Tuesday,
July 28, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the US Defense Secretary
visits Iraq, Nouri launches an attack on civilians at Camp Ashraf,
Baghdad loses millions in a bank robbery, and more.
Today Gabriel Gatehouse (BBC News) reveals
that, oh, US troops? Still patrolling. US troops are patrolling in
Mosul. The 'pull-back' was for-show as was Nouri al-Maliki's
no-no-we-don't-want-US-troops-in-Mosul. The largest question
Gatehouse's report raises is why the BBC is the one breaking the news?
Don't several US papers have staff in Baghdad?
He's
not patrolling (and he's hopefully not editing copying) but US
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was in Iraq today. As always, it was
an unannounced visit. They keep splashing waves of Operation Happy Talk
but the US officials still can't visit Iraq openly. Kevin Baron (Stars and Stripes) reports
that the press was told about the visit on Friday by someone at the
Defense Dept and quotes the unnamed person telling them, "The purpose
of going to Talil is so the secretary can get an understanding of the
advisory and assistance brigades that are sort of being developed. This
is what eventually we will be left with when we have a transitional
force come September 2010." Elisabeth Bumiller (New York Times) is part of the press traveling with Gates and notes
this his first visit to Iraq for 2009 -- seven months in, rather sad --
and that he plans to visit with both Nouri al-Maliki (puppet of the
occupation) and Gen Ray Odierno (top US commander in Iraq). She also
notes Gates will be playing an Amway salesman for US defense
contractors as he meets with Iraqi officials to discuss "whether the
U.S. will sell Iraq any F-16 fighter jets." Jim Wolf (Reuters) reports
it more bluntly: "One of the topics they are expected to discuss is
Baghdad's interest in acquiring Lockheed Martin Corp's (LMT.N) F-16
multirole fighter jets to counter possible threats from neighbouring
nations after U.S. forces leave." And he will visit Kurdistan President
Masoud Barzani. Al Bawaba reports that Gates' visit as 8 security guards were killed in a Baghdad bank robbery. AFP places the amount stolen at $3.8 million (US dollars). Gates was greeted with a parade. Well . . . a protest. Aljazeera reports followers of Moqtada al-Sadr staged a demonstration chanting "NO, NO TO AMERICA!" BBC reports,
"At a news conference after his talks in Baghdad, Mr Gates side-stepped
a question about whether some US forces might stay on beyond a 2011
deadline for withdrawal. The issue, he said, was best left until the
end of 2010 or even 2011."
Whose funding
the so-called "insurgents" in Iraq? For years General David Petraeus,
Robert Gates and assorted others have insisted it was the government of
Iran. Turns out, it may be the US. Free Speech Radio News explained yesterday:
Andrew
Stelzer: The US Agency for Intenational Development, or USAID, has
suspended a $644 million dollar program in Iraq because of two reviews
indicating a portion of the money was ending up in the hands of
insurgents and going to fund jobs that didn't exist. The government
hired the Virginia-based International Relief and Development to run
the public works job creation program. Former employees told USA Today that documents were faked and projects that didn't exist were included in progress reports.
Ken Dilanian (USA Today) explains
the program "was designed to tamp down the insurgency by paying Iraqi
cash to do public work projects such as trash removal and ditch
digging." So the US government, not the Iranian one, has been funding
the so-called 'insurgency.' Government officials in Iran are no doubt
happy by another development. Nouri al-Maliki did their bidding
today. Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) reports
that Camp Ashraf, to the north of Baghdad, was raided today by Iraqi
forces who "used batons, hoses, pepper spray and sound grenades during
the raid at Camp Ashraf, home to the Mujahadeen-e-Khalq [approximately
3500 people]. The raid came a day after the Iraqi government announced
it would assume complete responsibility of the camp and vowed to
'protest the people inside the base'." You can't trust Nouri. The Foreign Affairs Committee of the National Council of Resistance of Iran is stating that "Peyman Kord-Amir, artist and singer, is in coma right now due to severe blows to his head." They note 2,000 Iraqi forces were sent in and they note
that following the 300 wounded and the 4 dead, residents of Camp Ashraf
have started a hunger strike and have issued a list of demands which
include the immediate removal of Iraqi forces and the freeing of
prisoners, returning protection responsibilities for the camp to the
US, allowing attorneys and human rights organizations into the camp. Nouri's bag boy Ali al-Dabbagh insists to UPI,
The entrance of the Iraqi forces into Camp Ashraf is not a break-in but
rather a well-coordinated operation to stabilize the security situation
inside the camp." AFP is reporting
that 150 were injured as Iraqi forces stormed the camp. Until
recently, the US had been protecting the camp. Before the start of the
illegal war, the Iranians were allowed in the country by Saddam
Hussein. Nouri's close ties to Iran include the many years where his
cowardly streak found him living there because it took to much strength
and courage to fight to overthrow a government he didn't believe in.
Much better to hide like a coward and wait for the US military to do
so. AFP quotes US Gen Ray Odierno insisting the US had no
prior knowledge of the assault: "We didn't know they were going to do
this." Really? After May when Nouri ordered what was obviously the
trial run for the assault, no one suspected? When he sent Iraqi forces
into Camp Ashraf May 28th, no one had a clue?
Barack
Obama's administration has failed. Following the election, they knew
this was one of the issues that the previous administration would be
dumping in their laps and they knew it was time sensitive. They
refused to seriously address it and, in fact, took the promises of thug
Nouri at face value in order to be done with the matter and wash their
hands clean. They knew this was a serious issue and instead of
treating it seriously, they passed the buck. On an issue that was
early on desginated as "a litmus test" regarding Barack's dedication to
human rights.
32.
(U) 3,839 members and former members of the USG-designated foreign
terrorist organization Mujahideen-e-Khalq (MEK) are currently resident
at Camp Ashraf in Diyala Province under Coalition guard and protection.
33.
(U) MF-I has designated these 3,839 individuals as protected persons
under the Fourth Geneva Convention and considers the restrictions
placed on MEK travel outside the compound and on visitor entry as
"measures of control and security" permitted under Article 27 of IVGC.
34.
(U) Those 74 residents of Camp Ashraf who are citizens or legal
residents of third countries are permitted to repatriate with the
approval of their respective governments. MNF-I and Post are currently
facilitating a number of possible repatriations.
35.
(U) IRC has been invited to vist Camp Ashraf to conduct individual
interviews with the residents of the Camp. It is expected that these
interviews may result in ICRC's recommendation that UNHCR make a
determination of refugee status in many cases.
The
term "terrorist" may be applied to the group. That was being
re-evaluated by the US government (prior to the assault). Already this
year England and the European Union took the Mujahadeen-e-Khalq off
their list of terrorists groups. If "terrorist" is used, don't let
that distract from the fact that this was a camp for exiles, that
children were present during the assault. In March 2008, the International Red Cross' Juan-Pedro Schaerer explained,
"The main responsibility to protect civilians lies with the States that
have effective control over them -- in this case, the governments of
the United States and of Iraq have to find a suitable solution in
accordance with international law and relevant provisions of national
law. Our main concern is to ensure that the authorities meet these
obligations. In particular, they must always protect the lives, the
physical and moral integrity and the dignity of those concerned.
Morevoer, should anyone in Ashraf be suspected or accused of committing
criminal offences, judicial guarantees must be respected as provided
for in international law." The residents of the camp had rights.
Those rights were not respected and the camp was assaulted. April
20th, Amnesty International issued "Iraq: concerns regarding the future of Camp Ashraf resident:"
Amnesty
International has written directly to the Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri
al-Maliki about recent developments relating to the more than 3,000
Iranian exiles currently living in Camp Ashraf, northeast of Baghdad,
who Iraqi officials have said should leave the country. The Iranians
are members or supporters of the People's Mojahedin Organization of
Iran (PMOI).
In
particular, Amnesty International expressed concern at a recent
statement reportedly made in an interview with al-Forat, an Iraqi TV
channel, by National Security Advisor Dr Muwaffaq al-Rubaie, in which
he said that the authorities intend gradually to make the continued
presence of the Camp Ashraf residents "intolerable". Shortly after
this, possibly in a related development, a team of medical doctors were
denied access to the Camp for several days. One purpose of their visit
was reportedly to provide treatment to a woman in the Camp in need of
surgery for an internal cancerous tumour. The doctors were later
allowed into the camp.
In
its letter, Amnesty International urged the Iraqi Prime Minister to
ensure that no action is taken by the Iraqi authorities that violates
the human rights of the Camp Ashraf residents and to clarify the
government's intentions towards them in the light of Dr al-Rubaie's
reported threat to make their lives "intolerable." Amnesty
International has previously called on the Iraqi government to ensure
that none of the Camp Ashraf residents or other Iranian dissidents are
forcibly returned to Iran in view of fears that they would be at risk
of torture or other serious human rights violations there.
Background:
The
PMOI is an Iranian opposition organization and many of its members have
been resident in Iraq for many years. Until recently the organization
was listed as a "terrorist" organization by the European Union (EU) and
governments of non-EU states, but in most cases this designation has
now been lifted on the grounds that the PMOI no longer advocates or
engages in armed opposition to the government of Iran. Following the
invasion of Iraq in 2003 the US forces provided protection for the
Ashraf Camp residents, who were designated as "protected persons" under
the Geneva Conventions. This situation has apparently been discontinued
following the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) between the US and
Iraqi governments which came into force on 1 January 2009, although the
SOFA does not make any reference to Camp Ashraf or its residents. The
Iranian government is said to be putting pressure on Iraq to expel the
PMOI members and supporters from Iraq.
-
having regard to the Geneva Conventions and notably Article 27 of the
Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons
in Time of War,
- having regard to
the Geneva Convention of 1951 relating to the Status of Refugees and
the 1967 Protocol thereto,
- having regard to the Status of Forces Agreement between the US and Iraqi Governments, signed in November 2008,
- having regard to its resolution of 12 July 2007 on the humanitarian situation of Iraqi refugees(1) and its resolution of 4 September 2008 on executions in Iran(2),
which include references to Camp Ashraf residents having legal status
as protected persons under the Fourth Geneva Convention,
-having regard to Rule 115(5) of its Rules of Procedure,
A.-
whereas Camp Ashraf in Northern Iraq was established during the 1980s
for members of the Iranian opposition group People's Mujahedin
Organisation of Iran (PMOI),
B.- whereas
in 2003 US forces in Iraq disarmed Camp Ashraf's residents and provided
them with protection, those residents having been designated "protected
persons" under the Geneva Conventions,
C.-
whereas in a letter dated 15 October 2008 the UN High Commissioner for
Human Rights urged the Iraqi Government to protect Camp Ashraf
residents from forcible deportation, expulsion or repatriation in
violation of the non-refoulement principle, and to refrain from any
action that would endanger their life or
security,
D.-
whereas following the conclusion of the US/Iraqi Status of Forces
Agreement, control of Camp Ashraf was transferred to the Iraqi security
forces as of 1 January 2009,
E.-
whereas, according to recent statements reportedly made by the Iraqi
National Security Advisor, the authorities intend gradually to make the
continued presence of the Camp Ashraf residents "intolerable", and
whereas he reportedly also referred to their expulsion/extradition
and/or their forcible displacement inside Iraq,
1.-
Urges the Iraqi Prime Minister to ensure that no action is taken by
the Iraqi authorities which violates the human rights of the Camp
Ashraf residents and to clarify the Iraqi government's intentions
towards them; calls on the Iraqi authorities to protect the lives and
the physical and moral integrity of the Camp Ashraf residents and to
treat them in accordance with obligations under the Geneva Conventions,
in particular by refraining from forcibly displacing, deporting,
expelling or repatriating them in violation of the principle of
non-refoulement;
2.- Respecting the
individual wishes of anyone living in Camp Ashraf as regards his or her
future, considers that those living in Camp Ashraf and other Iranian
nationals who currently reside in Iraq having left Iran for political
reasons could be at risk of serious human rights violations if they
were to be returned involuntarily to Iran, and insists that no person
should be returned, either directly or via a third country, to a
situation where he or she would be at risk of torture or other serious
human rights abuses;
3.-
Calls on the Iraqi Government to end its blockade of the camp, to
respect the legal status of the Camp Ashraf residents as protected
persons under the Geneva Conventions, and to refrain from any action
that would endanger their life or security, i.e. to afford them full
access to food, water, medical care and supplies, fuel, family members
and international humanitarian organisations;
4.-
Calls on the Council, the Commission and the Member States, together
with the Iraqi and US Governments, the UN High Commissioner for
Refugees and the International Committee of the Red Cross, to work
towards finding a satisfactory long-term legal status for Camp Ashraf
residents;
5.-
Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the
Commission, the Governments and Parliaments of the Member States, the
UN High Commissioner for Refugees, the International Committee of the
Red Cross, the Government of the United States of America and the
Government and Parliament of Iraq.
