. There's no precise figures on
what was originally the Christian population in this country; however,
most people seem to agree it was around a million Christians in Iraq.
Most people now seem to agree that anything from 600,000 to 800,000 of
that million have fled. Indeed we know that just say last October there
were reports that in the northern city of Mosul which is one of the
last urban strongholds of al Qaeda in Iraq as many as a thousand
Christian families left the city and left the country at that time
after they faced a threat from Islamic militants to convert or to die. CNN notes
that another church has been bombed today, this one in Mosul (the
curfew doesn't appear to have helped, now did it?) with three children
(possibly more) left injured. Last week, the US army released their latest suicide data (for the month of June). Gregg Zoroya (USA Today) reports
this morning, "Army commanders are failing at the day-to-day task of
monitoring troubled young soldiers in their barracks back home, which
is helping push suicides to record numbers, the head of the Army's
suicide task force [Brig Gen Colleen McGuire] says." In this morning's New York Times, James Dao's " Veterans Affairs Faces Surge of Disability Claims"
which tracks Iraq War veteran Damian J. Todd's attempts to get his
claims filled by the VA in order to put a human face on the non-stop,
never-ending delays by the VA. Dao notes that the VA's unprocessed
claims are "now over 400,000, up from 253,000 six years ago, the agency
said." Actually, they're a lot higher. The June 25th snapshot
notes that day's House Veterans Affairs Subcommittee on Economic
Opportunity hearing on the Post-9-11 GI Bill which requires new
payments starting August 1st. [If you qualify or think you may for the new education benefits, you can refer to the VA's GI Bill website
as a resource. For those with limited internet access or who would
prefer the human interaction, the toll free number is 1-888-GI-BILL-1
or 1-888-442-4551. The Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) has a webpage
that gives you a historical overview and also allows you to locate a
VFW service officer who can assist veterans with the application
process.] The VA's Director from the Office of Education Service Keith
Wilson testified that, due to the number of applications which had come
in up to that point, there might be a last minute crunch of
applications as people rushed to put their paperwork through in order
to qualify for the fall semester. In addition, Dao notes,
"Veterans advocates say the actual backlog is nearing one million, if
minor claims, educational programs and appeals of denied claims are
factored in." DAO also notes the high number of those suffering from
PTSD: Post-traumatic stress
disorder, or PTSD, has emerged as one of the most prevalent disability
claims, after ailments like back pain and knee injuries. Not only are
many new veterans receiving a diagnosis of the disorder, but an
increasing number of Vietnam veterans are also reporting symptoms for
the first time, officials and advocates said.Delays
in getting PTSD claims approved have prompted members of Congress to
propose legislation that would reduce the documentation required to
prove that a veteran’s disorder was caused by specific combat events.
Finding such documentation can be difficult for Vietnam veterans, whose
memories of events 40 years ago may have grown hazy. Records from that
era are also often difficult to find, advocates said.PTSD
is a serious issue and it is a mental condition and diagnosis, no
matter how badly some journalists and their friends might prefer it not
be and might prefer to pretend the brain (an organ) is a "bone" that
can be mended. (Best comment on that in the four columns in last week's
gina & krista round-robin was ". . . and even bones have to be set to heal correctly.") Bonnie reminds that Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "The Republican Dream" went up last night. The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com. iraqliz slythe los angeles timesthe new york timessteven lee myersjames daocnnmichael warenaamu delaneygregg zoroyausa todaythe world today just nuts
Posted at 07:43 am by thecommonills
Permalink
Matthew Weaver (Guardian) notes
that Baha Mousa's death at the age of 26 while in British custody in
September 2003 is the subject of a public inquiry in England which
starts today. A central issue
of the inquiry is why five "conditioning techniques" – hooding
prisoners, putting them in stress positions, depriving them of sleep,
depriving them of food and water, and playing white noise – were used
on Iraqi detainees. The techniques, inflicted on IRA suspects, were
banned in 1972 by the then prime minister, Edward Heath..Detailing
the abuses against six other Iraqis arrested with Mousa, Elias said:
"One man says he was made to dance in the style of Michael Jackson."Other detainees claimed they were urinated on and forced to lie face down over a hole in the ground filled with excrement.The Telegraph of London offers this background: While
in the custody of the Preston-based Queen's Lancashire Regiment, the
receptionist was beaten to death, sustaining 93 separate injuries,
including fractured ribs and a broken nose.Mr
Mousa's 22-year-old wife had died of cancer shortly before his
detention, meaning his two young sons, Hussein and Hassan, were
orphaned.Seven soldiers
faced a court martial at Bulford Camp in Wiltshire on war crimes
charges relating to the receptionist's death. All but one were cleared
on all counts in March 2007.The
Ministry of Defence agreed in July last year to pay £2.83 million in
compensation to the families of Mr Mousa and nine other Iraqi men
mistreated by British troops.Mr Mousa's father, Iraqi police colonel Daoud Mousa, said: "I think of my son every day. The Telegraph also notes
that the inquiry was shown video of Corporal Donald Payne yelling and
screaming, "shouting and swearing at the Iraqis as they are force to
main painful 'stress position'." Julian Rush (Channel 4) offers a video report of the hearing thus far and what the inquiry is supposed to explore over the next year. BBC explains the Sir William Gage led inquiry will explore four segments: •
The history of "conditioning" techniques, like hooding, used by UK
troops while questioning prisoners from Northern Ireland in the early
1970s to the invasion of Iraq in March 2003• What happened to Mr Mousa and other Iraqi detainees• Training and the chain of command• Events since 2003 and any recommendations for the future Turning
to the United States where Topeka, Kansas was in the news yesterday
afternoon as a veteran had a standoff with police at the Colmery-O'Neil
VA Medical Center. India's Thaindian reports, "An unknown gunman stormed a Topeka, Kansas hospital on Sunday afternoon, officials told BNO News." Taylor Atkins and Ann Marie Bush (The Topeka Capital-Journal) explain: Jim
Gleisberg, public affairs officer for the medical center, said no one
was injured when a veteran, whose name and hometown won’t be released,
walked into the emergency room with a handgun at 12:10 p.m. and asked
to talk to a VA police officer."The
veteran showed the officer he had a gun and threatened his own life,"
Gleisberg said. "The police officer acted very professionally. He got
the veteran to leave the emergency room area, and other staff members
on duty called the Topeka police."KTKA quotes
the VA's Jim Gleisberg stating the man is an Iraq War and Afghanistan
War veteran and, "Veterans are being stressed. The soldiers over there
now that are in the conflict that are coming back with issues just
because they've been deployed either once or twice at 12 or 15 months
at a time it's a very stressful situation and so they are going to have
issues." Bonnie reminds that Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "The Republican Dream" went up last night. The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com. iraqmatthew weaverthe guardianthe telegraph of londonjulian rushtaylor atkinsann marie bushktkathe world today just nuts
Posted at 06:37 am by thecommonills
Permalink
Sunday, July 12, 2009
Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "The Republican Dream"
Posted at 11:01 pm by thecommonills
Permalink
And the war drags on . . .
