Wednesday, August 15, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, over 200 Iraqis dead from yesterday's bombing with the death toll climbing, Cindy Sheehan highlights the Iraqi refugee situation, PR Watch shines a spotlight so it's the Peace Resister to the rescue, and more.

Starting with war resistance. Jeremy Hinzman is the first war resister to self-check, go to Canada and do so publicly. Hinzman, his wife Nga Nguyen and their son Liam went to Canada in January 2004. He hoped to be granted asylum in Canada and began the process to be granted refugee status. In December of 2004, his case was heard. December 13, 2005, he spoke with Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) and explained, "Well, before the hearing even commenced, we had our hands tied a bit. As you have stated, the solicitor general of the Canadian government intervened in our case, and that's only done in about 5% of cases. Anyway, they raised the issue that they felt that the legality of the war in Iraq was irrelevant to our refugee claims. So, we were unable to argue that in any way. . . . Well, basically, they said whether war is legal or whether it's illegal, it's irrelevant to what you are trying to do here. Which, I mean, I would argue is pretty ludicrous, because that was almost my entire rationale for coming here in the first place." Although the hearing was technically held by the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada the reality is the 'board' for each case is one person.

Before self-checking out, Hinzman had attempted to be granted CO status but, like many, he was turned down. In March 2005, Hinzman's claim for refugee status was rejected by the 'board' (Brian Goodman, in this case). Amnesty International declared (May 2005): "Amnesty International considers Mr. Jeremy Hinzman to have a genuine conscientious objection to serving as a combatant in the US forces in Iraq. Amnesty International further considers that the took reasonable steps to register his conscientious objection through seeking non-combatant status in 2002, an application which was rejected. Accordingly, should he be imprisoned upon his return to the United States, Amnesty International would consider him to be a prisoner of conscience."

"I object to the Iraqi war because it is an act of agression with no defensive basis. It has been supported by pretenses that cannot withstand even elementary scrutiny. First, before the U.S. dropped the first bomb, it was quite evident that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. Second, the Bush administration had the gall to exploit the American public's fear of terrorists by making the absurd assertion that a secular Baathist government was working with a fundamentalist terrorist group. There was never any intelligence to substantiate this. Third, the notion that the U.S. wants to export democracy to Iraq is laughable. Democracy is by the people, not an appointed puppet theater," Peter Laufer's Mission Rejected: U.S. Soldiers Who Say No to Iraq quotes Hinzman explaining.

Gerry Condon (ZNet) explained of Hinzman, "He had converted to Catholicism in high school. While in Army training, he was reading about the Buddhist philosophy of living. On Sundays Hinzman and his wife attended the Quaker meetings in Fayetteville, North Carolina, next to Fort Bragg, the 'Home of the Airborne.' They enjoyed the weekly group mediations and were inspired by the Quakers' pacifist message. Hinzman came to realize that he could not in good conscience carry a weapon or kill another human being." Condon, a war resister during Vietnam, has been one of the ones giving back to today's war resisters as has attorney Jeffry House and they have been there for every step of the appeals process for Hinzman and war resister Brandon Hughey. In April of 2006, the Federal Court ruled against Hinzman and Hughey so they carried their cases on up the chain.

May 5, 2007, Jack Lakey (Toronto Star) reported the Federal Court of Appeal ruled that Hinzman and Hughey "are not entitled to refugee status" and that "The latest ruling noted neither made full use of steps open to them in the U.S. to win conscientious objector status, before fleeing here." The next move is Canada's Supreme Court and, as Cindy Chan (Epoch Times) noted earlier this month, that body will announce "late September or early October" whether or not they will hear the cases of Hinzman and Hughey. If the body refuses to hear the appeal, that is not the end of the story.

As Gerry Condon noted in 2004, "If Hinzman and Hughey are ultimately denied refugee status in Canada, they will not have exhausted their legal bids to remain in Canada. They may still petition the government to remain in Canada on humanitarian and compassionate grounds. By this time they may be well established in Canada, one of the criteria for granting this residency. Or they could ask for permission to apply from within Canada for immigrant status, due to special circumstances (if they were to apply from the U.S., they could be arrested and imprisoned for desertion)."