The issue was debate by the UK House of Lords at the start of this month
with the Labour Party Whip repeatedly assuring that England was on the
issue and conveying this message to the Iraqi government and that
message, and monitoring and they have "sought assurances" and received
them. At the US State Dept today, spokesperson Ian Kelly was asked
about the assault and responded, "We've seen these media reports and
we're looking into them. As you know, the government of Iraq has
assumed responsibility -- security responsibility -- for Camp Ashraf
and its residents. We continue to monitor the situation closely to
ensure the residents of Camp Ashraf are treated in accordance with
Iraq's written assurance that it will treat the residents there
humanely. This is in accordance with the constitutional laws and the
international obligations of Iraq and the government has stated to us
that no Camp Ashraf resident will be forcibly transferred to a country
where they have reason to fear persecution on the basis of their
political beliefs, poitical opinions or religious beliefs or whether
there are substantial grounds for believing they would be tortured."
While
Nouri, if Odierno is correct, ignores the US, they continue to cater to
him. July 9th, five Iranian diplomats were released. Or were they?
Apparently, four were released but the fifth was something else and the
US military used the diplomats release to sneak the non-diplomat out. Bill Roggio (Long War Journal) reports:
The US had previously released two members of the Irbil Five in November 2007, according to The Associated Press,
but the report received little attention. This "left room for Farhadi
to be pawned off as one of the Irbil Five and snuck out the back door,"
one official told The Long War Journal.
Farhadi's
detention caused a row between Iran and Iraq. Iran closed the border
after claiming Farhadi was an Iranian trade delegation representative
named Agha Farhadi who was visiting Iraq on a sanctioned business trip.
Why
would they worry? Why would they hide Farhadi's release? Because
Barack Obama has a large and growing problem with military families
over a stunt pulled without explanation last month. From the June 9th snapshot:
This morning the New York Times' Alissa J. Rubin and Michael Gordon offered "U.S. Frees Suspect in Killing of 5 G.I.'s." Martin Chulov (Guardian) covered the same story, Kim Gamel (AP) reported on it, BBC offered "Kidnap hope after Shia's handover" and Deborah Haynes contributed "Hope for British hostages in Iraq after release of Shia militant" (Times
of London). The basics of the story are this. 5 British citizens have
been hostages since May 29, 2007. The US military had in their custody
Laith al-Khazali. He is a member of Asa'ib al-Haq. He is also accused
of murdering five US troops. The US military released him and allegedly
did so because his organization was not going to release any of the
five British hostages until he was released. This is a big story and
the US military is attempting to state this is just diplomacy, has
nothing to do with the British hostages and, besides, they just
released him to Iraq. Sami al-askari told the New York Times,
"This is a very sensitive topic because you know the position that the
Iraqi government, the U.S. and British governments, and all the
governments do not accept the idea of exchanging hostages for
prisoners. So we put it in another format, and we told them that if
they want to participate in the political process they cannot do so
while they are holding hostages. And we mentioned to the American side
that they cannot join the political process and release their hostages
while their leaders are behind bars or imprisoned." In other words, a
prisoner was traded for hostages and they attempted to not only make
the trade but to lie to people about it. At the US State Dept, the
tired and bored reporters were unable to even broach the subject. Poor
declawed tabbies. Pentagon reporters did press the issue and got the
standard line from the department's spokesperson, Bryan Whitman, that
the US handed the prisoner to Iraq, the US didn't hand him over to any
organization -- terrorist or otherwise. What Iraq did, Whitman wanted
the press to know, was what Iraq did. A complete lie that really
insults the intelligence of the American people. CNN reminds the five US soldiers killed "were:
Capt. Brian S. Freeman, 31, of Temecula, California; 1st Lt. Jacob N.
Fritz, 25, of Verdon, Nebraska; Spc. Johnathan B. Chism, 22, of
Gonzales, Louisiana; Pfc. Shawn P. Falter, 25, of Cortland, New York;
and Pfc. Johnathon M. Millican, 20, of Trafford, Alabama." Those are
the five from January 2007 that al-Khazali and his brother Qais
al-Khazali are supposed to be responsible for the deaths of.
That
was a trade which was supposed to lead to the release of five British
hostages. Two were released, their corpses. Earlier this month, Kim Howells, former Foreign Office Minister in the UK, told BBC
that "he doubts Britain negotiated with the right people in its
attempts to free five men kidnapped in Iraq." Howells: "I'm not
convinced we were ever negotating with the right people. I mean, that's
doubtful. The only real proof of life that I saw were the video. And
there were stories circulating that a suicide had taken place, there
were deadlines that came and went." And all of that goes to why the US
would sneak out a prisoner.
Turning to other reported violence today . . .
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a
Baghdad motorcycle bombing which claimed 8 lives and left seventeen
injured and a two Baghdad roadside bombings which left four people
injured. Reuters notes a Baghdad cafe bombing which claimed 2 lives and left fifteen injured.
Meanwhile,
remember how Iraq was assuming control of paying Sahwa (also known as
"Awakening" and "Sons Of Iraq")? Remember that spin started in
November and we've had several other key 'dates' since. Well the US military announces today
that the Iraqi government paid some members of Sahwa today in Kirkuk
for . . the month of May. Handing out payments, Iraqi Lt Col Afrain
declared, "This payment is for May. We have to work on solutions to
the pay problem." Yes, you do. And, no, it's not a surprise, it's not
something new and it's nothing your government shouldn't have been
planning for some time ago.
Yesterday's snapshot included: " Deborah Haynes (Times of London) reports
British troops will likely have to leave Iraq as a result of the
Parliament failing to ratify the bilateral agreement between England
and Iraq 'Bob Ainsworth, the British Defence Secretary, said that the
naval training personnel would wait in Kuwait until they were given
permission to return. It is an embarrassment to Britain, however, and
an illustration of the low regard in which its role in Iraq -- it once
had 45,000 troops based there -- is held'." Today the Telegraph of London quotes British
Embassy spokesperson Jawwad Syed declaring, "The guys who were doing
the training are temporarily moving out to Kuwait while we talk to the
Iraqi government about what we might do in the interim." CNN reports
that "about a dozen helping to train Iraqi police as part of a NATO
mission" will remain. They also state it was the al-Sadr bloc in
Parliament that kept the agreement from being voted on. "Our story
begins," writes Babak Rahmi (Foreign Policy)
in an article on Moqtada al-Sadr's rise, "in the summer 2007, when Sadr
first dabbled in getting the extra credentials. The idea came after an
outbreak of violence between Sadr's Mahdi Army and the Badr
Organization, another armed Shiite group, in Karbala. Soon afterward,
Iraqi police intervenedand Sadr called a cease-fire, suspending
his militia's activity. He went underground for security reasons. Soon
thereafter, he left for Iran." Well why should he be any different
from the previous exiles?
After the 2003 American-led invasion, Iraqis enjoyed an immediate benefit--freedom of expression. Today, after all the pain and sacrifices we have endured for six years, this freedom is threatened again. After
the Saddam Hussein regime fell, thousands of book and dozens of
newspapers that had been banned, censored or not permitted to be
printed were suddenly free to publish.
Meanwhile Heath Druzin (Stars and Stripes) explores
the northern section of Iraq, "Iraqi Kurdistan's only legal land
crossing along the Turkish border, it is one of the busiest ports of
entry in the country, accounting for much of the estimated $6 billion
in trade between Turkey and the Iraqi Kurdish region, according to a
2008 report released by the U.S. Agency for International
Development." Druzin explains
that the violent exchanges between the PKK and Turkey are handled with
free-flow of information between the US and Turkey; however, that's not
the case for all:
Local villagers
are not so lucky and, while no solid numbers are available, there have
been many reports of civilian deaths and injuries. In March, a
2-year-old boy was killed near the Iranian border, and earlier this
month, a farmer was badly injured by shrapnel.
More
often, the attacks kill livestock, set pastures and farms ablaze and
flatten homes. In between shelling, shepherds who graze their sheep
along the poorly-marked border must worry about being captured by
Iranian troops, a fate that has befallen at least nine Iraqi Kurds in
the past month, according to local officials.
The
fighting makes an already grinding existence, scratched out from
unforgiving terrain through bee-keeping, herding, and subsistence
farming, nearly impossible. At least 8,000 Kurds have fled the
fighting, creating a refugee crisis in surrounding cities, according to
the Refugee Office of Soran, a government organization that works with
Kurdish refugees.
Druzin is the reporter the military attempted to censor. Xinhau notes
today, "Turkish Interior Minister Besir Atalay on Tuesday said that
Turkey, Iraq and the United States were determined to make their
cooperation on fighting against terrorism more influential."
After the 2003 American-led invasion, Iraqis enjoyed an immediate benefit--freedom of expression. Today, after all the pain and sacrifices we have endured for six years, this freedom is threatened again. After
the Saddam Hussein regime fell, thousands of book and dozens of
newspapers that had been banned, censored or not permitted to be
printed were suddenly free to publish. Today I received a statement
from the Society to Defend Press Freedom in Iraq. It said that the
Iraqi Ministry of Culture, in cooperation with the Ministry of
Interior, has decided to censor the importation of books from outside
the country and restrict printing them inside the country.
The above is from a McClatchy Iraqi correspondent's "A Return to '1984'?" (Inside Iraq). Saturday, Khalid al-Ansary (Reuters) reported
the Ministry of Culture is censoring books in 'free' Iraq and quotes
the ministry Taher al-Humoud explaining that all publishers now must
"submit lists of titles for approval". And that's what people died for?
US
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates is in Iraq today. As always, it was
an unannounced visit. They keep splashing waves of Operation Happy Talk
but the US officials still can't visit Iraq openly. Kevin Baron (Stars and Stripes) reports
that the press was told about the visit on Friday by someone at the
Defense Dept and quotes the unnamed person telling them, "The purpose
of going to Talil is so the secretary can get an understanding of the
advisory and assistance brigades that are sort of being developed. This
is what eventually we will be left with when we have a transitional
force come September 2010." Elisabeth Bumiller (New York Times) is part of the press traveling with Gates and notes
this his first visit to Iraq for 2009 -- seven months in, rather sad --
and that he plans to visit with both Nouri al-Maliki (puppet of the
occupation) and Gen Ray Odierno (top US commander in Iraq). She also
notes Gates will be playing an Amway salesman for US defense
contractors as he meets with Iraqi officials to discuss "whether the
U.S. will sell Iraq any F-16 fighter jets." Jim Wolf (Reuters) reports
it more bluntly: "One of the topics they are expected to discuss is
Baghdad's interest in acquiring Lockheed Martin Corp's (LMT.N) F-16
multirole fighter jets to counter possible threats from neighbouring
nations after U.S. forces leave." And he will visit Kurdistan President
Masoud Barzani. Al Bawaba reports that Gates' visit as 8 security guards were killed in a Baghdad bank robbery.
Voices of Honor
is a group we'll note sometimes and not others. As explained, we're not
interested in a group trying to overturn Don't Ask, Don't Tell which
can't tell meaning the efforts of some to hide gayness. You won't
overturn the policy by hiding in a closet or with talking points of,
"It's not about being gay." It's exactly about being gay. If people
weren't gay, they wouldn't be kicked out. A member of the group made
really insulting remarks (publicly) about Ellen Tauscher when she was
still in Congress. He trashed her for showing up -- the only member of
Congress to show up -- at one of the events to repeal Don't Ask, Don't
Tell. He trashed her, he mocked -- publicly -- and did so because she
wouldn't treat the issue as if people were being discharged because
they had sniffles. Gym Bunny apparently has a self-loathing issue and
that's his issue but Voices of Honor was launched only weeks ago and
it's already offended a huge number of gays and lesbians with efforts
to act as if the gay issue is something to run from. When they're
running from it, we're not covering them. And we will not now, or ever,
mention Gym Bunny or quote him or do anything to promote him.