As violence swept through Iraq today, a new feature, reported by Iran's Press TV, was the targeting of a roadside bomb in Dhi Qar. Jomana Karadsheh (CNN) explains, "The Shiite Arab-dominated province was among the first handed over to Iraqi security forces, and was the scene of periodic clashes between Iraqi security forces and a militia loyal to anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr in 2007." Aamer Madhani (USA Today) adds, "A USA TODAY reporter was traveling in a separate U.S. convoy a few minutes behind Hill's in Nasiriyah, a relatively peaceful city where Hill had just finished meeting with local political leaders." Though no one is reported wounded or dead from the attacks, others weren't so lucky as Iraq saw repeated bombing attacks on churches today as well as continued attacks on the Iraqi police and Sahwa. They're just there to try and make the people free, But the way that they're doing it, it don't seem like that to me. Just more blood-letting and misery and tears That this poor country's known for the last twenty years, And the war drags on. -- words and lyrics by Mick Softly (available on Donovan's Fairytale) Last Sunday, ICCC's number of US troops killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war was 4321 and tonight? 4322. Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 Baghdad bombings "near churches" which left eight people wounded, a Baghdad car bombing "near a church" which claimed 4 lives and left twenty-one injured, a Baghdad sticky bombing which claimed 1 life and left four people injured, a Baghdad bombing "near a church" which left three people injured. Reuters counts five churches attackd with bombings in Baghdad and drops back to Saturday to note a Baghdad roadside bombing targeting the Iraqi polic which claimed the life of 1 Iraqi civilian and left twenty people injured. And they provide this context, "Iraq's Christians, believed to number around 750,000, are a small minority in a mainly Muslim country of around 28 million. Christians have been sporadically targeted for attacks, particularly in Baghdad and the northern city of Mosul, leading many of them to flee abroad." Shootings? Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports "the financial inspection department in Kirkuk" was assassinated in Kirkuk today. Reuters identifies the man shot dead in Kirkuk as Aziz Rizko and notes the brother of a Sawha member was shot dead in Jurf Al-Sakhar. Corpses? Reuters notes the corpse "of an official from former Prime Minister Ayad Allawi's Iraqi National Accord party" was discovered in Baghdad ("bearing signs of torture"). In this morning's New York Times, Sam Dagher and Amir A. Al-Obeidi contributed " 6 Are Killed And 67 Hurt In Bombings In Iraq Cities" on yesterday's violence which notes Nineveh Province's continued violence and that, "[l]ike neighboring Kirkuk Province, it is embroiled in a bitter territorial dispute involving Kurds, Arabs, Turkmens and other ethnic and sectarian groups." And, of course, a territorial dispute between the KRG and the central government ouf of Baghdad. Waleed Ibrahim (Reuters) observes oil-rich Kirkuk's status "is now seen as the leading long term threat to Iraq's stability as sectarian violence dies down". If you remember Sam Dagher's article Friday ( click here for critique), notice how Ibrahim is able to break down the basics without taking sides: "Kurds claim Kirkuk as their historic capital and want to attach it, with other disputed territories, to their largely autonomous Kurdistan region -- an idea rejected by the city's Arab and Turkman residents as well as Iraq's Baghdad government." Ibrahim explains that Kirkuk does not appear likely to be getting a vote anytime soon and cites the Speaker of Parliament, Ayad al-Samarai, declaring that instead of open election, Arab and Turkmen MPs are advocating for a number of seats set aside for each ethnic group in the city. Iraqi journalist Hussein Khalifa left Iraq and was accepted for admission into the US under the program that encourages the admission of journalists, translators, etc. Anna M. Tinsley's " Iraqi journalist has second thoughts about resettling in U.S." ( McClatchy Newspapers) explains: Loneliness has set in on the man accustomed to working two jobs and spending much time with his 4-year-old nephew.
He has been forced into a slower pace as he waits for a Social Security card and legal documents that will let him formally begin a job search. So he spends time talking with other Iraqi refugees, looking through old pictures, sending e-mails to family and talking on the telephone with his nephew, who wants him to come home.New content at Third: Dumbest statement of the weekA note to our readersEditorial: No excuse for Sotomayor's secretsTV: Cuting through the crapVoices of HonorIraq at a glanceLady nOThe return of Times SelectWhy On A Clear Day failedNYT serving less than half the US populationTruth in a Senate committee hearingCongressional attention on East TimorHighlightsIsaiah's latest goes up after this. Pru notes " Obama’s war intensifies in Afghanistan and Pakistan" (Great Britain's Socialist Worker): US and British troops are involved in a bloody fight with insurgents in the southern Helmand province in Afghanistan.
Occupation forces hope to push into an area that is considered a Taliban stronghold.
Six British troops, including a lieutenant colonel, had been killed in the operation as Socialist Worker went to press.
Troops plan to push out insurgents and set up a string of permanent bases using a strategy developed during the occupation of Iraq.
This is part of a wider plan to squeeze the insurgents between Western troops in Afghanistan and an extensive operation by the Pakistani army in the border regions.
Militants in Pakistan have been ambushing some 200 supply trucks a month as supply convoys snaked through northern Pakistan to Afghanistan. The attacks are causing serious problems for the occupation, and it now wants to secure these routes.
But the push has come at a heavy cost. Some two million Pakistanis have been displaced by the offensive.
Many of them have been abandoned in sprawling refugee camps that have sprung up over the past few months.
Meanwhile the Taliban are said to be gaining influence in the northern provinces of Afghanistan, and remain a threat in the regions around the capital Kabul.
Despite a promise by Barack Obama that the “mini-surge” in Afghanistan would be limited to an extra 21,000 troops, US commanders are hinting that more soldiers are on the way.
© Socialist Worker (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original.
Share this story on:
Delicious Digg reddit Facebook StumbleUpon
If you found this article useful please help us maintain SW by » making a donation.
» comment on article » email article » printable versionThe e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com. iraqand the war drags ondonovanjomana karadshehcnnthe new york timessam dagheramir a. al-obeidimcclatchy newspaperslaith hammoudiaamer madhaniwaleed ibrahimanna m. tinsleythe socialist workerthe third estate sunday review
Posted at 10:58 pm by thecommonills
Permalink
Sandra Bullock's blockbuster passes the $100 million mark
Posted at 10:52 pm by thecommonills
Permalink
Saturday, July 11, 2009
11 dead, seventy-one reported wounded in Iraq
AP reports former KBR contractor in Iraq David Charles Breda Jr. is under federal indictment over an alleged sexual assault at Camp Al Asad. Braden Reddall and Anthony Boadle (Reuters) adds, "Breda, 34, appeared before a judge on Friday after his arrest by Naval Criminal Investigative Service agents on Thursday at a Houston-area barber college, the U.S. Attorney's office said. He faces a up to 10 years in prison if convicted of the charge of abusive sexual contact, it added. Richard Connelly (Houston Press) reminds, "This is not the first time the company has faced allegations of employees raping women. The claims by Jamie Leigh Jones became a national story." In other legal news, a US soldier has been sentenced for the shooting death of US soldier Sean McCune. M-NF released the following today: A Multi-National Division - North Soldier was sentenced July 11, in the shooting death of a fellow Soldier.