Whatever happens, one thing is known. Hinzman, Hughey and others have based their applications on the illegality of the war and their refusal to participate in it. This has been refuted repeatedly by Canadian bodies even when war resisters like Jimmy Massey testify before them as a witness. In the November 2006, Democrats in the US were swept into power and they campaigned on ending the illegal war. While US Speaker of the House may or may not be able to 'table' impeachment, the fact remains that the American people were promised serious Congressional probes of the illegal war. Those probes have not taken place. It's been no better than when the Republicans controlled Congress because no one was surprised that they would stall and bury reports on the intell that was embarrassing to the White House. Where are the Congressional hearings? As Congress has done very little, it has had effects, in this country and around the world.


There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Zamesha Dominique, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Carla Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Jeremy Hinzman, Stephen Funk, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, forty-one US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.


Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. IVAW and others will be joining Veterans For Peace's conference in St. Louis, Missouri August 15th to 19th.

Yesterday in northern Iraq, bombings resulted in mass deaths. Kim Gamel (AP) reports the death toll has risen to 200 this morning and it is still rising. AFP notes "growing fears last night that more dead were trapped under the rubble." Megan Greenwell and Dlovan Brwari (Washington Post) quote survivor Khidr Farhan declaring, "I found myself flying through the air, and my face was burning. I felt my leg hurting, and I knew my head was bleeding. Then I couldn't feel anything. When I woke up, I was in the hospital" and Haji Sido declaring, "I ran past people screaming on the ground. I didn't care, because I had to get to my family. When I got home, my wife said: 'Calm down and thank God. We are safe'." Carol J. Williams (Los Angeles Times) quotes survivor Aydan Shikh declaring, "There is no justification for this. What crime have the Yazidis committed to deserve this?" and Subhee Abdullah declaring, "I saw people drowning in their own blood. More people are sure to die."

Paul Tait (Reuters) notes that digging through the rubble continues with many people "dazed and crying" as they attempt to locate missing family members and friends. In addition, Tait notes 330 people are classified as wounded. Sam Knight and Deborah Haynes (Times of London) list the number of dead at 250 (wounded at 350) and quote Dakhil Qassim ("mayor of the nearby town of Sinjar") declaring, "We are expecting to reach the final death toll tomorrow or day after tomorrow as we are getting only pieces of bodies." BBC, citing a Tal Afar official, notes the death toll is 257 (350 wounded) and that the attacks precede the upcoming vote on the fate of the area (it's own independent area -- "Correspondents say the planned referendum makes northern Iraq's Kurds a target for politically-motivated attacks." Tim Butcher and Sally Peck (Telegraph of London) note that the attacks have overwhelmed health care facilities resulting in survivors being "ferried to hospitals across northern Iraq" and they remind that US Gen. George Casy Jr.had recently declared "Our guys are seeing progress on the security front." Casey made those remarks to the National Press Club in DC only yesterday, August 14, 2007 where he made one baseless claim after another (and yes, he falsely linked it all to 9-11). He also stated that "The successes" remain unreported.

While Casey got caught by surprise, the US military appears unsure of what it's doing today at any given minutes. First Gen. David Petraues and US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker issue a joint-statment decrying "the barbaric attacks on innocent Iraqi men, women and children in Ninawah Province yesterday." Then the US military insists to CBS News that the death toll was only 30. They also maintain it is the work of al Qaeda . . . no doubt too startled yet to try and create a link to Iran.

In some of the other violence reported today . . .

Today Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) reported, "The violence comes as U.S. forces have launched new crackdowns across Iraq. More than sixteen thousand U.S. and Iraqi troops are taking part in Operation Lightning Hammer around the Diyala River. In Baghdad, at least two people were killed in a U.S.-led raid on the Shiite neighborhood of Sadr City. The victims were reported to be a father and his three-year old daughter, asleep in the summer heat on the roof of their home. Nine others were arrested, including the three sons of local resident Umm Falah" and Falah was quoted explaining, "I used to bake breads and sell it to feed them and when they grew they started to work to help me. We though that we would be relieved when Saddam fell, we did not expect that he was replaced with the worst. Only God can beat them (the Americans)."