Ellen
(I know Ellen, I've known her for years) went to that public event and
was the only member of Congress to do so. She spoke at that event, she
spoke movingly about the need to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell. She
didn't deserve to be trashed. I don't put up with bad manners and that
was bad manners to the max. The group (this is just months ago) needed
all the Congressional help it could get and they needed a name at their
event to get them any coverage. Ellen's got a life. She went on her own
time. And her thanks for that is to be trashed because she talked about
the issue and she noted it is an issue for the lesbian and gay
community? (Causing Gym Bunny to snort that it's not a gay issue. It's
a gay issue, Dumb Ass. People are being kicked out because they're
gay.) So with that brief (ha) intro, Zoe Tillman (Philadelphia Inquirer) reports:
Marine
veteran and Philadelphia resident Joe Soto, 48, was among the repeal
advocates who joined Murphy at yesterday's news conference. An
openly gay man who grew up in Hershey and graduated from the Naval
Academy in 1983, Soto resigned his commission in 1991. The former
Marine captain said he no longer wanted to hide his sexual orientation. "I was proud to serve, but I had to do so in silence," he said. "We need to end discrimination now." Former
Army intelligence collector Alexander Nicholson, 28, who speaks several
languages, including Arabic, was discharged in 2002 when he was outed. Nicholson
is the founder and executive director of Servicemembers United, an
advocacy group for gay and lesbian troops and veterans. He said he
hopes the tour will "show the American public that this is the face of
a gay soldier."
Things like that we'll note. Dan Choi,
we'll obviously note. Choi knows why he's being targeted and speaks
about it. (Gym Bunny appears to think, based on his statements, that
mentioning "gay" will turn off likely voters. So he thinks it shouldn't
be mentioned. And somehow Americans won't grasp what Don't Ask, Don't
Tell is targeting?) WFMZ offers video of US House Rep Patrick Murphy speaking on the issue. News 8 quotes Alexander Nicholson
stating, "My command was forced to involuntarily discharge me because I
was outed as gay." Which is basic and truthful and gets across that
it's an issue of equality, fairness and dignity. See Marcia's "Voices of Honor" from last night.
Filling in for Elaine while she and Mike
were vacationing in Hawaii this month, I noted that I don't see
anything happening. I believe Patrick Murphy is very sincere and is
willing to work hard. A friend at the White House mentioned, in
passing, how this effort would take the heat off Barack and how nothing
would be done on it this year. I confirmed with others and that is the
White House attitude. It's also the attitude of leadership in Congress.
(Here for that post
at Elaine's site.) People need to grasp that. They need to grasp that
Ellen introduced legislation in the House (again) on March 3rd and that
her bill has 161 co-sponsors. But it's never come to the floor for a
vote. All this time later. 161 co-sponsors.
What's going on? Leadership doesn't want to vote this year and they really don't want a vote next year (an election year).
Murphy's sincere. I'm not doubting him. But most bills with 161 co-sponors quickly come up for a vote.
This didn't.
There
is NO leadership on it in the Senate. The only one who has actively
spoken of it in public repeatedly in the last two months is Senator
Roland Burris. Supposedly Ted Kennedy's going to lead on it but he's
ill, he has a book coming out in a few weeks to promote and he's not
even leading on health care despite efforts to portray as doing so.
(Ted's very ill and should honestly step down.) Kristen Gillbran is the
new senator from New York (she fills Hillary Clinton's senate seat).
First termers rarely get anything passed. (Remember when Homer got
elected to Congress on The Simpsons? Not far from the truth about the difficulties in passing legislation.) Ruth's "Senator Gillibrand's office needs to learn it is okay to say 'gay'"
last night noted that Gillibrand's quote issued by her office avoided
the words "gay" and "lesbian." And Ruth also pointed out that there's
no legislation Gillibrand's proposing. She's proposing a talking
hearing . . . so people can get to know the issues. Get to know the
issues? Are they headless? Where has the US Senate been? It's more
efforts to stall and take the heat off Barack and give the appearance
that something's going to be done.
Kind of like the Iraq War. We
voted Democrats into power of both houses of Congress in 2006 because
they were going to end the war. Immediately after, it was whine-whine,
we need the White House. They got the White House. The Iraq War is not
over.
Not only is it not over the 'plan' to end the illegal war
that has idiots drooling is George W. Bush's plan that he rammed
through in November 2008. (And that 'plan' is not the end of the
illegal war. But fools who think Barack's 'done something' have a hard
enough time grasping reality.)
Nearly
a month after American troops officially withdrew from urban areas in
Iraq, they are quietly going back in again, patrolling the streets of
towns and cities where, despite improvements in security, violence
remains an everyday occurrence. By the US military's own reckoning, Mosul and its surrounding region is the most dangerous area in Iraq. On
average they calculate there are four attacks here every day -
explosions, shootings, suicide bombings. That is down from six per day
in January - progress, of sorts. Since 30 June, Iraqi forces have
been entirely responsible for maintaining security in urban areas. But
the Americans want to keep a close eye. So they are maintaining a
limited number of joint patrols inside cities like Mosul.
The above is from Gabriel Gatehouse's "US troops back on patrol in Iraq"
(BBC News) and the June 30 pull-back is revealed as not quite what it
was promoted as -- but that's been the case throughout the illegal war
so, at this point, it's not that the US government fooled anyone, it's
that people willingly went along with the latest propaganda. There's
not a great deal of difference between "We're out of Iraq cities!" and
"Mission Accomplished!" So those who were foolish enough to believe the
lies really need to take some accountability and dial down the mock
surprise.
The willful stupidity is why waves of Operation Happy
Talk work. It's why a retired colonel feels he can offer ditherings and
not be laughed out of the public square, John M. House "Situation in Iraq is different" (Ledger-Enquirer): American
troops often act as backup for Iraqi Army units on patrol, rather than
leading those efforts. We still have soldiers training Iraqis on how to
be a professional army, but we aren’t leading the combat operations at
the level of a year ago. There will still be plenty of bad days because
the loss of every soldier causes a bad day. [. . .] My main point
is that the situation in Iraq is better. Less news time seems dominated
by the war. That’s a good indicator that the situation has improved.
So
as long as the news doesn't reach him, Hall argues, things are going
good. Do you get the feeling that a lot of news and reality don't reach
Hall?
The networks, tired of covering the illegal war they
helped sell, wanted to withdraw from Iraq which is what they did. They
shut down operations. ABC made a deal with the BBC to carry BBC reports
from time to time. But the American broadcast networks left Iraq.
That's why you get so little coverage of Iraq. The lie -- and it was a
lie -- was that they were moving into Afghanistan. They didn't. Not in
terms of the same number. They played it cheap and sent a tiny portion
of news staff to Afghanistan. They don't care. It's cheaper to cover
celebrities death and lie that they're offering news (hello, Cynthia
McFadden!). They're not covering anything. They're reading a bunch of
headlines based on wire reports and newspaper reports and not doing
much of anything. They should be ashamed of themselves. The country has
two ongoing wars (and the undeclared one on Pakistan) and they're not
covering it.
Because they're cheap and because they're personalities passed off as journalists.
The
BBC, not CBS, not ABC, not NBC, is reporting on US troops staging
patrols in Mosul. So John House can kid himself that things are going
great. And the criticsm of the poor job the media's doing? Not confined
to me. Thomas E. Ricks covered the war on the ground in Iraq (he was a
military reporter) for the Washington Post and he's written two books
on the war. Note this from him in yesterday's "Iraq, the unraveling (XIX): Friends like these" (Foreign Policy):
Also, more bad news in al Anbar -- a big bomb went off in Fallujah, as well as a smaller one
near the headquarters of the Iraqi Islamic Party, and one at a funeral
between Ramadi and Fallujah. And a bunch of police were shot up in Abu
Ghraib. Is the Anbar Sawha going off the reservation? I still don't
understand what is happening out there, and have been surprised by the
lack of news coverage of it. It makes me wonder if in budget cutbacks,
news bureaus let go their stringers in Anbar. If so, what a sad turn
for the news business. Suppose they gave a war and nobody covered it.
"It
makes me wonder if in budget cutbacks, news bureaus let go their
stringers in Anbar"? He's "been surprised by the lack of news coverage"
on the Sahwa?
The Iraq War hasn't ended. US troops have not left. The Boston Globe's Bryan Bender today speaks
of the tactical needs in removing 143,000 troops. Most are using the
figure of "approximately 130,000." What's 13,000 here or there
apparently? And those who leave? They're replaced by troops sent over. David Bauerlein (Florida's Time-Union ) reports:
Until
Sunday, Vietman War veteran Wayne Metcalfe had kept a pocket-sized
Bible for 40 years as a memento of his military service. His
edition of the New Testament has a metal plate inserted in its front
cover, giving another layer of protection when it's tucked into a shirt
pocket over a solider's heart. At
a family fun day Sunday at Camp Blanding for the 631st Maintenance
Company - slated to leave soon for a deployment in Iraq - Metcalfe
handed the Bible to his younger brother, Staff Sgt. Mike Malone.
Malone, a Keystone Heights resident, is among about 170 members of the
631st Maintenance Company who will leave for a one-year mission.
Spc. Michael Alves, 30, of Natick, is leaving a newborn son, a 3-year-old, an 8-year-old and a nervous wife. "That
will be the toughest part, not seeing my kids and not seeing them
grow," he said. "You never know what is going to happen, but we've had
great training." Alves said he and the rest of his unit are prepared for Iraq. "That's
what the military does, prepares you mentally and physically for
situations like these. In joining the military, you have to be prepared
to go at any given time," he said. After
having served in the military for about three years and working there
full-time, Alves knows he is giving back to his country. "I'm
most worried about my family, I know everything will be OK, but not
knowing what to say when you can't see your wife or your kids, it's
hard," he said.
GOVERNOR CRIST HONORS FLORIDA NATIONAL GUARD 631ST MAINTENANCE COMPANY DEPLOYING TO IRAQ
~~ ~Unit to serve as 24-hour maintenance support for Operation Iraqi Freedom~ ~~
July 27, 2009
Contact:
GOVERNOR'S PRESS OFFICE (850) 488-5394
Governor Crist Honors Florida National Guard 631st Maintenance Company Deploying to Iraq Unit to serve as 24-hour maintenance support for Operation Iraqi Freedom STARKE
-- Governor Charlie Crist today expressed his gratitude to members the
Florida National Guard’s 631st Maintenance Company for their service as
they prepare to deploy for Operation Iraqi Freedom. The ceremony was
held at Madison Street Baptist Church Activity Center in Starke with
nearly 200 guardsmen and women and their families, primarily from North
Florida area, in attendance. The 631st Maintenance Company will depart
Camp Blanding Tuesday, July 28, for Fort McCoy, Wisconsin, for advanced
training and preparation before heading overseas. The
631st Maintenance Company specializes in maintenance of wheeled
vehicles, weapons, communications equipment and night vision gear.
During their 2003 deployment, the 631st supported every National Guard
and Reserve unit that processed through Fort Stewart, Georgia, on their
way to and from operations in both Iraq and Afghanistan. The company
processed more than 50,000 pieces of equipment to ensure each unit
going to and from combat zones was "fully mission capable."
Additionally, in 2004, 2005 and 2006 the 631st Maintenance Company also
served for state active duty in support of hurricane missions. Earlier
this year, Governor Crist praised the brave men and women of the
Florida National Guard 779th Engineer Battalion prior to their
deployment in May 2008. Earlier this month, Lt. Governor Kottkamp
thanked the Florida National Guard 144th Transportation Company during
a deployment ceremony in Tallahassee. Collectively, nearly 300
guardsmen and women are deployed. Starke
is known as a "good National Guard" town and has a history that can be
charted from the early 1880's. The company was last relocated to Starke
in 1996 from Crystal River, Florida.