Sgt. Miguel A. Vegaquinones was sentenced to three years confinement, reduction in rank to private/E-1 and a dishonorable discharge.
Vegaquinones pled guilty to involuntary manslaughter in the accidental shooting death of Pfc. Sean McCune, when Vegaquinones negligently discharged one round from his weapon on Jan. 11, in Samarra, Iraq, after completing guard duty.
Pursuant to the terms of a pre-trial agreement, Vegaquinones’ sentence was limited to 30 months confinement. The charge of making a false official statement was dismissed as part of the pre-trial agreement.
Vegaquinones is assigned to the 2nd Battalion, 35th Infantry Regiment, 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 25th Infantry Division, but was temporarily attached to the brigade's Headquarters and Headquarters Company pending the outcome of the proceedings.
U.S. Army Soldiers sentenced to confinement of more than one year automatically have their cases forwarded to the Army Court of Criminal Appeals for review.Meanwhile violence continues in Iraq with a Mosul car bombing claiming the lives of at least 4 people and leaving another forty wounded according to BBC which adds, "Correspondents say the Mosul bomb went off in an area with a predominantly Shia population, thought to be from Iraq's Shabak community." Xinhua notes 5 dead. Mohammed al Dulaimy (McClatchy) puts the death toll at 8 and the wounded at fifty. Other violence? Bombings? Mohammed al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 Baghdad roadside bombing -- the first apparently used to lure people to the site -- which claimed 1 life and left "11 civilians and nine policemen" wounded, a Baghdad bombing which claimed the life of Zaid Abdul Kareem ("an employee of the Iraqi ministers' cabinet") and left his wife wounded, two Baghdad bombings which damaged a church. Shootings? Reuters notes 1 police officer was shot dead at a Baaj checkpoint. Tuesday's snapshot included this, " Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports two Iraqi 'servicemen and one civilian' were injured in a shooting at a Baghdad checkpoint and 1 police officer was shot dead in Mosul while his father (also a police officer) was left wounded. In both incidents, silencers were used on the guns and McClatchy was noting (in their daily violence round-ups) over the weekend how common the use of silencers was becoming." Yesterday, Mike Tharp offered " Silencers on Handguns -- a Silver Lining?" ( McClatchy's Baghdad Observer): But there may be one in a little-known but increasingly common part of the insurgent arsenal: the use of silencers on handguns.
Since July 4, the Daily Violence Report compiled by the McClatchy Baghdad bureau from police and hospitals all over the county has contained no fewer than four cases of insurgents and others killing and wounding Iraqi army and national police officers with pistols fitted with silencers. In June there were several others, including shootings at officers' homes, in northern Iraq.
This week two incidents occurred in Mosul and one in Kirkuk--both in northern Iraq--and one in Baghdad. One of the incidents in Mosul was especially gruesome. A father was killed and his son wounded at a police checkpoint by a gunman using a silencer.
With all the homemade bombs, adhesive bombs, hand-thrown bombs and other lethal weapons that've been used in recent weeks, why would the use of handguns with silencers be anything but one more downer?
Alsumaria reports, "Iraqi Parliament is due to sign three agreements with US and British Parliaments as well as the European Union aimed to enhance cooperation and exchange expertise mainly in legislating laws. Iraqi Parliament plans to sign two agreements with the European Union and the United States and seeks to conclude as well another protocol with the British House of Commons, an informed source from Iraqi Speaker’s office said." And they note that the release of the five Iranian diplomats by the US military "is not sufficient to change Iran's policy towards the United States," citing Alaeddin Boroujerdi, chair of Iran's Parliament. Alice Fordham (Times of London) blogged Thursday about leaving Iraq: And were they ever glorious. I didn't so much want to buy some of those carpets as marry them. It was as if some magician had spirited the colours out of a peacock's feathers and woven them into the whorls and curlicues of prayer rugs and wall hangings. There was a green one the colour of a slice of agate, and a dove grey one with a silvery geometric pattern. There were silken carpets from Isfahan which would fill a room and napkin-sized ruglets with verses of the Koran worked in wool. They were carpets to conjure with, carpets which deserved to be the subjects of stories about enchantments and genies.
I vowed one day to save up and come back for a whopping, silk number in 1,001 shades of purple, blue and gold, but for this humbler shopping trip, I was very taken by a rug which I was told came from Kurdistan. My next adventure, God willing, will take me to the separatist region in northern Iraq, and it was pleasing to have a carpet which was, I was told, a traditional Kurdish pattern. Its geometric design looked a little like Cubist versions of Paisley swirls and it was in unusually flat, bright shades of yellow, red and blue. It didn't fly me out of Baghdad, but it did come with me on the plane and, until my next trip, will remind me of my adventures in this ancient, modern, troubled and intriguing country. And we'll close with this from Sherwood Ross' " U.S. NEEDS TO LISTEN TO ARIAS ON LATIN AMERICAN ISSUES" ( Veterans' Today): Oscar Arias, the president of Costa Rica and the man who will serve as mediator of the crisis in Honduras, writes in an OpEd piece this morning (July 10th) in the Miami Herald, “This coup demonstrates, once more, that the combination of powerful militaries and fragile democracies creates a terrible risk.”
Arias never once mentions the role of the United States in destabilizing democracy across Latin America but he doesn’t have to. Uncle Sam is the world’s Numero Uno arms dealer. What Arias does say is: “This year alone, the governments of Latin America will spend nearly $50 billion on their armies. That’s nearly double the amount spent five years ago, a ridiculous sum in a region where 200 million people live on fewer than $2 a day and where only Colombia is engaged in an armed conflict.”
The Pentagon’s Latin influence, always powerful, has been gaining steadily for years and few Americans appear either to know, or to care, what’s been going down the tubes South of the Border. In the five years ended in 2003---under both Presidents Clinton and Bush---U.S. military aid to the region more than tripled, Jim Lobe wrote on “Common Dreams.” “While the militarization of U.S. aid in Latin America actually began under former President Bill Clinton….trends established then have become more pronounced under Bush,” Lobe wrote, citing a report by the Latin America Working Group Education Fund. “Despite pervasive problems of poverty in Latin America, the United States’ focus on military rather than economic aid to the region is increasing,” he quoted Lisa Haugaard of LAWGEF as stating.
You can get the Pentagon’s slant on why Latins must be armed to the teeth from Stephen Johnson, installed two years ago by the Bush regime as Assistant Defense Secretary for the Western Hemisphere. Reuters quotes him as saying (May 21, 2007): “Right now funds for security assistance are slim and what programs we can offer are limited by complicated sanctions. That leaves a vacuum for powers like China and Russia to fill.” This statement is fairly hilarious considering that Russia can scarcely defend its borders and the sinister Chinese are keeping the U.S. economy afloat by lending us billions. (And what’s “slim?”)