Bombings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports two Mosul car bombings that claimed 10 lives. Reuters reports 5 lives ended by a Hilla bombing in an attack on "a judge's house".

Shootings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 4 people shot dead in Baghdad (one from "random fire by an American convoy") and three police officers were shot dead in Baghdad. Reuters reports one person shot dead in Madaen, "a member of a joint Iraqi and U.S. security coordination" was shot dead in Najaf, 3 "police commandos" shot dead in Doura and one person shot dead in Buhriz.


Corpses?

Kim Gamel (AP) reports that 24 corpses were discovered today "bullet-riddled bodies of apparent victimes of sectarian death squads usually run by Shiite militias."

In other violence, there are the displaced. Over four million Iraqis have been displaced (internally and externally) due to the illegal war. Cindy Sheehan (Common Dreams) notes that the bulk of the externally displaced have gone to Jordan and Syria: "The refugee catastrophe is going a long way to destabilize the countries to which the Iraqis . . . emergency CPR needs to flow to Jordan and Syria immediately to help the Iraqi people and the two mentioned countries. Significantly, both countries also have vast populations of Palestinian refugees that has now become a generational problem. Solving the problems in Israel will help the Palestinian refugees who want the right of return to their homes as well as help solving our own 'terrorism' problem at home. This is also an issue that needs to be pressed and exposed back in the states." This as IRIN notes the effects on Iraqi children being raised within Iraq "in a climate of fear and violence" And pregnant women in labor try to avoid going to hospitals after nightfall due to the violence. IRIN reports that in 1989, 117 Iraqi women "died during pregnancy or childbirth" but today the "figures has now gone up by 65 per cent." These results didn't happen by chance, they are the direct effects of an illegal war.

Turning to the political situations. At Inside Iraq (a blog run by McClatchy Newspapers Iraqi staff), a correspondent captures the endless repetition: "Did anyone hear about the meetings our great politician would start soon? OMG Here we are again, again and again and again, we are standing on the first square. new meetings but do these meetings have any solutions to the daily massacre that we live in? I'm sure the demands of the political blocs would be the same, each party and bloc will ask for sure for more power to control, more money to steal and more weapons to kill the people of the other sect. and guess what? Again the US Godfather will sponsor the great meetings. its the same old game, keep them busy, let them kill each other on the name of democracy."

Meanwhile the Center for Media and Democracy's PR Watch.org notes that the partisan groups Vets for Freedom and VoteVets have been hailed by the AP as "valuable public relations tools" . . . for elected and those seeking elections and notes VoteVets (with a board of advisers that includes War Hawk Bob Kerrey) " is part of Americans Against Escalation in Iraq, the [WalkOn] and SEIU coalition that pressures pro-war Republicans but not Democrats." Too much reality for some and apparently that includes the Peace Resister who felt the need to team with a failed screenwriter (how did Rooster work out? Oh, that's right) to offer the usual sop that the Peace Resister is now known for. Does anyone else wonder why she only teams up with male co-writers or are we never supposed to notice that? That inability to work with women as co-writers may go a long way towards explaining why the magazine published nearly 4 men for every 1 woman in the first six months of this year. So Useless and Failed Screenwriter team up to offer that 'things are changing' (sadly, not at the magazine) and it's a turned corner for the movement thanks to the useless people of WalkOn.org and others and provide plenty of 'love' to Americans Against Escalation and a hell of a lot of cover.