The Iraq War has not ended. Kristina De Leon (San Antonio's WOAI) reports
on the funeral held yesterday for the 20-year-old Brandon Lara who was
killed in Iraq July 19th. While his family mourned him in Texas, Cpl. Meg Murray (Military News) reports
a service was held earlier in Iraq, "Service members traveled from
bases across Al Anbar province to join Marines and sailors of Police
Transition Team 4 at a memorial service aboard Contingency Operating
Location Ubaydi as they paid their respects to their fallen comrade,
Lance Cpl. Brandon T. Lara, July 24, 2009."
The Iraq War hasn't
ended and it's disgraceful enough when the hitchikers on the highway of
causes (Susan Sarandon, for example) abandon the issue but it's even
more appalling when a retired military colonel wants to spin the
public. It's shameful. The lack of awareness -- which people have to
take responsibility for -- is appalling and shameful.
The Iraq War is not over. Last Thursday, Angelina Jolie made another goodwill visit to Iraq on behalf of the United Nations and she pointed out,
"There are still three million people displaced, innocent families,"
she added. "We have still many young men and women from our country who
are fighting every day, there are men and women from all countries who
have lost their lives, and this is a time to try to make some positive
change." Angelina is the UNHCR's Goodwill Ambassador and she was making her third trip to Iraq Thursday. The San Francisco Chronicle quoted
her stating, "There are some changes. There are returns of displaced
people, not a big number, but there is progress. This is a moment where
things seem to be improving on the ground, but Iraqis need a lot of
support and help to rebuild their lives." The UN notes (link has a great photo of a young Iraqi boy and Angelina in Baghdad) that she is calling "for greater support for the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who remain displaced."
Monday,
July 27, 2009. Chaos and violence continue with at least 6 dead and at
least nineteen wounded, the KRG held elections Saturday and no violence
reported, Nouri hopes to cut them out of Kirkuk, KBR continues to deny
responsibility in the electrocution deaths of US service members in
Iraq but a new Pentagon report emerges, the US government officially
denies any protocol signed with Iraqi exile leaders but the Los Angeles Times publishes the protocol, and more.
Saturday
the Kurdistan region in northern Iraq held provincial and presidential
elections. Early voting started on Thursday. Ballots will be counted
in Baghdad and results are expected, at the earliest, on Tuesday but US
embassy staff are predicting Wednesday at the earliest. Alsumaria noted
on election day, "Kurdistan elections are the most intense since 1992
as parliamentary and presidential elections will be carried out on the
same day. Five candidates are competing for the presidency while 24
political entities including 19 lists are standing the test of people's
vote to occupy 111 seats in Parliament." Adam Ashton (McClatchy Newspapers) reported,
"Kurdish voters on Saturday packed polling places in Iraq's second
election this year, weighing the promises of a new party that pledged
to shake up the status quo by exposing corruption in the incumbent
regional government. . . . The mood at polling places remained calm
through the morning with many men walking to the polls in traditional
Kurdish attire and women filling in wearing colorful dresses.
Opposition party leaders complained about activity at the polls later
in the day, when they said supporters of incumbents tried to sway
votes." Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) reports,
"Long lines snaked out of polling stations Saturday" which "attests to
the enthusiasm generated by the appearance for the first time, of a
viable challenge to the 18-year monopoly of the two ruling parties, the
Patriotic Union of Kurdistan and the Kurdish Democratic Party." Tim Cocks and Shamal Aqrawi (Reuters) explain voting was extended for one hour today and that the Electoral Commission estimates a turnout of 78.5%. The United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq issued a statement today noting
they applaud "the people of the Kurdistan Region of Iraq for having
turned out in large numbers, especially among women, on July 23rd and
25th to exercise their right to elect new regional, parliamentary, and
presidential representatives, in an orderly environment, notably free
of violence." Saturday started with the region under curfew but the KRG lifted it after the first four hours when no incidents of violence were reported.
The January 31st provincial elections which took place in fourteen of
Iraq's 18 provinces required curfews and crackdowns. In Baghdad, for
example, voters had to walk to polls as a result of the vehicle ban --
and frequently had to then walk to another polling station and
sometimes a third. Don't remember it?
Mohammed Hussein (New York Times) explained, "I
walked more than three miles and four polling centers to vote today. I
have lived in the same neighborhood for more than 30 years, but my name
was not on the list. With the sound of hovering American helicopters
filling the unusual silence on the streets I walked to the polling
center nearest my house to vote. First I had to be searched and take
off my wristwatch, my box of cigarettes and my mobile telphone because
an American patrol was watching the main checkpoint of the polling
center. I checked my name but I could not find it." He recounts the
trip to four polling stations only to note that at the fourth, where he
was allowed to vote, he didn't recognize the names of any candidates. Nasreen Yousif couldn't put up with it and she told Stephen Farrell and Alissa J. Rubin (New York Times),
that after her third Baghdad polling station, "Now I am going home.
Maybe there is a forth school, but it is too far and I can't walk
anymore." Back then, Tina Susman (Los Angeles Times) reported,
"The thousands of schools being used as polling places were ringed with
coils of razor wire days ago, and the police began 24-hour guard of
them earlier in the week." Stephen Farrell and Alissa J. Rubin noted,
"Driving was banned in most of the country to prevent suuicide bombers
from attacking any of the more than 6,000 polling places and security
checkpoints, often spaced just yards apart. The tight security, couples
with confusion over where voters should cast their ballots, appeared to
have reduced turnout in many districts across the country." And though
the claim quickly became that there was no violence at all on this
allgedly political holy day, in real time violence was being noted
including McClatchy's Laith Hammoudi reporting a Saturday tribal fight in Baghdad that resulted in one death and one person injured and Alissa J. Rubin and Stephen Farrell (New York Times) reporting security forces shot two people in Baghdad who "tried to enter a polling place carrying cameras and recorders". Reuters states,
"The vote was not entirely without incident. Kurdish Prime Minister
Nechirvan Barzani, the president's nephew, said that one person was
killed and 12 were wounded on Sunday evening when election revellers
began firing shots into the air." That's Sunday, the day after the
vote and, as described, also unintentional violence.
So
the KRG calling off the curfew in the midst of voting Saturday is
actually news and it's a shame no one thought to report it as such or
to offer the obvious comparison of the three provincial elections over
the weekend with the fourteen provincial elections in January. Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) reported
Saturday, "Kurdish President Massoud Barzani touched on an issue dear
to all Kurds when he cast his ballot on his mountain stronghold of
Salahuddin. 'I will never compromise on Kirkuk,' he said." That moment
resulted in one of the few complaints actually filed (as opposed to
complaints bandied to reporters by "Change" 'officials' and
their US-government backers). Tim Cocks, Shamal Aqrawi, Muhanad Mohammed and Mohammed Abbas (Reuters) explained
that Iraq's Independent High Electoral Commission "did say Barzani had
broken a campaign deadline rule by speaking to reporters after voting"
and quotes IHEC's Qasim al-Sachet, "This is not important, it was a
very simple matter and has no effect on the elections." Liz Sly explained Sunday
that the parties were releasing their own tallies (these are not
official tallies) and that, "Iraq's Independent High Electoral
Commission, which is running the election, said it was investigating a
number of complaints lodged by opposition candidates but had not yet
found any serious enough to affect the outcome of the vote." The KRG adds,
"More than 320 international observers from more than 35 organizations
were registered by IHEC to monitor the election. This included
observers from the United Nations, the European Union, the United
States, the United Kingdom, Japan and a variety of other nations and
non-governmental organizations. In addition, more than 30
international media outlets were accredited to observe and report on
the election. More than 90 organizations based in Iraq and/or the
Kurdistan Region also participated in the observation, with more than
10,000 individuals receiving accreditation badges from IHEC. Political
parties were also granted the right to monitor the proceedings, with 47
groups and more than 27,000 individuals accredited for observation." Adam Ashton (Modesto Bee's The Hive) blogs
about visitng the "multimedia empire" which is the headquarters for the
"Change" Party, "I don't want to be cynical because the voting I saw
was free and full of healthy debate. I just couldn't help but hear
Roger Daltry singing 'Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss,' as we
drove away from the Change compound in Sulaimaniya." (He's referring
to the Who's
"Won't Get Fooled Again," written by Pete Townsend.) "Change" is a
US-creation. Founder (frontman) Nawshirwan Mustafa runs that US funded
"multi-media empire." Mustafa became a US favorite while allegedly
representing Kurdish interests to the US created and controlled
Coalition Provisional Authority (interim government run by Paul
Bremer). Though a strong voice in public, he was surprisingly weak in
protecting Kurdish interests. Despite his fiery words in public and
his apparent incompentence as an advocate for Kurdish interests, the US
quickly funded Dick Cheney's BFF providing Mustafa with the money
needed to start his paper and 'independent' radio station which is a
satellite of the US propaganda arm Voice of America (Mustafa's is
tellingly known as "Voice of Change").
In
addition to crying foul, "Change" has attempted to insist they are the
reason for the huge turnout. That claim cannot be backed up. But the
issue of Kirkuk's status became a very big part of the KRG elections.
Not just on election day with Barzani's remarks. Not just two Sundays
ago with a very public speech. For weeks, it has been the driving force
behind the elections with candidates from all parties attempting to
make the most convincing argument that they would bring Kirkuk under
the Kurdistan umbrella. Do not mistakenly think that this campaign talk
did not impact voter turnout. The Kurds have long seen Kirkuk as their
property and have a historical grievance over the region since Saddam
Hussein ran them out of the area. Alsumaria reports
the PUK kept a previously scheduled meeting yesterday: "Regardless of
the elections results, people's will ought to be respected and
whichever party wins, it will form the next government, said Mulla
Bakhtyar, PUK political office spokesman. Bakhtyar stressed that the
upcoming government will work on achieving major attainments in favor
of Kurdistan's people mainly the application of Constitution Article
140." That's the article pertaining to oil-rich Kirkuk which mandated
a census and referendum be held to resolve the issue by . . the end of
2007. Also in 2007, Nouri al-Maliki signed off on -- literally signed
his name to -- the White House benchmarks for Iraq which included
resolving the issue. It has not been resolved. Anthony Shadid (Washington Post) observes this morning,
"Since 2003, when U.S. forces barreled into Baghdad, toppling Saddam
Hussein, inspiring a Shiite revival and unleashing a Sunni insurgency
that drew on a communal sense of siege, the war in Iraq has been in
large part a sectarian conflict that pitted Sunni Arab against Shiite
Arab. That war has subsided, even if bitterness remains." He argues the
new conflict is between Arabs and Kurds. Liz Sly interviewed
Iraq's Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salih (and PUK member as well as a
candidate for prime minister in Kurdistan) and asked him what the
elections would mean in terms of the "strained relationship with
Baghdad?" Barham Salih responded, "In terms of relationships with
Baghdad, the impact should not be overestimated. This election is a
turning point in Kurdish political dynamics and Kurdish politics are
becoming more competitive and more focused on domestic issues –
services, quality of life, corruption, as opposed to the larger issues
of Kurdish nationalism. These issues remain important, such as the fate
of Kirkuk, the fate of the relationship with Baghdad. But I do not see
that there is much dissent on what I see as the mainstream Kurdish
position on these issues." Prime minister of Iraq and puppet of the
occupation Nouri al-Maliki has been visiting DC. Sami Moubayed (Asia Times) analyzes
the trip and observes that Nouri al "Maliki wants US and UN support to
solve an upcoming problem with Iraqi Kurds. During a honeymoon period
with the Kurds in 2007, Maliki promised to uphold Article 140 of the
constitution, which calls for a referendum in the oil-rich city of
Kirkuk (which holds 13% of Iraq's reserves), to see if its residents
want to remain part of Iraq or merge with Iraqi Kurdistan. It seemed
like the logical thing to do at the time, as Kurdish support was vital
for him to maintain a shaky cabinet coalition rocked by major walkouts
by Sunnis and fellow Shi'ites loyal to rebel leader Muqtada al-Sadr. .