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com. iraqrichard connellybraden reddallanthony boadlebbc newssahar issamohammed al dulaimyalsumariamcclatchy newspapersmike tharpthe times of londonalice fordhamsherwood rossiraq
Posted at 08:21 pm by thecommonills
Permalink
US military kills truck driver, Grannies get bitchy
Meeting reporters outside the Veterans Museum and Memorial Center in San Diego, Long said he wished every morning that he could see his son running toward him and hear his voice."Instead I woke up to reveille and I saw high fences and razor wire," said Long, from Boise, Idaho. "This punishment was for having a moral opposition to the Iraq war."Long enlisted in 2003 and was trained as a tank crewman but fled to Canada in 2005 when his unit was on the verge of deploying to Iraq. He said his views about the war had changed since his enlistment.
Long said that, like much of the American public, he began to doubt the wisdom of the war when the U.S. was unable to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Long said he was influenced by a quotation attributed to Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."That's from Tony Perry's " Army deserter tells of his time behind bars" ( Los Angeles Times) and the article has a nice photo of Robin taken by Perry. US war resister Robin Long was released from the brig on Thursday and held a press conference Friday morning. John Wilken's " 'I had to do what I felt was right,' Army deserter tells news conference" ( San Diego Union-Tribune): He worked in the supply room at Miramar and wrote several open letters calling the war “illegal and immoral.” Anti-war activists rallied around him on the Internet and at the base, where they held monthly vigils. Hundreds of people sent him letters from as far away as South Africa.
With time off for good behavior, he was released Thursday after 371 days in custody. At first, he said, he found freedom an overwhelming swirl of noise, crowds and color.
Now he's busy with plans to start school next month at a holistic institute in San Francisco. He hopes Renée, his common-law wife, and Océan, his son, can visit him there while he studies massage therapy. His goal is to return to Canada.
In today's New York Times, Sam Dagher's " G.I. Kills Iraqi Driver Who Failed To Stop, U.S. Military Says" appears on A5 of the national edition and recounts the death of 1 truckdriver who was shot dead north of Baghdad at two in the morning not a checkpoint, but where the US military had stopped due to a US vehicle breaking down. Dagher notes, "Major [Derrick] Cheng [US military spokesperson] did not immediately respond to questions about what kind of signal the soldiers used." On the item below, one Granny had a real problem with being bitchy. We've deleted one word from this press release. If she wants to focus on Iraq, try focusing on it. The next time it happens, we won't delete a word, we just won't note them. There's enough sexism in the world already and if I were the Raging Grannies -- apparently now named the Peace Grannies -- if I were a bunch of Reds from Brooklyn who felt it was my obligation to tell the truth, I damn well wouldn't have provided cover for Barry O throughout 2008 which, for the record, Red Grannies did. Now they're red with blood on their hands. Good to know they now remember Iraq. NOW. In real time, in 2008, they were too busy showing how bitchy grannies could be as they worked over time to rip apart Hillary Clinton. Now since they aren't Democrats they never should have butted it in. But they have blood on their hands now -- whether they acknowledge it or not. And being bitchy about Sarah Palin, doesn't wipe away the blood Grannies. You made yourselves a joke in 2008 -- who ever heard of a bunch of Communists drooling over a Democrat to begin with? (Though they were far from alone.) If they want to get their act and ass together in 2009, we'll note 'em. But one more piece of bitchy from the Grannies and we're done with them. By the way, note that the Red Cowards can get bitchy with Palin but their press release on the Iraq War? They never mention Barry, now do they? Apparently the Iraq War continues all on its own. Without any presidential directives. Or maybe Red Grannies are still just a bunch of fools and cowards? Here's their press release and does do a lot to indicate that elderly Communists in the United States have much bravery or much worth saying: PRESS ADVISORY
FOR RELEASE ANY TIME
CONTACT: Joan Wile - 917-441-0651
GRANNIES HAVE NOT FORGOTTEN;
WAR STILL NO. 1 ISSUE FOR PEACE GRANNIES
Two Vigil Protests Held Weekly
As most of America focuses on the death of Michael Jackson, Sarah Palin's [. . .] resignation interview and Gov. Sanford's marital straying, New York's peace grandmothers still concentrate on the all-important issue of war and peace. As they have since we invaded Iraq, the women and their supporters feel it is urgent that the troops come home from both Iraq and Afghanistan. "There has never been nor can ever be anything to be accomplished by these immoral wars other than death and destruction," said Barbara Walker, one of the peace grandmothers.
They have recently stepped up the momentum of their anti-war actions so that, in addition to maintaining their five-and-a-half plus years Wednesday Grandmothers Against the War vigil at Rockefeller Center, the sister group Granny Peace Brigade now holds a Friday "Costs of War" tableau protest at the Times Square recruitment center (re-named, laughably, the U.S. Military Career Center). In this event, the grannies have a choreographed Q & A routine displaying on posters the answers to such chanted questions as: How much does it cost to keep one soldier deployed in Iraq? How many Iraqi civilians killed? How many soldier suicides? How many starving Iraqi children?
The location at Times Square is very significant for the grannies, inasmuch as 18 of them were arrested and jailed there when they tried to enlist in October 2005 in order to replace America's grandchildren so they could live long lives like the grannies have been privileged to enjoy. They were on trial for 6 days in Manhattan's criminal court and were acquitted after their defense by civil liberties lawyer Norman Siegel and his associate, Earl Ward. The story traveled around the world overnight and was instrumental in jump-starting the anti-war movement, which had been largely quiescent before then.
The media is invited to either or both of these events any time. The Rockefeller Center vigil is held religiously every week no matter what the weather. The recruitment center action may be affected by the weather, so it is advisable to call me if it is raining.
ROCKEFELLER CENTER VIGIL
PLACE: West side of 5th Ave. between 49th and 50th Sts.
DAY AND TIME: Wednesday afternoons, 4:30 - 5:30 p.m.
TIMES SQUARE RECRUITING CENTER PROTEST
PLACE: Broadway and 43rd St.DAY AND TIME: Fridays, noon to 1:30 p.m.