The Nation wasn't always worthless and a few at the magazine (or distributed by it) still try to make a difference. Today, Democracy Now! featured 25 minutes of a recent speech Naomi Klein entitled "Another World Is Possible." From that speech:

We who say we believe in this other world need to know that we are not losers. We did not lose the battle of ideas. We were not outsmarted, and we were not out-argued. We lost because we were crushed. Sometimes we were crushed by army tanks, and sometimes we were crushed by think tanks. And by think tanks, I mean the people who are paid to think by the makers of tanks. Now, most effective we have seen is when the army tanks and the think tanks team up. The quest to impose a single world market has casualties now in the millions, from Chile then to Iraq today. These blueprints for another world were crushed and disappeared because they are popular and because, when tried, they work. They're popular because they have the power to give millions of people lives with dignity, with the basics guaranteed. They are dangerous because they put real limits on the rich, who respond accordingly. Understanding this history, understanding that we never lost the battle of ideas, that we only lost a series of dirty wars, is key to building the confidence that we lack, to igniting the passionate intensity that we need.


iraq
brandon hughey
jeremy hinzman
peter laufer
democracy now
amy goodman
naomi klein
cindy sheehan
megan greenwell
the washington post
leila fadel
mcclatchy newspapers
the los angeles times
carol j. williams
the world today just nuts
peace resister
Katrina vanden Heuvel

"I felt my leg hurting, and I knew my head was bleeding," he said. "Then I couldn't feel anything. When I woke up, I was in the hospital."
During an interview with a Washington Post special correspondent, Farhan began to cry. "Where is my family?" he said. "I left my wife and my four children at home. Did they die?"

The above is from an article noted by Martha and Lloyd by Megan Greenwell and Dlovan Brwari, "Truck Bombs Kill 175 In Iraq's North" (Washington Post). Over 175 people died (AP has an update on the number of people) and saying that number and moving on isn't reporting. Someone break the news to Damien Cave of the New York Times. Violence kills and it changes lives and doing a piece, as Cave has, where you go running to Iraqi officials and US officials isn't reporting on what happened. It's not even that he's more focused on the 9 US service members announced dead yesterday (including the 5 who died in the helicopter crash). He's not. He's focused on "Military officials" and "Military officials" and "Military officials" and "leader of the largest Sunni bloc" and "Another Iraqi official" and "the Iraqi authorites." Quoting a captain (actually paraphrasing) about how "socres of families were obliterated in the blast" is not giving voice to anything but what officials say. It's not demonstrating the very real destruction of people's lives.

People are dead and he's more comfortable tossing around a number and rushing off to get statements from officials than he is in conveying the tragedy that took place. No witness is quoted, no one who lost a family member. In fairness to him, the paper should have flooded the zone with this story (but they only flood on Iraq now when it's DC based coverage). And even if people were his strong suit (they aren't), the paper's approach is usually 'voice of officials.' They drop that when mass tragedies occur (the tsunami being one example). But his article tells you nothing about the very real destruction. It's removed and it's distant.

If they'd flooeded the zone, there would be a place for his article. As it is, the article's just a huge disappointment that's using mass destruction and death as an excuse to check in with officials. It conveys nothing of what took place yesterday.

The Post also quotes Haji Sido, "I ran past people screaming on the ground. I didn't care, because I had to get to my family. When I got home, my wife said: 'Calm down and thank God. We are safe.' " You get nothing like that in Cave's article.

Kim Gamel (AP) reports the death toll has risen to 200 and this is from that article:

"We are still digging with our hands and shovels because we can't use cranes because many of the houses were built of clay," Qassim said. "We are expecting to reach the final death toll tomorrow or day after tomorrow as we are getting only pieces of bodies."
The bombings came as extremists staged other bold attacks on Tuesday: leveling a key bridge outside Baghdad and abducting five officials from an Oil Ministry compound in the capital in a raid using gunmen dressed as security officers. Nine U.S. soldiers also were reported killed, including five in a helicopter crash.
The carnage dealt a serious blow to U.S. efforts to pacify the country with just weeks to go before the top U.S. commander Gen. David Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker are to deliver a pivotal report to the U.S. Congress amid a fierce debate over whether to begin withdrawing American troops from Iraq.

Gamel quotes Khadir Shamu declaring, "My friend and I were thrown high in the air. I still don't know what happened to him."