. . That honemymoon is now a thing of the past, and Maliki wants to
make sure that so is the promised referendum on Kirkuk. The UN is
supporting Maliki's argument, claiming that if such a referendum did
take place, it could ignite a civil war between Arabs and Kurds.
Maliki could not afford this civil strife, nor could he afford having
Iran, Turkey, and Syria -- all of which oppose giving Kirikuk to
Kurdistan -- on the offensive."
Friday, the press [see Nada Bakri (Washington Post) and Sam Dagher (New York Times)]
was covering the talks the US was having with Ba'athist exile leaders
and others and the claim that the central government in Baghdad was
left in the dark as they insisted they were "demanding explanations]
reported on the angry response of the puppet government in Baghdad to
the news (which emerged weeks ago in the Arab world) that the US was
negotiating with leaders of Iraqi groups opposed to the puppet
government the US installed. Elise Labott (CNN) reports
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated Friday that, supposedly
like the Iraqi government, she had been unaware of the negotiations
until "recently." Labott explains: "Iraqi officials said Friday they
were investigating reports of the meetings, calling them a violation of
Iraqi sovereignty. The reports, which detail a supposed signed
agreement between the Americans and insurgents, have angered Iraqis as
they seek to establish their authority in the wake of the withdrawal of
American troops from Iraqi cities." Officially the State Dept denies
the signing of any protocol. Unofficially, they admit to Labott one
was signed. The Los Angeles Times has posted the protocol both parties signed March 6th:
IN THE NAME OF ALLAH THE BENEFICENT THE MERCIFUL
PROTOCOL
ON ESTABLISHMENT OF NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN REPRESENTATIVES OF THE
POLITICAL COUNCIL FOR IRAQI RESISTANCE AND US GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVES
(Istanbul, 6 March 2009)
The
following has been agreed upon between the two parties, Political
Coundil for Iraq Resistance (PCIR) and the US Government
Representatives in this meeting:
1.
The PCIR will give the names of 15 representatives/political leaders in
their negotiation team to the Turkish side, in the case of detention or
problems in travel inside Iraq or leaving Iraq of this negotiating
team, the Turkish Government will inform the US authorities, who will
undertake to resolve the problem, in the case of detention by the Iraqi
forces inside Iraq or leaving Iraq of this negotiating team, the US as
well as the Turkish side will exert their best efforts with the Iraqi
Government in order to get release of the respresentative(s) of the
PCIR.
2. Both
parties agreed upon to take a decision regarding the level of the
participation in the negotiating teams (technical experts, politicians
and leaders), before the next session of negotiations in coordination
with the Turkish side.
3. Both negotiating teams should have the equal number of representatives, including the technicians and experts.
4.
The venue of the upcoming sessions will be determined at least 10 days
prior to the date of the meeting, in coordination with the Turkish
side.
5. dates of the upcoming sessions will be determined by the consent of both parties.
6.
This negotiation process is planned to be finalized before the end of
June 2009. However, upon agreement by both sides, the negotiation
process may be extended.
7.
Both parties agreed that the Turkish side to act as the facilitator and
guarantor throughout this negotiation process and the PCIR retains the
right to ask for other guarantors.
8.
Both parties agreed to maintain the confidentiality of the negotiations
and to leak information about the negotiations in full or in part to
the media, unless otherwise agreed by both parties.
9. Both parties agreed not to use cameras or any recording devices during the sessions.
10.
The US will not undertake negotiations with other Sunni resistance
groups during negotiation time, in order to allow PCIR to broaden the
negotiation with them (This is to be confirmed by the US delegation
after consulting with the US Government).
Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) explains,
"Iraqi officials have denied any knowledge of the meetings and have
lashed out at the United States about conducting such talks. The
reality is that U.S. officials most probably informed the Iraqi
government about the talks beforehand, as they have done in the past
when they explored discussions with groups that might be willing to
negotiate with Iraqi officials." Thomas E. Ricks (Foreign Policy) adds,
"Maliki also is shocked -- shocked -- that the U.S. government talked
secretly to insurgent leaders. Everyone, don't tell the prime minister
about the Sons of Iraq program, either!" Sami Moubayed (Asia Times) offers
on Nouri, "Once Maliki's image is transformed in Washington, he will be
able to market himself in different manner to ordinary Iraqis, who need
time to forget that he was originally brought to power in 2006 by the
United States" ahead of elections currently scheduled for next
January. Nouri has Barack supporting him (verbally) on the plan to end
UN sanctions on Iraq. Louis Charbonneau (Reuters) reports
that Ban Ki-moon, UN Secretary-General, is backing a different plan, "I
strongly encourage Iraq and other stakeholders to actively discuss
alternative solutions to the issue of outstanding compensation and debt
payments, including through investments, in the mutual interest of
Iraq's people and the region as a while." The amount Iraq owes
currently is $25.5 billion of which $24 million is owed to Kuwait.
Meanwhile what Gordon Brown couldn't do (despite promising to) the Iraqi Parliament may have due to its inaction. Deborah Haynes (Times of London) reports
British troops will likely have to leave Iraq as a result of the
Parliament failing to ratify the bilateral agreement between England
and Iraq "Bob Ainsworth, the British Defence Secretary, said that the
naval training personnel would wait in Kuwait until they were given
permission to return. It is an embarrassment to Britain, however, and
an illustration of the low regard in which its role in Iraq -- it once
had 45,000 troops based there -- is held."
Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports
a Baghdad roadside bombing which claimed 1 life and left four people
wounded, a Baghdad sticky bombing which left five people injured, a
Mosul roadside bombing which injured six Iraqi soldiers, a Mosul
roadside bombing which injured one police officer and an Ameriyah
sticky bombing which claimed the life of police Captain Ibraheem
Khairallah. Reuters notes
a Mosul sticky bombing which claimed the life of 1 "local tribal
leader" (his driver was injured), a Kirkuk roadside bombing which left
one police officer injured.
Turning to the US and Dave Phillips' "Lethal warriors day 2" (Colorado Springs Gazette):
It was October 2007. A fellow soldier, Kenneth Eastridge, 24, watched it all from the passenger seat. At
that moment, he said, it was clear that however messed up some of the
soldiers in the unit had been after their first Iraq deployment, it was
about to get much worse. "I have no
problem with killing," said Eastridge, a two-tour infantryman with
almost 80 confirmed kills. "But I won't just murder someone for no
reason. He had gone crazy." Hear the prison interviews with Kenneth Eastridge. All
three soldiers belonged to the 2nd Battalion, 12th Infantry Regiment,
part of Fort Carson's 4th Brigade Combat Team. The 500-soldier infantry
battalion nicknamed itself the "Lethal Warriors." They
fought in the deadliest places in the war twice -- first in the Sunni
Triangle, then in downtown Baghdad. Since their return late in 2007,
eight infantry soldiers have been arrested and accused of murder,
attempted murder or manslaughter. Another two soldiers from the brigade
were arrested and accused of murder and attempted murder after the
first tour. Others have committed other violent crimes. Others have
committed suicide. Many of the soldiers
behind bars and their family members say the violence at home is a
consequence of the violence in Iraq. They came home angry, confused,
paranoid and depressed. They had trouble getting effective mental heath
care. Most buried their symptoms in drugs and alcohol until they
exploded.
The article is part of a package following an investigation by the Gazette, part one is Phillips' "The hell of war comes home" and there's also Tom Roeder's "Fort Carson report: Combat stress contributed to soldiers' crimes back home" and "EDITOR'S NOTE: A note of caution about the Lethal Warriors package."
The series addresses what happened after they returned to the US and
what happened while serving in Iraq where Iraqi drivers were randomly
shot at, where those who didn't stop would be run "over with the
Bradley," where Iraqis post-interrogation were dumped from bridges and
more. Returning home? No concerns from the command except go-away, left
to fend for themselves, some afraid to get help, some targeted for
trying. Parents who attempted to get help for the children? Commanding
officers mocked the soldiers whose parents called, ridiculed them. It's
a complete breakdown in policies and procedures and the Gazette did a
wonderful investigation but what's needed is a Congressional one.
Meanwhile at least 18 US service members have died in Iraq from shoddy electrocution. KBR always denies that's the case. Scott Bronstein (CNN) reports on the Defense Dept's inspector-general's
finding released today which states nine deaths resulted from "improper
grounding or faulty equipment" with five more still being
investigated. The nine deaths established to have been caused by
faulting work on KRB's part includes Sgt Ryan Maseth. KBR continues to
shirk responsibility and spokesperson Heather Browne tells CNN, "While
the death of Sgt. Maseth was tragic, KBR continues to maintain that it
was not responsible for his death. The building in which Staff Sgt
Maseth lived was built by Iraqi and other contractors under previous
Iraqi leadership." US Senator Bob Casey Jr.'s office released the following today:
After
the Department of Defense Inspector General released its report on the
electrocution death of Staff Sergeant Ryan Maseth and 17 other
electrocution deaths in Iraq, U.S. Senator Bob Casey (D-PA) released
the following statement:
"I am
heartened that, after an exhaustive investigation, the Department of
Defense Inspector General has finally published its findings and
recommendations. The responsibility for the death of Ryan Maseth can
be attributed to many quarters. However, the Inspector General has
concluded that the water pump which shorted and caused his
electrocution was first installed by a KBR subcontractor less than two
years prior to Ryan's death. That water pump, located on the roof of
Ryan's building, was not grounded during installation. This deficiency
was not discovered during a subsequent inspection administered by
KBR.
"We cannot stop with the
publication of this report alone. Those who failed to carry out their
contractual obligations in a way that contributed to the death of a
U.S. soldier should be held fully accountable for their negligence. I
also eagerly await the findings of the Army CID report."
Ike
Skelton: The department's understanding of the allowed usage of CERP
funds seems to have undergone a rather dramatic change since Congress
first authorized it. The intent of the program was originally to meet
urgent humanitarian needs in Iraq through small projects undertaken
under the initative of brigade and battalion commanders. Am I correct?
Edelman: Yes, sir.
Ike
Skelton: Thank you. The answer was "yes." Last year the Department of
Defense has used millions of CERP dollars to build hotels for foreign
visitors, spent $900,000 on a mural at the Baghdad International
Airport and, as I understand this second piece of art, that CERP funds
were used for. I'm not sure that the American tax payer would
appreciate that knowing full well that Iraq has a lot of money in the
bank from oil revenues and it is my understanding that Iraq has
announced that they're going to build the world's largest ferris wheel.
And if they have money to build the world's largest ferris wheel why
are we funding murals and hotels with money that should be used by the
local battallion commander. This falls in the purview of plans and
policy ambassador.
Edelman:
No, no, it's absolutely right and I'll shae the stage here -- I'll
share the stage quite willing with uh, with Admiral Winnefeld with whom
I've actually been involved in discussions with for some weeks about
how we provide some additional guidance to the field and some
additional requirements to make sure that CERP is appropriately spent.
Appearing
before the The Commission on Wartime Contracting February 2nd, the
Department of Defense's Inspector General Thomas F. Gimble explained
CERP (Commander's Emergency Response Program) funds, "CERP funds
are appropriated through the DoD and allocted through each major
command's sector of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Up to $500,000
can be allocated to individual CERP projects, and CERP beneficiaries
often receive payments in cash. We have also identified occasions where
soldiers with limited contracting experience were responsible for
administering CERP funds. In some instances, there appeared to be
scant, if any, oversight of the manner in which funds were expended.
Complicating matters further is the fact that payment of bribes and
gratuities to government officials is a common business practice in
some Southwest Asia nations. Taken in combination, these factors result
in an environment conducive to bribery and corruption." Despite
repeated calls by Congress for an accounting, where the money goes
remains murky. Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) reports how the millions in CERP funds have had little-to-no impact:
U.S.
lawmakers and the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq
Reconstruction, which has released a report about the Caravan Hotel,
are increasingly scrutinizing the use of CERP and urging the Pentagon
to be more vigilant in its selection and oversight of projects. The
success stories and cautionary tales of CERP initiatives in Iraq are
shaping the way commanders in Afghanistan use the program as they place
greater emphasis on counterinsurgency and keeping the civilian
population safe. Since
2003, the U.S. Congress has appropriated more than $10 billion in CERP
funds for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. "CERP
was meant to be walking-around money for commanders to achieve a
desired effect in their battle space," said the office's deputy
inspector general, Ginger Cruz. "Slowly, it has become a de facto
reconstruction pot of money."