For the record, we're not interested in any of Red Grannies sex fantasies about female politicians. We weren't in 2008 and we're not interested now. But for those who only know the Grannies from their easy p.r. and don't grasp "bitchy," bitchy is attempting to destroy Hillary via little 'skits' about her bedroom habits. Which honestly say more about Joan Wile's bedroom sadness than they could ever about Hillary Clinton. And one correction. If they're not calling out Barack, we're not interested. It's not just their continued bitchy, we're not interested period. Elderly Communists better grow the hell up and find the courage to call out a sitting president continuing an illegal war or they better retire to Florida or where ever the elderly Brooklyn contingent of CPUSA goes. The following community sites have updated since yesterday morning: Cedric's Big MixHe'll get to work one day1 hour ago The Daily JotTHIS JUST IN! THE NEVER READY PRESIDENT!1 hour ago Mikey Likes It!Legal abuses by Bush and Barack21 hours ago Thomas Friedman is a Great ManWe need answers22 hours ago Trina's KitchenBaked tuna casserole22 hours ago Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitudegrab bag23 hours ago SICKOFITRADLZThe shameful David Kris23 hours ago Ruth's ReportPolitco goes down on Huffington Post23 hours ago Oh Boy It Never EndsRoland Burris announces he won't run in 201023 hours ago Like Maria Said PazSnapshot (C.I.)23 hours ago Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills)House Armed Services Committee's Subcommittee23 hours ago The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com. iraqthe los angeles timestony perrythe new york timessam dagherrobin longjohn wilkenthe san diego union-tribuneiraqlike 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 08:17 pm by thecommonills
Permalink
Friday, July 10, 2009
Friday, July 10, 2009. Chaos and violence continues, war resister Robin Long is out of the brig, the New York Times
backs Nouri so much they not only attack the Kurds but they also play
dumb about a DC meet-up between Iraq and neighbors that the White House
is attempting to set up for later this year, a House Armed Services
subcommittee questions the budget numbers, and more. Starting with war resistance. Robin Long has no regrets. John Wilkens (San Diego Union-Tribune) quotes him declaring today, "I wouldn't do anything differently." 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
environment in the United States today is not one that can support and
sustain a GI resistance movement of significant proportions, giving it
enough power to directly affect the foreign policy of the country, as
it did so effectively in the Vietnam era. There is much in the military
to prohibit a GI resistance movement from growing anywhere near the
proportion that helped end the U.S. war in Vietnam. Military discipline
is much more repressive than in the past, which makes organizing more
difficult. There is less radicalization of the GI movement, as compared
to that in the late 1960s and early 1970s; therefore, passive
resistance against the command is more common than direct resistance.
There is a much lower level of political awareness and analysis among
soldiers as compared to that during Vietnam, when there were hundreds
of underground newspapers that served to inform troops while
criticizing the military apparatus. The all-volunteer military, rather
than a draft, is also responsible for stifling broader dissent. Despite
these factors, dissent in the ranks is happening on a daily basis.
While overall violence in Iraq has dropped, it is escalating
dramatically in Afghanistan, as President Obama begins to "surge"
30,000 troops into that occupation. The overstretched military is in a
state of disrepair, full of demoralized, bitter soldiers whose reasons
for staying in are based on economics and loyalty to their friends
rather than nationalism or patriotism. These
elements, accompanied by the continuing neglect that soldiers
experience upon their return home, are driving larger numbers toward
dissent. This is a book
about average soldiers and their brave acts of dissent against a system
that is betraying them. I decided to focus on the rank-and-file members
who actually served in Iraq, rather than those giving the orders from
within safe compounds. I believe it is those who have followed the
orders who have had to pay the highest price. My main objective in
presenting this book is to highlight the reality that oppressed and
oppressors alike suffer the dehumanizing effects of military action.
For soldiers and war journalists like myself who have lived with this,
struggled with PTSD, and reintegrated ourselves into society, a light
at the seemingly endless dark tunnel of the U.S. occupations of Iraq
and Afghanistan is the possibility of the shifting of these individual
acts of resistance into a broader, organized movement toward
justice--both in the military and in U.S. foreign policy. Let's
be clear - Maliki has been supported by the US as the leader of Iraq
since his installation. In January 2005, I was in Baghdad for the
elections that formed an Iraqi Parliament, which then elected Iraq's
first prime minister under US occupation - that man was Ibrahim
al-Jaafari. Jaafari wasn't exactly toeing the US/UK line in Iraq, so it
wasn't long until then-US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and her
UK counterpart Jack Straw rushed to Baghdad to set things straight. Just after their visit, Jaafari was out and Maliki was in. No democracy was involved in this process. In a recent article titled "Iraq's New Death Squad"
for The Nation by independent journalist Shane Bauer, we are provided
with an inside view of Maliki's iron fist, which has come in the form
of the Iraq Special Operations Forces. Bauer writes: "The
Iraq Special Operations Forces (ISOF) is probably the largest special
forces outfit ever built by the United States, and it is free of many
of the controls that most governments employ to rein in such lethal
forces. The project started in the deserts of Jordan just after the
Americans took Baghdad in April 2003. There, the US Army's Special
Forces, or Green Berets, trained mostly 18-year-old Iraqis with no
prior military experience. The resulting brigade was a Green Beret's
dream come true: a deadly, elite, covert unit, fully fitted with
American equipment, that would operate for years under US command and
be unaccountable to Iraqi ministries and the normal political process.
The ISOF is at least 4,564 operatives strong, making it approximately
the size of the US Army's own Special Forces in Iraq. Congressional
records indicate that there are plans to double the ISOF over the next
'several years'." According
to Bauer, control of the ISOF was slowly transferred by US Special
Forces to the Iraqis in 2007, but it wasn't put under the command of
the Defense or Interior Ministry. Rather, "the Americans pressured the
Iraqi government to create a new minister-level office called the
Counter-Terrorism Bureau," Bauer writes, "Established by a directive
from Iraq's prime minister, Nuri al-Maliki, the CTB answers directly to
him and commands the ISOF independently of the police and army.
According to Maliki's directive, the Iraqi Parliament has no influence
over the ISOF and knows little about its mission." Untold
numbers of politically motivated murders have followed as a result.
Regular assassinations and detentions of al-Sahwa (US-created Sunni
militia that Maliki had opposed from the beginning) members have been
ongoing for years. Last August, the ISOF raided the provincial
government compound in Diyala, while backed by US Apache helicopters,
and arrested a member of Iraq's main Sunni Arab political party. In
December, the ISOF arrested more than 30 Interior Ministry officials
who were believed to be opponents of Maliki's Dawa Party. In March, the
ISOF arrested a leader of the Sahwa. As he attempts to become the new Saddam, he does so with the apparent approval and endorsement of the New York Times, hence Sam Dagher's article today
allegedly about the Kurish region and their events but told from a
Nouri point of view. Well into the article, primarily an article
carping about the KRG's proposed constitution, Dagher notes, "Iraq's
federal Constitution allows the Kurds the right to their own
constitution, referring any conflicts to Iraq's highest court." Though
it bothers Nouri, and apparently the paper, the Kurds can do a new
constitution, revamp their old one, do whatever they want and it is
their right. The unresolved issue of the oil-rich city of Kirkuk is
not presented as having anything to do with Nouri. This despite
realities including Damien Cave's June 2007 reporting for the paper when he noted,
"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." 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. Dahger ignores
all of that but does find time to say the Kruds "defended" attempting
"to add all of hotly contested and oil-rich Kirkuk Province, as well as
other disputed areas in Nineveh and Diyala Provinces." Are they
'adding' Kirkuk if they've long claimed it? Or are they continuing to
stake their claim on Kirkuk? 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. If
you're still not getting how one-sided Dagher's article is, please note
that in the print edition of the paper, the article is entitled " Kurds Lay Claim To Land and Oil, Defying Baghdad"; however, Australia's The Age re-runs the article and gives it the more appropriate headline " Kurds' new constitution angers US, Iraq." And
certainly Dagher's written reflecting something other than Kurdish
goals or interests. Apparently those aren't topics to cover . . . even
in an article apparently about the Kurdish region. Al Hurriyet notes
that some are trying to state that the northern region of Iraq would be
better off with Turkey -- please note that 'some' includes those
Americans who lied/spun/cheerleaded the US into Vietnam, some of the
same losers (including Katty-van-van's deadbeat father) who were part
of the "American Friends of Vietnam" -- a front group which, starting
in 1955, began openly advocating for US 'intervention' in Vietnam via
lies, trickery and deceit. The New York Times is so busy shining on al-Maliki, they forgot to tell you about his flare up with US Vice President Joe Biden. Salah Hemeid (Al-Ahram Weekly) explains
the paper only "alluded" and didn't explain but Biden issued a call for
bringing the Ba'athist back into the political process. Nouri's
response was to issue public statements such as this one through his
spokesperson "the government will never talk to those whose hands were
stained with blood". Publicly stated. Somehow the paper missed that.