The Los Angeles Times offers a listing of "Worst blasts" from Reuters. Carol J. Williams (Los Angeles Times) reports:

"There is no justification for this," said Aydan Shikh, a 33-year-old Yazidi activist surveying the devastation after the bombings, which left apartment buildings and stores ablaze. "What crime have the Yazidis committed to deserve this?"
Subhee Abdullah, a shop owner who was about to close up when the attacks occurred, described a scene of panic and chaos. Yazidis, maimed and bleeding, crouched in hiding, fearful that more blasts were coming."I saw people drowning in their own blood," the 50-year-old said. "More people are sure to die."

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


megan greenwell
the washington post
damien cave
the new york times
the los angeles times
carol j. williams

Zoltan Grossman has a new piece entitled "Speaking Different Languages" (ZNet) and we're linking to it and noting it in the first entry, the first sentence of the first entry, and we don't link to trash. I think it's worth reading, I think it's worth thinking about.

I don't think it is gospel.

It may end up being something we explore at The Third Estate Sunday Review so I'll use that as my out to just make a few comments. (I'm not summarizing it. If you want to read it, read it.)

1) He names someone who doesn't feel he got enough support. I'll agree with that (and defended the person in a roundtable at The Third Estate Sunday Review). But let's be real here, when you piss people off, you don't get a lot of support. When you are seen to publicly sneer at family's losses, you don't get a lot of support. In one speech (posted online), the person's image cratered around the country. Was that fair? In the roundtable, I pointed out the person was in pain, dealing with a lot and finding their way. I stand by that, but I'm not unaware (believe me, I heard the complaints loudly, the first time on a high school campus in Florida) that when you're comments are seen as sneering (and he was saracastic and cracking jokes) about the very real losses of others, families who've lost loved ones in the illegal war, your problems in terms of support go beyond, "They don't support me!"

2) I don't ridicule the 9-11 truth movement. I say, I wasn't there, I don't know what happened. But when you align yourself with them, people are going to step back. That's not "they should."
That is knowing the reality. When you do that and videos of speeches you've given show up online and you're looking like you need a shave about a month ago and you are hopefully speaking passionately but it can be twisted into "He sounds insane!" -- you don't need to blame the peace movement.

3) The peace movement is not the "public relations movement." A lot of people have that confused. They think the peace movement's behind them so that means coverage. When the coverage isn't there, feelings can get hurt. In this instance, staying on the one example, you had the wife of the man taking to mainstream message boards trying to get coverage for her husband. It didn't happen. That's shameful but that has to do with the media, it doesn't have to do with the peace movement. In 2006 (and this year as well), The Nation magazine has refused to cover war resisters in print (if they're feeling generous they toss out an "online exclusive"). The Nation magazine is not the peace movement. They have not been a part of the peace movement. They have not covered the peace movement, they have not provided a roundtable of various people in the peace movement. When the peace movement has been mentioned by the magazine (online exclusives, of course, except for the "HOW DARE CODEPINK BIRDDOG HILLARY CLINTON!" nonsense of 2006), it's been to insult it. Do not confuse The Nation with the peace movement. They are not the peace movement. Matthew Rothschild, with a monthly magazine, has done a better job covering resistance and peace than has The Nation. The MSM has done a better job covering the peace movement and war resisters than has The Nation.

It would be wonderful if that's not the case. But the magazine has made it very clear, they don't give a damn about war resistance. (You only need look at their overly praised, bad article last month to see how they misportray Camilo Mejia to grasp how little they care.) Yeah, they do a firey editorial when everyone else is weighing in -- against the war -- and then they go back to doing nothing. They'd rather cover elections (even in an off year) than cover the illegal war. That's the reality.

It's not pretty. It's not noble. It's nothing to be proud of. But everyone should grasp that.

When Ehren Watada's name finally made it into print (January, 2007 issue), it was as a sidebar after he'd been called a coward in the main article. That's the reality of The Nation.

If you're doing a speaking tour, you need to be aware of that reality and you do not need to confuse the media with the peace movement.