Related, Walter Pincus (Washington Post) reports
Congress is questioning defense spending on 'hearts & minds'
campaigns (or spending hidden under that umbrella) and, "In Iraq, the
[US] military has awarded $100 million contracts to support elections
and the aims of the Baghdad government."
Louis
Khno is a city councilman whose city is beyond his control. In his
barricaded streets are militiamen -- in baseball caps and jeans,
wielding Kalashnikov rifles, with the safeties switched off. They
answer to someone else. Leaders of his police force give their loyalty
to their ethnic brethren -- be they Kurd or Arab. Clergy in the town
pledge themselves to the former. Khno and his colleagues to the latter. "We're
far from the conflict, but now we've become the heart of the conflict
between Kurds and Arabs," Khno said. "We're now stuck in between them."
That's the opening to Anthony Shadid's "Worries About A Kurdish-Arab Conflict Move To Fore in Iraq" (Washington Post)
which attempts to chart the shifting dynamics as potential lines of
conflict are redrawn and a long neglected issue (who gets Kirkuk)
appears to move closer to center stage as the tensions between Kurds
and Arabs replace the usual narrative of tensions between Shia and
Sunni. Ben Lando usually reports for UPI; however, he has a piece that
went up at Time magazine Friday (one day before the elections in Kurdistan Saturday) entitled "Iraq's Kurds: Time to Prove Their Democracy:"
The
Kurdish provinces of Iraq are a world apart from the country inhabited
by their fellow citizens. Basic services like electricity and fuel are
good and increasingly available to all Kurds. Booming foreign
investment has created a business culture complete with plans for a
golf course as part of a gated-community outside the capital city of
Erbil. There have been no U.S. combat fatalities in the autonomous
Kurdish region since the fall of Saddam Hussein, in 2003. But there's
one thing the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) can no longer lord over
the struggling central government in Baghdad: democracy. "The KRG has a democracy gap with Baghdad," says Quil Lawrence, author of Invisible Nation: How the Kurds' Quest for Statehood Is Shaping Iraq and the Middle East.
"After years of counting on American support because of its
pro-Western, secular and, most importantly, pro-democratic image, the
Kurdish parliament looks like a rubber stamp shared by the two main
parties. Arab Iraq had peaceful provincial elections in January in
which some entrenched parties lost and stepped down quietly. The Kurds
need to show they can do the same." The Kurds, who speak a different
language and are a separate ethnic group from their Arab countrymen,
have a chance to do that on July 25, when locals will elect regional
members of parliament as well as a new president for the KRG. (See pictures of Kurdish guerrillas operating on the Turkey-Iraq border.)
Quil Lawrence reports for NPR (not mentioned in the article). Anna Fifield (Financial Times of London) also weighed
in on Friday with the belief, that carping aside, Masoud Barzani would
be re-elected as president of the KRG because "[n]one of the four other
candidates for regional president is considered to be a serious
challenged to Mr Barzani, while the KDP and PUK are running in
coalition in the parliamentary election." The PUK (Talabani's party) is
thought to have done poorly in Saturday's election. "Thought to." No
one knows. The earliest that results could be released would be Tuesday
but US embassy staff thinks that the count might be released Wednesday.
Alsumaria reports
the PUK kept a previously scheduled meeting yesterday: "Regardless of
the elections results, people’s will ought to be respected and
whichever party wins, it will form the next government, said Mulla
Bakhtyar, PUK political office spokesman. Bakhtyar stressed that the
upcoming government will work on achieving major attainments in favor
of Kurdistan’s people mainly the application of Constitution Article
140." Article 140 is about resolving the fate of the disputed Kirkuk.
(It mandates a census be held and a referendum before the end of . . .
2007. Currently a census is scheduled for this October.) Almost 80% of
registered voters are said to have participated in the KRG provincial
and presidential elections, polls were required to remain open an
additional hour due to the number of voters. Results are not known.
Ballots will be counted in Baghdad. "Change" is making allegations of
fraud -- most of which have not resulted in people actually filing
claims -- and to read the press, you'd think they were the only ones.
Other minor groups (minor proportionally) including the Socialist Party
have made complaints but, unlike "Change," they don't have the US
government to act as their PR advance team. Election observers reject
the claims of frauds and already have dismissed the one concrete
charge: Barzani violated campaign rules Saturday by speaking to the
press immediately after he voted. It was a violation, observers have
ruled; however, it had little-to-no impact. The KRG released the following statement on the elections:
Large turnout in peaceful Kurdistan Region elections
Erbil,
Kurdistan - Iraq (KRG.org) -- The Kurdistan Region yesterday
successfully held historic parliamentary and presidential elections.
The ballot for the president was the first direct presidential vote in the Kurdistan Region.
The
vote has underlined the democratic character of the Region and
reinforced the process of peaceful elections through political
competition.
The Independent High Electoral Commission of
Iraq (IHEC) said the overall turnout was 78 per cent. In Erbil 79 per
cent of eligible voters cast a ballot, in Suleimaniah 74 per cent, and
in Dohuk 85 per cent.
The election was conducted by IHEC,
which was responsible for ensuring free and fair voting. IHEC oversees
all Iraqi elections. IHEC Commissioner Mr Faraj Al-Haidari, speaking at
a press conference yesterday evening, said the commission was pleased
with the conduct of the elections and that any complaints would be
studied.
Ballots are being preliminarily tabulated in polling
stations and then moved to Baghdad for official tabulation.
International observers will accompany the ballots throughout the
transfer.
Mr Karim Sinjari, the Kurdistan Regional
Government's Interior Minister, speaking at the same press conference,
said there had been no security incidents during the elections and a
curfew was lifted four hours after voting began as it became clear the
situation was normal and the curfew was not necessary.
After
casting his ballot, Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani remarked, "We
support this election as a chance for citizens to exercise their
democratic rights. I am proud to see so many people express their
political views through this election, in which we all have an equal
opportunity to be part of the decision-making process."
More
than 320 international observers from more than 35 organizations were
registered by IHEC to monitor the election. This included observers
from the United Nations, the European Union, the United States, the
United Kingdom, Japan, and a variety of other nations and
non-governmental organizations. In addition, more than 30 international
media outlets were accredited to observe and report on the election.
More
than 90 organizations based in Iraq and/or the Kurdistan Region also
participated in the observation, with more than 10,000 individuals
receiving accreditation badges from IHEC. Political parties were also
granted the right to monitor the proceedings, with 47 groups and more
than 27,000 individuals accredited for observation.
The Head
of the Department of Foreign Relations, Minister Falah Mustafa Bakir,
said, "It is important that the outside world is aware of our continued
democratic development. We believe democracy is the best system, and we
very much welcome the high turnout" Minister Bakir noted that the
election is an important step not only for the Kurdistan Region but all
of Iraq.
IHEC estimates that official results will be available in the next few days.
Meanwhile violence continues in Iraq today. Reuters reports
a Baghdad roadside bombing which claimed 1 life and left four people
injured, a Falluja bombing targeting and killing 1 captain in the Iraqi
military, a Mosul car bombing targeting and killing 1 "local tribal
leader" (wounding his driver), a Mosul roadside bombing which injured
six Iraqi soldiers, a Kirkuk roadside bombing which injured one police
officer and the corpse of 1 police officer ("shot in the head and
chest") discovered in Kirkuk.
Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) reports
how the millions in CERP funds have had little-to-no impact. (CERP
funds are US tax dollars which are handed out -- with little-to-no
documentation -- in Iraq by the US military.) Londono reports:
U.S.
lawmakers and the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq
Reconstruction, which has released a report about the Caravan Hotel,
are increasingly scrutinizing the use of CERP and urging the Pentagon
to be more vigilant in its selection and oversight of projects. The
success stories and cautionary tales of CERP initiatives in Iraq are
shaping the way commanders in Afghanistan use the program as they place
greater emphasis on counterinsurgency and keeping the civilian
population safe. Since 2003, the U.S. Congress has appropriated more than $10 billion in CERP funds for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. "CERP
was meant to be walking-around money for commanders to achieve a
desired effect in their battle space," said the office's deputy
inspector general, Ginger Cruz. "Slowly, it has become a de facto
reconstruction pot of money."
Moving to Iraq's borders, Arab Times reports
that Sheikh Mohammed Sabah al-Salem al-Sabah, the Foreign Minister of
Kuwait, has stated that Iraq is not respecting the border between it
and Kuwait and quotes the foreign minister stating, "Kuwait hopes that
the brothers in Iraq will solve a number of issues, starting with the
demarcation of the border because there are still Iraqi violations
there." TheTehran Times reports
that Iran is awaiting a report on the "attacks on Iranian pilgrims" and
quotes Hassan Kazemi Qomi, the country's Ambassador to Baghdad,
stating, "We hope that the Iraqi government, after (accomplishing) its
studies and investigations (into the attacks), informing us of the
results in case it achieves any information."
I
met Eddie Spearritt in the Philharmonic pub, overlooking Liverpool. It
was a few years after 96 Liverpool football fans had been crushed to
death at Hillsborough Stadium, Sheffield, on 15 April 1989. Eddie's
son, Adam, aged 14, died in his arms. The "main reason for the
disaster", Lord Justice Taylor subsequently reported, was the "failure"
of the police, who had herded fans into a lethal pen. "As
I lay in my hospital bed," Eddie said, "the hospital staff kept the Sun
away from me. It's bad enough when you lose your 14-year-old son
because you're treating him to a football match. Nothing can be worse
than that. But since then I've had to defend him against all the
rubbish printed by the Sun about everyone there being a hooligan and
drinking. There was no hooliganism. During 31 days of Lord Justice
Taylor's inquiry, no blame was attributed because of alcohol. Adam
never touched it in his life." Three
days after the disaster, Kelvin MacKenzie, Rupert Murdoch's "favourite
editor", sat down and designed the Sun front page, scribbling "THE
TRUTH" in huge letters. Beneath it, he wrote three subsidiary
headlines: "Some fans picked pockets of victims"... "Some fans urinated
on the brave cops"... "Some fans beat up PC giving kiss of life". All
of it was false; MacKenzie was banking on anti-Liverpool prejudice. When
sales of the Sun fell by almost 40 per cent on Merseyside, Murdoch
ordered his favourite editor to feign penitence. BBC Radio 4 was chosen
as his platform. The "sarf London" accent that was integral to
MacKenzie’s fake persona as an "ordinary punter" was now a contrite,
middle-class voice that fitted Radio 4. "I made a rather serious
error," said MacKenzie, who has since been back on Radio 4 in a very
different mood, aggressively claiming that the Sun's treatment of
Hillsborough was merely a "vehicle for others".
Almost every day for three years, prison guards at one of Saddam Hussein's most notorious prisons tortured Sami Alkarim. Now,
in a cruel twist of fate, the accomplished Iraqi artist is being
treated like a terrorist by the U.S., the country where he sought
refuge. U.S. officials have
told him they can't give him permanent residency in Denver because of
messenger work he did as a teenager for the same political party that
counts the current prime minister of Iraq as a member.
The above is from Marisa Taylor's "Why are U.S.-allied refugees still branded as 'terrorists?'" (McClatchy Newspapers)
who also cites the case of a woman known as "Anna" who worked with the
Patriotic Union of Kurdistan -- the political party of Iraq's president
Jalal Talabani -- and is seen, by US laws such as the Patriot Act, as a
"terrorist" as a result. Russell Contreras (AP) also reports
on Iraqi refugees in the US, specifically in Worcester, MA where
approximately 151 members of Iraq's Mandaean community have settled and
notes a total of 1,200 have been settled in the US in the last two
years.
Conservative columnist (formerly with The Atlantic) Ross Douthat shared thoughts on the Iraq War in a column for the New York Times entitled "The War We'd Like to Forget."