Somehow the paper forgot to tell readers that. The US ran, under Paul
Bremer, the Ba'athists out of the political process in what is termed
"de-Ba'ahtification." Part of the benchmarks established by the US
White House in 2007 and signed off on by Nouri al-Maliki was to bring
the Ba'athists back in -- a de-de-Ba'athification. That has never
happened and when Biden pointed out the need for it to, al-Maliki made
it clear it wasn't happening. That's a key moment and it's interesting
that the paper of record elected not to cover it or that Biden proposed
a DC meeting with segments of Iraq including the Ba'athists and Iraqi
neighbors to sort out some issues. An Iraqi official states that the
vice president "suggested that Arab countries that will participate in
the proposed reconciliation meeting in Washington are ready to
guarantee that the Baathists will abandon any kind of armed resistance
if they are allowed to function as a legitimate political party."
Again, huge news and the paper of record 'missed' it.. Today on NPR's The Diane Rehm Show, Steve Roberts filled in for Diane Rehm. The second hour (international) featured Andrei Sitov (Itar-Tass), Farah Stockman ( Boston Globe)
and Tom Gjelten (NPR). And we'll note this section on Iraq which
covers some of the themes and topics emerging during the week. Steve
Roberts: [. . .] but, Farah, I want to deal with one more development,
actually several developments in Iraq, including the more aggressiver
assertion of territorial integrity and separateness on the part of the
Kurds in northern Iraq. This is not a new story in some ways, it's
been a semi-autonomous region for a long time, but some new
developments. Farah
Stockman: Yeah. I think the Kurds are-are starting to get frustrated
with Baghdad. A lot of the disagreements that have been simmering for
years over oil, over the share of oil they should get, over whether the
state controlled oil companies should make decisions or whether we
should have production sharing agreements and the Kurds are -- and
disputed territories. And these questions have been left unresolved
for a long time and the Kurds are impatient and saying, 'We need to
move forward and resolve some of these.' Whereas I think Maliki's
government doesn't appreciate those moves by the Kurds and he's also
starting to become an Arab -- kind of an Arab nationalist which is, I
think, worrisome for the Kurds. Maliki is starting to position himself
politically as an Arab nationalist against the Kurds. And, I think,
this is worrisome because the Sunnis were always odd-man-out. It was
always the Kurds-were-the-voice-of-reason and they were the ones
arguing for the greater good of Iraq and even though they wanted their
own -- their own semi-autonomous area, they were still speaking of
things in terms of unity with the government and now we're seeing a
shift. We're seeing the Shias and the Kurds draw farther apart. I
think that's worrisome. Steve
Roberts: And of course the vice president of the United States, Joe
Biden, was the author, co-author of a plan at one time that would
provide for what was sometimes called a soft partition of Iraq.
Farah
Stockman: Well -- right. Some people would say that Biden's plan was
simply what was already enshrined in the Iraqi Constitution. It
depends upon your interpretation of that document, I guess. I think --
I think the Obama administration had hoped to turn its attention to
Afghanistan, get away from Iraq and last week they asked Biden to look
more closely at Iraq. I think that's a sign that they see Iraq as
continuing to be worrisome and that they can't -- they can't just shut
it out.
Steve Roberts: In addition, Tom, to the problem of the Kurds, there's the problem of ongoing violence. Tom
Gjelten: That's what I was going to say. It's not just the Kurds.
What we're seeing is real sectarian strife returning in Iraq. A lot of
violence this week, most of it directed against Shites, and it's coming
just as the United States has pulled its troops out of major cities.
The big question in Iraq is whether the Iraqi security forces are going
to be capable of handling security responsibilities in Iraq. Right now
with these rising ethnic tensions, whether it's the Kurds in the north
or the Sunni and the Shi'ite populations, I think there's some real
concerns. Farah Stockman: I -- also just to add -- Steve Roberts: Please. Farah
Stockman: I think there's a real danger here for Obama in that we could
get stuck with one foot in Iraq and one foot in Afghanistan and not
really have the freedom of movement to do any of those two very
complicated countries justice. Steve
Roberts: Is there any sense that given the pull-back of American troops
and the rise in violence that there's any rethinking about this
strategy, Tom, or is the Americans completely devoted to this pull-back
whatever instability results? Tom
Gjelten: Well, I think, Steve, one point to keep in mind is that
there's less to this pullback than you might think. I mean, the Bush
administration -- sorry, the Obama administration makes a big point of
there not being after a certain point combat troops in Iraq but what
we've seen with the nature of warfare in Iraq is basically everybody
who is in Iraq is in the category of combat troops. And the numbers
that we're seeing now, we're down to 130,000 but that's, remember,
that's only the number that was there before the surge. We're going to
see 130,000 or 120,000 throughout the rest of this year. So there's
not a major pull-back here. 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. In some of today's reported violence (it's Friday, little gets reported) . . . Bombings? Reuters notes a Baghdad bombing late Thursday which claimed injured a police officer "and three of his family members". Shootings? Moahmmed al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 Sahwa member ("Awakening" "Sons of Iraq" are other names) shot dead in Baghdad with another injured. Reuters notes another Sahwa member was shot dead in Babil with another left injured. CNN notes
two Sawha were killed in the Baghdad attack and they state 75 people
have lost their lives in Iraq since Wednesday with two-hundred-and-two
left injured. Yesterday the House Armed
Services Committee's Subcommittee on Joint Readiness, Air and Land
Forces and Seapower and Expeditionary Forces met to take testimony from
General James Amos with the Marines and General Peter Chiarelli with
the Army. Amos' big news is that all the marines equipment will be out
of Iraq at the end of 2010 but not all of the marines. The press has
maintained otherwise. We will be out of Iraq, the marines will be,"
declared Amos, "with the exception of just a few, by this time next
year, the equipment will be out of Iraq, being repaired and going to
the home stations." Repaired? With regards to
Chiarelli and the army, the big news appeared to be that money was
being wasted because military equipment being reset is not also being
repaired. This was referred Roscoe
Bartlett: I want to follow up with a question asked by Mr. Forbes, the
army's 2010 request for reset is about $11 billion which nearly 8