4) Zoltan sees a split between the peace movement and veterans against the war. The split he's speaking of exists in the latter category as well. I've heard about that repeatedly from veterans who are committed to ending the illegal war. Zoltan sees it as happening between veterans and the peace movement -- it's also within those opposed to illegal war within veterans groups.

5) There's also the very real tension over the issue of "Who should be leading?" No one's handed leadership. Nor should they be. From any camp in the resistance to the illegal war. You carve out your role. New groups are emerging constantly and new leaders are emerging constantly. The monolythic nature that the article appears to present in needs further exploration. And it's true (and been noted here many times), this is nothing new. It happened during Vietnam as well and that's why new groups emerge. When they no longer speak to people, new groups will come about.

6) Dropping back to within the veterans opposing the illegal war because I will hear about that in phone calls from friends saying, "You really passed over that topic." They'll call because they are veterans resisting the illegal war and the problems Zoltan sees between them and the peace movement are actually, for them, problems they have with different veterans trying to end the illegal war. The sidelining Zoltan seems to be addressing is an issue within veterans groups where veterans -- in those groups -- feel they are sidelined. So let me be very clear that a very real feeling he is writing of exists not only between some vets and the peace movement but also between some (a lot in fact) vets and veterans organization.

I'm glad Zoltan Grossman has addressed so many issues. I think they need to discussed and not swept under the rug. I recommend his article (and applaud him for writing it) but he's seeing a split between A and B and the reality is there's a whole alphabet split going on.

I don't believe he's attacking anyone. I think he's trying to seriously get the discussion going. That is needed. And you'll note it comes from ZNet (and will probably reappear at CounterPunch). It's not coming from The Nation. They've shown no leadership, only cowardice.

I think everyone can benefit from reading Zoltan's article. Some parts may ring true for you, some parts might not. All parts may ring true for you, or none of them may. But he's addressing it seriously and reading it (and exploring it) will not be a waste of your time. He deserves a lot of credit for raising issues and trying to keep a dialogue going (one that very few have engaged in). I've sketched that out above, that's not "in full" or "end of story." Hopefully, we can address the article in a roundtable at The Third Estate Sunday Review. And hopefully, you'll address it yourself (whether you agree with it or disagree with it -- in part or whole) because it is a serious contribution that needed to be made and he deserves credit for doing so.

The above is not a summary of the article. It's not footnotes or additional points. I've raised the issues I know I will hear about to try to cut down on phone calls because I am on the road speaking and also because I know one group especially (those who are veterans and who have the issues he's writing about but with other veterans trying to end the illegal war) will call if I don't make certain points.

Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) is making a serious effort to report. Not a lot ever do. (That's our transition.) And this is from her "U.S. military leaders: Iraq security effort hampered by lack of political progress:"


Despite U.S. claims that violence is down in the Iraqi capital, U.S. military officers are offering a bleak picture of Iraq’s future, saying they’ve yet to see any signs of reconciliation between Sunni and Shiite Muslims despite the drop in violence.
Without reconciliation, the military officers say, any decline in violence will be temporary and bloodshed could return to previous levels as soon as the U.S. military cuts back its campaign against insurgent attacks.
That downbeat assessment comes despite a buildup of U.S. troops that began five months ago Wednesday and has seen U.S. casualties reach the highest sustained levels since the United States invaded Iraq nearly four and a half years ago.
Violence remains endemic, with truck bombs on Tuesday claiming as many as 175 lives in northern Iraq and destroying a key bridge near Baghdad, the first successful bridge attack since June.

We'll focus on that and save the waves of Operation Happy Talk meant to lull a nation (and the world) for the snapshot later today. The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

zoltan grossman
leila fadel
mcclatchy newspapers

Tuesday, August 14, 2007. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces more deaths, a US helicopter crashes, mass fatalities from bombings in northern Iraq, and more.