He notes the lack of attention to the Iraq War (the illegal war, not an
opinion he'd share) and points out that the current White House has
"inherited a timeline for pulling out our troops, instead of having to
negotiate their own" -- a point the peace movement would do well to
grasp (see Friday's snapshot for the idiot from A.N.S.W.E.R. who's pleased as punch with what she sees as Barack's plan). Douthat observes:
Except
that the Iraq war isn't finished yet. There are still 130,000 American
troops in the country. As Maliki acknowledged during his visit to
Washington, there will probably be thousands of soldiers there after
2011, when the current Status of Forces Agreement states that our
troops must be withdrawn.
No, the illegal war is not over. Amber Miller (Volunteer TV) notes that the Tennessee Army National Guard's 252 Military Police is sending seventy service members to Iraq. Jessica Stith (Daily Times) adds,
"About 40 men and women kissed and hugged their families during a
tearful goodbye Sunday as the Alcoa unit of the Tennessee Army National
Guard's 252nd Military Police Company left for training and a one-year
deployment for Operation Iraqi Freedom. The soldiers left on the bus
with a convoy of Humvees and Patriot Guard Riders following behind.
They waved goodbye to their families as they rode out of the Army
Aviation Support Facility 2 (AASF-2) on McGhee Tyson Air National Guard
Base. Their destination on Sunday was Cleveland, where they will meet
up with about 130 other member of the military police company." Tracy Madden (WOWT) reports
on a ceremony in Omaha for departing soldiers, "One-hundred-twenty-five
soldiers representing 24 states, including Sgt. 1st Class Paul Graham
on his third deployment, expect to be gone for 12 months." KETV adds,
"Hundreds of friends and family members joined the soldiers for a
sendoff ceremony at South High School, expressing a lot of mixed
emotions." Seattle also had a farewell ceremony. The Seattle Times explains,
"The 3rd (Stryker) Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division held a deployment
ceremony at Fort Lewis Friday as the unit's nearly 4,000 soldiers
prepare to head off to Iraq later this summer." AP notes the Stryker Brigade is making their third deployment to Iraq. Lindsay Cohen (KOMO) reports
on the ceremony ("military music") and a toddler who "darted in front
of a Stryker armored vehicle" which was moving and was rescued (I'm
using the term "rescued") by Sgt Mickey Robinson. Scott Fontaine (News Tribune) breaks down
the previous deployments to note they were sent to Iraq first in 2003
(November) and lost 20 service members, then they were sent in 2006
(June) and lost 48 members. And KSTP (link has text and video) reports on Minnesota's Fort Snelling ceremony yesterday "for 25 U.S. Army Reservists leaving for active duty in Iraq." Today, KSTP reports,
the funeral for James Wertish is held at St. Mary's Catholic Church --
he was killed in the mortar attack on the US base in Basra July 16th.
The war is not over and it's a shame that the only New York Times columnist who can grasp that is a conservative.
Isaiah's latest The World Today Just Nuts "Barack The Magnificent." Lynn Sweet (Chicago Sun-Times) asks, "Mr. President, who will win the 2010 Super Bowl?" Barack, wearing Johnny Carson's old get-up, holds up an envelope and declares, "Lynn, I don't know the facts, but I see the Detroit Lions."
It was October 2007. A fellow soldier, Kenneth Eastridge, 24, watched it all from the passenger seat. At that moment, he said, it was clear that however messed up some of the soldiers in the unit had been after their first Iraq deployment, it was about to get much worse. "I have no problem with killing," said Eastridge, a two-tour infantryman with almost 80 confirmed kills. "But I won’t just murder someone for no reason. He had gone crazy." Hear the prison interviews with Kenneth Eastridge. All three soldiers belonged to the 2nd Battalion, 12th Infantry Regiment, part of Fort Carson’s 4th Brigade Combat Team. The 500-soldier infantry battalion nicknamed itself the "Lethal Warriors." They fought in the deadliest places in the war twice -- first in the Sunni Triangle, then in downtown Baghdad. Since their return late in 2007, eight infantry soldiers have been arrested and accused of murder, attempted murder or manslaughter. Another two soldiers from the brigade were arrested and accused of murder and attempted murder after the first tour. Others have committed other violent crimes. Others have committed suicide. Many of the soldiers behind bars and their family members say the violence at home is a consequence of the violence in Iraq. They came home angry, confused, paranoid and depressed. They had trouble getting effective mental heath care. Most buried their symptoms in drugs and alcohol until they exploded.
The above is from Dave Phillips' "Lethal warriors day 2" (Colorado Springs Gazette) and it's part of a package following an investigation by the Gazette, part one is Phillips' "The hell of war comes home" and there's also Tom Roeder's "Fort Carson report: Combat stress contributed to soldiers' crimes back home" and "EDITOR'S NOTE: A note of caution about the Lethal Warriors package." The series addresses what happened after they returned to the US and what happened while serving in Iraq where Iraqi drivers were randomly shot at, where those who didn't stop would be run "over with the Bradley," where Iraqis post-interrogation were dumped from bridges and more. Returning home? No concerns from the command except go-away, left to fend for themselves, some afraid to get help, some targeted for trying. Parents who attempted to get help for the children? Commanding officers mocked the soldiers whose parents called, ridiculed them. It's a complete breakdown in policies and procedures and the Gazette did a wonderful investigation but what's needed is a Congressional one.
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 4327 and tonight? 4328. Violence continued in Iraq today.
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a bomber killed himself Khaldiyah and claimed the lives of 2 police officers while wounding thirteen bystanders. Reuters notes a Mosul roadside bombing which injured one police officer and a Mosul grenade attack which wounded one police officer. Reuters also notes a bomber just outside Falluja who took their own life and the lives of 4 other people while injuing nine. As noted yesterday, "BBC (link has text and video) reports on the bombing of the party offices of Iraq's Sunni vice president Tareq Hashemi in Falluja which resulted in multiple deaths and wounded. Citing the Interior Ministry, Reuters counts 5 dead and twenty-one injured." KUNA reports that as a result of Saturday's bombing, a curfew was put in place.
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 people shot dead outside Baquba. Reuters notes a Baghdad attack in which 3 police officers and 1 bystander were shot dead, a Baghdad attack "on a money exchange office" in which 3 police officers were killed and five more injured and 1 Christian shot dead in Mosul.
Turning to the KRG where elections ended yesterday. No results are known. No surprise, the US-backed "Change" party is claiming they won and that there is cheating. Yes, it is the CIA-Iran operation all over again. Maybe hopeless saps can take to Twitter? Egged on by the actions of CIA agents, assets and dupes. And let's wonder which a certain reporter is? A Socialist from a family of Socialists and Communitsts. Working for an English language European daily, he's been doing the CIA work for them a lot lately, hasn't he? Long before the "Change" party. But he's back on the "Change" beat and he's telling you they had a "suprisingly strong showing". He knows that because? Votes haven't been counted. Real reporters (Liz Sly, Adam Ashton, etc.) were able to tell you how difficult it was to get Kurds to tell you how they planned to vote. But Euro Trash just knows "Change" did well. Oh look, the CIA-backed Institute for War and Peace Reporting. Euro Trash is quoting them as well. And failing to alert his readers about the organization's backing. And look, there's Euro Trash speaking to the 'founder' (frontman) for "Change, Nawshirwan Mustafa. He quotes Mustafa stating that most exist "on government salaries.' Mustafa does. His big 'media empire' in Kurdistan? Euro Trash forgets to tell the world that the US government funded it -- a detail even the Committee for the Protection of Journalists has covered. But Euro Trash missed it?
At some point Euro Trash no longer comes off stupid -- it's impossible to be that stupid -- and comes off more like a CIA asset. Well it wouldn't be the first time the Agency's recruited form a cess pool.
Let's talk Mustafa. Mustafa worked with the US (and was a favorite of Dick Cheney's) post-invasion. He was supposed to be representing the Kurds and their interests in Baghdad as a new post-war government was assembled. And he certainly made a lot of fiery, strong statements to the press. But while working with the US CPA, he didn't talk that way. In fact, as the lead-figure on the negotiations, it needs to be noted that he sold out Kurdish intrests and, despite his public criticism, he pushed the selling out of Kurdish interests. But he played along with the Americans and, as a result, he got funding for his radio station which is another US propaganda outlet, another Voice of America (telling called "Voice of Change"), despite the fact that it's presented as something else by the press -- "independent" and, goodness how brave, it critizes the two dominant Kurdish parties.
People need to wonder why Euro Trash can't cover that and they need to wonder tomorrow morning when Euro Trash's garbage pops up at his brother's American outlet -- they need to wonder just how far the ties to the CIA go?
Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) covers the allegations of voter fraud during Saturday's elections and she's actually reporting. Al Jazeera reports that despite the claims of "Change" winning Sulaimaniya, "[t]he ballots are still being counted" and that while "Change" is crying fraud, "[e]lection officials in the region hailed the vote as transparent". Hey Euro Trash forgets the Socialist Party and there are estimates that it did rather well. But, when you're churning out CIA talking points passed off as reporting, when you're attempting to help secure an American foothold in an oil and gas rich region, you probably don't have time to remember the Socialist Party that everyone would expect you to note? Iran's Press TV notes, "The official vote counting is due to take place in Baghdad and final results will be known in three days." Tim Cocks, Shamal Aqrawi, Muhanad Mohammed and Mohammed Abbas (Reuters) report:
Iraq's Independent High Electoral Commission (IHEC) said it would investigate officially submitted complaints of election violations, but told reporters late on Saturday the vote had been largely violation-free. However, it did say Barzani had broken a campaign deadline rule by speaking to reporters after voting. "This is not important, it was a very simple matter and has no effect on the elections," said IHEC's Qasim al-Sachet.
We'll note Anthony Shadid (Washington Post) tomorrow, it's late and his article runs in Monday's paper. (It's reporting, not propaganda.) We will note right now that while some insist "Change" is the reason for the huge turnout, that's not only impossible to back up, it also fails to note -- because the bulk of them ignored Kurdistan in the lead up to the elections -- the fact that Kirkuk's status became a very big part of the KRG elections. Not just on election day with Barzani's remarks. Not just last Sunday with a very public speech. For weeks, it has been the driving force behind the elections with candidates from all parties attempting to make the most convincing argument that they would bring Kirkuk under the Kurdistan umbrella. Do not mistakenly think that this campaign talk did not impact voter turnout. The Kurds have long seen Kirkuk as their property and have a historical grievance over the region since Saddam Hussein ran them out of the area. It would be the same as political groups campaigning for Palestinian votes with the assertion that they would regain Palestinian lands. That talk was very important to this election and it resonated with voters. Much more so than the airy "change" slogans that Kurds who did go on record during the lead up -- with various outlets -- repeatedly questioned and mocked.
An Iraqi officer who ordered the detention of U.S. soldiers last week after they killed three Iraqis while pursuing insurgents acted in error and was "out of line," Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said Saturday. The officer "did not understand the agreement" governing U.S. military activities since American combat troops withdrew from Iraqi cities last month, Maliki said in an interview, adding that it "clearly states that American forces have the right to defend themselves, and that's what they did." Four Iraqis, including two children, also were wounded when U.S. forces returned fire and raided nearby houses after insurgents attacked their convoy. Maliki, at the end of a week-long U.S. visit, said he had telephoned Baghdad and "made clear that they understand that this demand of handing over the people who killed the Iraqis was wrong."
Kurdish voters on Saturday packed polling places in Iraq's second election this year, weighing the promises of a new party that pledged to shake up the status quo by exposing corruption in the incumbent regional government. The election appeared to take place smoothly without serious complaints from parties or voters, though two opposition parties raised questions late Saturday about whether soldiers tried to cast multiple ballots and whether greeters at polling places showed too much support for incumbents. Those questions could lead to unrest in coming days when Iraq's Independent Electoral Commission discloses results, party leaders suggested. Samad Mohamed, a candidate from the incumbent Kurdistani List, told Iraqi television that 80 percent of the region's 2.4 million eligible voters participated in the election. The Charge Party, which emerged as the leading opposition group, estimated the turnout at 55 percent.