billion -- 7.9 billion is for operations and maintenance and 3.1
billion for procurement. Now from 2007 to 2010, the O and M portion
has been pretty constant at about 8 billion but the procurement portion
has dropped to less than fifty percent of what it was in '07. I know
'07 was a bit higher than it might have been because we were short in
'06. But at just the time when we need more money because of all this
reset, now we have less money. And if we're going to justify this on
the basis of this new rule that you can't upgrade when you're repairing
the equipment than I have a problem with that because what an
opportunity we have when it's in there for maintenance repair why can't
we upgrade? It seems to me to be very short sighted and I'm wondering
why the money wasn't there? Did the army ask for more than 11 billion
and 11 billion was all you could get? Peter
Chiarelli: My understanding is no, sir, we did not. We understood with
the new overseas contingency operations rules were going to be,
that amount, that three-billion-plus in procurement can only be used
for washouts or vehicles or aircraft that are destroyed. And for the
most part -- although like all these rules, they change -- for the most
part, the recap -- or adding on -- is not allowed in FY10 and that
drove down the amount of money we needed for procurement. Roscoe
Bartlett: But sir, why not? Isn't it our goal to have a better and
better military? To support our people? Why shouldn't we upgrade? And
isn't this a very short sighted program? Peter Chiarelli:
Sir, you'd have to ask the folks who wrote the new rules. Uhm. I-I
think that it makes a lot of sense to upgrade when we can. It's kind
of like paving a road. Uh, you know, it's better to put the sewer
system in before you pave the road. It's-it's not a good idea to, in
fact, pave the road and then decide to dig it up to put the sewer
system in. So when we have equipment in and are able to do that --
that was a plus and allowed us to recap equipment. But the new rules
are that we cannot do that. Roscoe
Bartlett: Well I think Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution says
that the Congress makes the rules. And, Mr. Chairman [Ortez], I think
we need to take a look at that. Thank you very much and I yield back. Solomon Ortez: Chairman Abercrombie. Neil
Abercrombie: I want to follow up, General, on what Mr. Bartlett just
was dealing with when he says the Congress makes the rules. I'm not
clear from your answer to Mr. Bartlett. What-what part of what the
Congress wants you to do is being thwarted by whomever is making these
rules? Who made this rule? Peter Chiarelli: Sir, my understanding is they come out of OMB Neil Abercrombie: I'm sorry? Peter Chiarelli: Sir, my understanding is they come out of OMB. They write -- Neil Abercrombie: So you -- this is very important to me -- you take orders from OMB and not from the Defense Bill? Peter
Chiarelli: I, um, I can only tell you what I know now right now, sir,
is the rules -- and I don't question who makes rules -- Neil
Abercrombie: Well maybe rules is the wrong way. I'm not trying to be
argumentative here at all. But this is serious business because the
questions I have have to do with inventory and our capacity to do an
accurate inventory so that I can make from -- Mr. Bartlett and I, I
should say, because we do this together -- make recommendations to our
subcommittee members and the committee as a whole. We try to this in a
way that reflects your needs and if you're telling me that -- or
telling Mr. Bartlett -- that someone in the Office of Management and
Budget is able to countermand, I guess, what we're doing, how on earth
are we supposed to make an accurate assessment, let alone
recommendation, to follow up on, uh, requests that you're making today,
let alone what has been made in the past. I'm not quite sure about
your answer. Are you saying that your present -- your present course
of action, when you make decisions with regard to the context
established by Mr. Bartlett, that you're not paying any attention to
the Defense Bill? Peter Chiarelli: I'm not saying that. I'm saying -- Neil Abercrombie: Then why -- I really need to know what it is that we're dealing with here. Peter
Chiarelli: I can only tell you what the people I trust to put together
our request to Congress have indicated to us: In FY10, as a general
rule, we are not allowed to recap equipment. And that has brought down
the amount of money that we requested for procurement as part of reset. Neil Abercrombie: So you don't need additional funds? Is that right? Peter Chiarelli: I am telling you -- Neil
Abercrombie: Because we could reallocate funds. Believe me, I've got
requests, Mr. Bartlett has requests right now, if your answer is is
that you don't need this money and that which was represented to us --
whether I was in the minority or the majority because we've been on
this subcommittee for some period of time now -- so those estimates
from before were inaccurate? Peter Chiarelli: Let me be perfectly clear -- Neil Abercrombie: I hope so. Peter Chiarelli: -- this -- Neil Abercrombie: Because believe me I'll make some recommendations for re-allocations. Absolutely, I will. Peter
Chiarelli: We are in fact able -- with the budget we have and what
we've requested to you to do what you asked me to come here and talk
about today and that is reset our equipment. That is bring our
equipment up to 1020 standards and 1020 standards meaning that it is
fully capable to do its mission with minor deficiencies at best. We do
not bring it to a recap situation. We are able to reset our equipment
exactly as defined with the money we've been given by Congress. Neil
Abercrombie: Okay, if that's the case then, what do -- what system is
in place then, whether it's from the OMB or yourself, to accurately
asses inventory. The reason that I ask this question, in following up
on Mr. Bartlett's observations and inquiry, is that just in shipping
containers alone, you read the GAO reports, shipping containers alone,
we can't get, our subcommittee staff, is unable to get an accurate
answer as to what we need even from containers for equipment because we
can't get a handle on your inventory. What inventory process is in
place right now? And do you have confidence in it? Peter
Chiarelli: I have confidence in our inventory. I have confidence not
only that commanders down range like I was twice maintaining
inventory of both their TO and E equipment that they bring over with
them plus the troop provided equipment. Uh, we have had many looks at
our equipment down range to make sure that accountability standards are
high. Uh, and they are. Uh and we feel very, very good that we know
what we've got down range and what we will in fact be bringing back and
what is in troop provided -- theater provided equipment which they
issue to units when they arrive in theater Neil Abercrombie: So the GAO reports on the capacity for you to accurately assess inventory is incorrect. Peter Chiarelli: I believe -- Neil Abercrombie: I'll send it to you.
Peter Chiarelli: Thank you, sir.