The above is from Adam Ashton's "Heavy turnout in Iraq's Kurdistan for contest of new vs. old" (McClatchy Newspapers) and Ashton's back in Iraq and covering the KRG elections. January 31st, 14 of Iraq's eighteen provinces held elections. The KRG's three provinces did not nor was Kirkuk allowed to. Thursday early elections began for the KRG. These are provincial elections and also the election of a president -- incumbent Massud Barzani is running for re-election and facing challengers. Fu Yiming and Gao Shan (Xinhua) cover the conflict between the KRG and the central government in Baghdad and how "Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki is already not on speaking terms with Massud Barzani. . . . . On August 10 last year, the central government deployed army forces to northern Diyala and ordered the Kurdish Peshmerga militia to withdraw within 24 hours. They even forced KRG staff out of their government buildings a week later, and triggered a final crossfire between the two sides in late September." Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) reports, "Long lines snaked out of polling stations Saturday" which "attests to the enthusiasm generated by the appearance for the first time, of a viable challenge to the 18-year monopoly of the two ruling parties, the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan and the Kurdish Democratic Party." Tim Cocks and Shamal Aqrawi (Reuters) explain voting was extended for one hour today and that the Electoral Commission estimates a turnout of 78.5%. They note the counting of ballots may take three days and spend a great deal of time covering the US-backed "Change" Party. Most reporters and outlets have either avoided "Change" or taken a skeptical approach. Despite the money spent (US tax dollars), no credible observer expects them to be swept into a position of influence. For the US, that was never the point. This was more of a learning experience for them, a way to test various theories and figure out how to best influence a future election should they feel the 'need' to in the future.
"Change" tried to present itself as homegrown but failed at that and, early on, the US scaled back plans of major gains for the 'party' and instead focused on utilizing a variety of techniques in different regions in order to gauge Kurdish reactions.
Some 'reporters' (not Cocks and Aqrawi) were encouraged by officers and assets to tie "Change" into some sort of global revolution and did so. If you saw those stories you know who the gullible and/or assets are. (Don't scroll through the last two weeks here. When friends at the State Dept passed on that news last month, I made the decision anyone who pimped the line would not be worth highlighting. We ignored them. Even while others -- hopefully mistakenly -- promoted them.)
Kurdish President Massoud Barzani touched on an issue dear to all Kurds when he cast his ballot in his mountain stronghold of Salahuddin. "I will never compromise on Kirkuk," he said. The status of the oil-rich northern city of Kirkuk, which the Kurds regard as their capital, is at the heart of heightened tensions between the central government in Baghdad and Kurdistan that U.S. officials have said pose the most serious threat to the future stability of Iraq. The election was fought mostly over domestic issues, and is not expected to herald a change in the region's long-standing demand for a swath of bordering territory, including Kirkuk, to be incorporated into Kurdistan. All the candidates sought to portray themselves as fierce defenders of Kurdish claims to those territories. But once the election is over, some of the fiery rhetoric may subside, making possible a greater effort toward serious negotiations with Baghdad.
Violence continued in Iraq today. BBC (link has text and video) reports on the bombing of the party offices of Iraq's Sunni vice president Tareq Hashemi in Falluja which resulted in multiple deaths and wounded. Citing the Interior Ministry, Reuters counts 5 dead and twenty-one injured. Al Jazeera adds, "On Tuesday, Iraqi officials declared a rare vehicle ban across Anbar after two bomb attacks killed three people in the Ramadi, the provincial capital. The previous day, an explosion had killed two police officers in the city." In addition, Mohammed al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad sticky bombing which claimed 1 life, Qahtan Ahmed, and left his son wounded, a Kirkuk roadside bombing which wounded four police officers in the latest targeting of the police.
Yesterday the press [see Nada Bakri (Washington Post) and Sam Dagher (New York Times)] that the central government in Baghdad states it is "demanding explanations] reported on the angry response of the puppet government in Baghdad to the news (which emerged weeks ago in the Arab world) that the US was negotiating with leaders of Iraqi groups opposed to the puppet government the US installed. Elise Labott (CNN) reports US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated yesterday she had been unaware of the negotiations until "recently." Labott explains:
Iraqi officials said Friday they were investigating reports of the meetings, calling them a violation of Iraqi sovereignty. The reports, which detail a supposed signed agreement between the Americans and insurgents, have angered Iraqis as they seek to establish their authority in the wake of the withdrawal of American troops from Iraqi cities. Al-Maliki said he was "satisfied" with what he heard from Clinton, who assured him the United States would not negotiate with any extremists who killed Iraqi or American troops.
She goes not to note that officials confirmed to CNN such a protocol was signed. But notice Nouri's latest lies. He's pleased? That the US won't "negotiate with any extremists who killed Iraqi or American troops"? Are we all so stupid we forget the two brothers responsible for the worst attack on a US based which resulted in the deaths of 5 US soldiers? Or that they were just released weeks ago?
Hillary met with Nouri at two-thirty yesterday for a bilateral meeting, at 3:15 (EST) they began a coorodinating committe meeting and at 4:30 they spoke to the press and we'll note this portion:
SECRETARY CLINTON: Good afternoon. It is a pleasure to have this opportunity to meet with Prime Minister Maliki. We are continuing our work together to meet our goal of building a stable, sovereign and self-reliant Iraq. Our countries are on a long journey together, and obstacles, of course, remain, but we are making significant progress. Today's meeting was the second of the Strategic Framework Agreement Higher Coordinating Committee. This agreement establishes the terms of our relationship beyond security cooperation. We are working to promote economic growth and human development and diplomatic efforts so that Iraq can play a very constructive role not only at home, but throughout the region. We have had six months of work together, so today, we reported on that work. And I'd like to thank Deputy Secretary Jim Steinberg and Ambassador Christopher Hill for their ongoing leadership of our Iraqi policy. Implementing the strategic framework agreement will be the focus of our work here at the State Department for months ahead. I very much appreciate the positive contributions that the prime minister and his team made today. We will partner with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to host the U.S.-Iraq Business and Investment Summit in October. And we're going to work to make sure that the investment and business climate is very attractive. There are many important issues, but let me just highlight our education exchange. I want to commend Iraq for the $2.5 million it has recently put into the Fulbright student exchange program. We're also working on justice issues to enhance law enforcement and strengthen the judicial and corrections systems. And we are also working to assist the Iraqi Government with the return of Iraqis who left their country but now wish to return home and be part of a new Iraq. I am pleased to announce that the United States is contributing more than $100 million in new assistance this year to support the return and reintegration of displaced Iraqis. Again, thank you, Mr. Prime Minister, for your leadership. PRIME MINISTER MALIKI: (Via interpreter) Thank you very much. I would like – in the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate, I would like to express my gratitude and thanks to you, Secretary Clinton, for your interest and your commitment to convene the second meeting for the Higher Coordination Committee as a part of the strategic framework agreement between us. And I thank you very much for managing this meeting and convening this meeting. There were so many ideas, commitments, principles, joint work ahead of us. All of us gives – all of that gives us the hope to look forward to a future that is bright for both. The meeting that was convened today was a very strong launching to broaden the relationship under the strategic framework agreement that was signed between the two nations. Through the review and through the briefings that we heard during the meetings, there is tangible progress that actually happened and took place. But we also said that this is not enough. We still have to work more for more success and more achievements and cooperation throughout the various spheres that are covered in the bilateral relationship. Madame Secretary, today's meeting, it was a declaration in itself that we're going into a new phase, from a previous phase of cooperation that focused on security and confronting terror and various groups into a phase where we expand our cooperation and relationship to economics, to trade, to higher education, to tourism, to every other sphere. And I here would like to express my gratitude and thanks for the $100 million from the United States to support the efforts of the return of the Iraqis who left their places. And I am delighted by the level of seriousness and our agreement that the next meeting will be convened in Baghdad. And at the meantime, between now and the next meeting, all the various subgroups will continue their meetings in order to accelerate, in order to activate the various lines of cooperation. And today's meeting with the Chamber of Commerce, where a number of American businessmen and corporations came, I believe that was a very strong prelude to the upcoming conference that will be convened in October here in the United States, which will be the launching pad for a massive work in order to reconstruct Iraq, in order to invite investments, and in order to rebuild the country. And tomorrow, also, we will be signing an educational initiative agreement which would allow us to send the first group of Iraqi students to the United States. We hope that we will be able, through that program, to send 10,000 Iraqi students to receive their education here. And I would like to express our thanks and gratitude to your cooperation, Madame Secretary, in allowing that American visas will be issued out of the American Embassy in Baghdad. Thank you so much. QUESTION: Madame Secretary, first, have you provided the prime minister with any clarification regarding the meeting that been held in Istanbul between American officials and Iraqi insurgents? And have you signed any protocol with the insurgents during that meeting? (Speaking in Arabic.) SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, let me say that I – INTERPRETER: Can I say to the prime minister in Arabic? Can I give him the question? SECRETARY CLINTON: He was asked a question in Arabic. INTERPRETER: Please. SECRETARY CLINTON: Oh, okay. INTERPRETER: (Speaking Arabic.) SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I have discussed this matter, which was only recently brought to my attention, with our Ambassador and with other officials. And we intend to make sure that the Iraqi Government is fully informed of any such activities, whether they are sponsored by another party or come from any other source. So we want to be sure that we have a very close working relationship and we have a very clear line of communication, and that's what we intend to do going forward. PRIME MINISTER MALIKI: (Speaking Arabic.) QUESTION: Have you signed any (inaudible), Madame Secretary? SECRETARY CLINTON: No, we have not authorized any to be signed. STAFF: Elise. INTERPRETER: One – just one second. PRIME MINISTER MALIKI: (Via interpreter) In the spirit of bilateral cooperation and when the relationship between two parties who are equal and sovereign, I believe that constant dialogue – it's very important in order to achieve the desirable outcome. I am quite satisfied on terms of what I heard on this issue. And I have been given a commitment that the Administration will not negotiate or reach any agreements with those who killed American soldiers, Iraqi soldiers, and Iraqi people.
But if Maliki is worried about Washington backing or opposing him in Iraqi elections early next year, Obama must make it clear America will do neither. The US role from now on is to support Iraqi efforts to resolve their disputes over who will award oil contracts and whether regional autonomy is preferable to a strong central government. Obama needs to transform the occupation of Iraq into a respectful friendship.
QUESTION: Mr. Prime Minister, you came to Washington asking the Obama Administration for more political support in terms of helping Iraqis mediate over issues such as Kirkuk, between Arabs and Kurds, playing more of a mediative role on political reconciliation. Did you receive that political support? And are you satisfied that as the Obama Administration takes a military disengagement, that it will not undertake a political disengagement? And Madame Secretary, if I might, on Honduras, President Zelaya is just feet from the Honduran border with Nicaragua. He seems to have a lot of cell phones in his hand, talking on the cell phone. Wondering if you had spoken to him and what you're urging him in terms of his planned return into Honduras. Thank you. PRIME MINISTER MALIKI: (Via interpreter) First of all, I am very satisfied, because what happened between Iraq and the United States is that we achieved an agreement regarding security arrangements and not disengaging. And if what was intended here is the withdrawal of forces from cities and towns, I see this as a manifestation of success, where their work would not be needed. My visit here to the United States came in order to meet with the leadership here and strengthening the relationship with them, and also to activate the strategic framework agreement through a relationship of mutual cooperation, covering all other issues on the economic front, commercial front, education front, tourism, and so on. And of course, within the spirit of friendship and cooperation, a number of critical issues were discussed. One of them is Iraq's, under Chapter 7 and the various sanctions that were imposed on Iraq over the years, in addition to other bilateral issues. But we did not come specifically for any issues such as Kirkuk or anything else. And the issue of Kirkuk is an Iraqi issue. It will be settled among the Iraqis through the constitutions, through negotiations, through contacts, through dialogue, and it's inevitable that we will reach an Iraqi solution to it.
An Iraqi solution? Like banning books? Khalid al-Ansary (Reuters) reports the Ministry of Culture is censoring books in 'free' Iraq and quotes the ministry Taher al-Humoud explaining that all publishers now must "submit lists of titles for approval". That's the 'freedom' millions of Iraqis died for, 4328 US service members, 179 British service members and 139 'other' troops have died for. They died so . . . Iraq could return to censorship.