Neil
Abercrombie: And I would appreciate your response. This is a serious
question because, again, this involves numbers, including billions of
dollars. Believe me, we are looking right now for billions of dollars
possibly for reallocation because of other demands. So-so if you don't
need this money and you're sure your inventory assessment is absolutely
correct seems to me I'm going to have a hell of a lot more
flexibility than I thought I had. Peter
Chiarelli: Uh, we too understand the tru-tremendous fiscal re - crisis
that our country has gone though. The economic situation. And one of
the reasons why there's no question as long as we can reset our
equipment we understand because of fiscal requirements it may be in the
best interest of our country as a whole to cut back on the amount of
recap we're doing so it did not seem odd to me -- Neil
Abercrombie: Okay, excuse me. In the fiscal interests, is that the
basis? Are you in conversations with these folks at OMB? Peter Chiarelli: I have not, sir. Neil Abercrombie: Who would have had these conversations? Peter Chiarelli: It would have taken place at the Office of Secretary of Defense, OSD. Neil
Abercrombie: So the Secretary of Defense is saying that you need -- at
least from my calculations here -- approximately 2 billion dollars less
than you said you needed previously with regard to reset on the basis
of -- what was the phrase you used? Fiscal discipline or fiscal
necessity? Peter
Chiarelli: We understand that we all have to be very, very careful with
the dollars that we spend. And, uhm, people have made a decision that
we will not recap equipment in FY10. That seems to me to be
understandable. Neil Abercrombie: Okay, it's understandable, yes. Do you think it's good policy? Peter
Chiarelli: If-if-if I had the ability to recap equipment, if we had the
money to recap equipment I think it would make sense -- Neil
Abercrombie: That's not the question I asked. Do you think you need
the money to recap? In you professional judgment, that's what we're
asking for today, not from a politician appointed in the OMB. I'm
asking for your professional judgment today with regard: Do you need
money to recap? Peter Chiarelli: If I had the ability to recap, I would recap for all the reasons I have stated. Neil
Abercrombie: You think the policy then of not being able to do that
which is reflected in your -- in the numbers that are given to us -- is
not good policy? Peter
Chiarelli: I-I-I can't say that and I won't say that. And I won't say
that because I understand that the people who make those rules, make
those decisions, have to take many other things into consideration.
And that is why -- Neil
Abercrombie: Yes, they have to take into consideration what we say is
in the Defense Bill because we're reflecting -- we are trying to
reflect -- I'm trying to help you here. Because, believe me, if you
give me this answer, I want to know, and right now what you're telling
me is is that -- is that in your professional judgment the-the rules or
the-the policy or the-the-the admonitions that you've been given or the
directions that you're operating under reflects your professional
judgment of what the necessities for the army are right now. Peter Chiarelli: If I had the authority and the ability to recap, I would. I -- Neil
Abercrombie: Okay, thank you. If Congress gives you the authority
under the Defense Bill then that would reflect your professional
opinion that you could use at least 13 billion dollars a year rather
than 11 billion -- Peter Chiarelli: I can't -- I can't give you those numbers. Neil Abercrombie: Well okay. You don't have to -- well, those are the numbers we have been given previously. Peter Chiarelli: Previous years? Neil Abercrombie: Yes. Peter Chiarelli: I'd have to go back and ask the -- we just don't go -- Neil
Abercrombie: I won't go further. Mr. Chairman, this is serious
business. We're under the gun here in the Defense Bill to make accurate
numbers and put them forward for everybody to consider and now we have
to make a decision whether OMB does this because, what the hell, we
don't need a committee here if-if-if somebody down in OMB, this is a
political appointment. It's all political appointments and if we're
going to do it on the basis of-of what somebody else decides in the
executive is-is a budget number as opposed to what our obligation is
which is to provide for you and the people who serve under you and
under your command then we have a real dilemma here. I have a real
dilemma because I can't accurately, I cannot in good conscience say to
Chairman Ortiz or to the other members that we're giving a number that
adequately responds to what you believe to be in your professional
judgment a necessity. Understand my motivation here? Peter
Chiarelli: I hope you understand mine. I-I understand also that you
have to take many other things into consideration when putting together
our budget. That's all I'm saying to you. That was pulled from yesterday's snapshot because there wasn't room. Monday a bad article about women veterns and the large increase in the number who become homeless appeared, Bryan Bender's " More female veterans are winding up homeless" ( Boston Globe)
-- an article on how women veterans are falling through the cracks
because their specific issues and problems are not known and/or
addressed -- an article where all the 'experts' were men. No one
apparently noticed that incongruity. Bender was not tackling a
just-breaking story. From the June 3rd snapshot,
when US House Rep Bob Finer chaired the House Committee on Veterans
Affairs committee for the hearing entitled "A National Commitment to
End Veterans' Homelessness:" The number of women veterans who are homeless is rising. [Vietnam Veterans of America's
Marsha] Four observed, "There certainly is a question of course on the
actual number of homeless veterans -- it's been flucuating dramatically
in the last few years. When it was reported at 250,000 level, two
percent were considered females. This was rougly about 5,000. Today,
even if we use the very low number VA is supplying us with -- 131,000
-- the number, the percentage, of women in that population has risen up
to four to five percent, and in some areas, it's larger. So that even a
conservative method of determinng this has left the number as high as
[6,550]. And the VA actually is reporting that they are seeing that
this is as high as eleven percent for the new homeless women veterans.
This is a very vulnerable population, high incidents of past sexual
trauma, rape and domestic violence. They have been used, abused and
raped. They trust no one. Some of these women have sold themselves for
money, been sold for sex as children, they have given away their own
children. And they are encased in this total humiliation and guilt the
rest of their lives." About half of her testimony was reading and about
half just speaking to the committee directly.\ Marsha
Ford is only one of the experts on the issue Bender could have spoken
to but didn't. Congress has found many women capable of speaking on
the issue in the last two years. Since the press seems unable to (and since the Feminist Wire Daily can't even notice that women aren't 'experts' in Bender's article)
perhaps the press could pay attention on July 14th when the Senate
Veterans Affairs Committee holds their hearing Women Veterans: Bridging
the Gaps in Care? Or possibly July 16th when the House Armed Services
Committee holds their hearing Eliminating the Gaps: Examing Women
Veterans' Issues? Were they to do so, they might discover that, no
surprise, there are many, many women who can speak to issues effecting
women veterans and they might realize how insulting -- in a story about
how women's own issues are ignored by the VA (including being a single,
primary caregiver for a child) -- it is to pen an article on women
veterans while bringing in 'expert' males to talk about their problems
as if to say: No one can follow the issue when a woman speaks. It's
the equivalent, in conversations, of a man interrupting a woman to tell
her story 'for her' because he can do it so much better because,
apparently, an addition groin weight somehow helps in 'translation.' Turning to film, 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. 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.
Posted at 04:16 pm by thecommonills
Permalink
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 QDoes the U.S. relationship with Israel help our national security? Yes No Not sureSurvey software by SurveyGizmoSend 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. iraqthe new york timessam daghersteven lee myerscampbell robertsonthe washington postnada bakrithe los angeles timesned parkerusama redhamichael schwartz60 minutescbs newsto the contrarybonnie erbenow on pbsnprthe diane rehm showpbskathryn bigelowann hornadaymick lasalle
Posted at 07:15 am by thecommonills
Permalink
|
|
|
|
|
|