Starting with war resistance, Mary Wiltenburg (Christian Science Monitor) continues her coverage of Agustin Aguayo today addressing his court-martial, how Agustin's wife Helga cried (Helga: "It was the ugly crying, with snot and everything. I wanted them to see how much they were hurting us."), how Augustin's squad leader, Sgt. David Garcia, testifited ("I told him what he needed to do was stick by his gun, if that was how he felt.") and how, following the conviction, Capt. Jennifer Neuhauser talked about what really was going on (sending a message to others serving). (Click here for part one of Wiltenburg's coverage.) Aguayo's case for CO status is currently awaiting his decision as to whether or not he's going to continue to fight in civilian courts. In his court filed statement (August 10, 2006), Aguayo wrote, "As time progresses (it has been more than two and a half years since I became a CO) my beliefs have only become more firm and intense. I believe that participating in this (or any) deployment would be fundamentally wrong, and therefore I cannot and will not participate. I believe that to do so, I would be taking part in organized killing and condoning war missions and operations, even though I object, on the basis of my religious training and belief, to participating in any war. I have to take stand for my principles, values, and morals and I must let my conscience by my guide. After all, I and no one else has to bear the consequences of my decisions or burden of neglecting my conscience." He also addresses the fact that although he was supposed to be a non-combatant, per The Department of the Army, his "unit will not respect that arrangement."

Aguayo was punished by the military to send a message. As noted on October 20, 2006, "That is their biggest fear. That this will spread. Unfortunately for the military, it is already spreading. That's why it's important to get the word out. Each person who takes a brave stand against the war deserves support. They'll only get that if people are aware of their stand. And with increased awareness it's not just an issue of raising awareness on one person, it's an issue of raising awareness on an entire movement."

Kyle Snyder is another war resister and he self-checked out (April 2005) and moved to Canada. On October 31st, Snyder returned to the US and turned himself in at Fort Knox. Snyder turned himself in and quickly checked back out when the US military refused to honor the agreement they had come to and instead attempted to send him to Fort Leonard. Snyder then began speaking out in the United States, he did some volunteer construction work in New Orleans around Thanksgiving of last year and continued to speaking out (one of the places he spoke out at was Fort Benning). Despite the lie repeated by the media, the US military does attempt to track those who self-checkout. We certainly saw it last month in Denver, CO when a parent's home was searched. We saw with it Snyder who, in the midst of his West Coast speaking tour, suddenly had to worry about the police showing up at stops because the military investigation unit of Kentucky kept calling the California police and instructing them. Snyder returned to Canada after his speaking tour was over and was set to marry Maleah Frisen when Canadian police showed up at his door, drug him off in handcuffs (and in his boxers). Snyder was told the orders for the arrest came from the US military and that charge came, not from Snyder, but from Canada's Border Service Agency.

It was a last ditch attempt to screw with Snyder because, married to Frisen, he's out of the US military's reach. (He no longer needs to be granted asylum by the Canadian government.) Rochelle Baker (The Abbotsford News) reported last week that at last an investigation is taking place. The Nelson City Police -- and specifically Chief Dan Maluta, have repeatedly changed their public versions of events. At one point, Maulta was claiming the Border Service Agency ordered the arrest (the Border Service Agency consistently maintained that they did not, that they did not contact the Nelson City Police Dept., and that, after Snyder was arrested, the Nelson City Police Dept. contacted them). How much of an investigation it will be is unclear since Maluta has strong ties to the Abbotsford Police who will be conducting the investigation.

What happened to Snyder is not a one-time incident. Joshua Key is also a war resister who went to Canada (Key tells his story in The Deserter's Tale). Following the February orders to arrest Snyder, 2 members of the US military (still unidentified) went into Canada, paired up with a Canadian police officer and began inquiring as to where Key was. They showed up at peace activist Winnie Ng's door. The three men identified themselves as Canadian police and began questioning her -- very upsetting. Ng came forward with what happened and that she believed two of the men were US military. "Never happened!" cried the police. They hadn't gone to Ng's door. They hadn't been accompanied by the US military. Those were lies and slowly the police had to admit that, yes, a Canadian police officer did travel with two US military service members to assist their efforts to find Joshua Key. That is a violation of Canadian sovereignty. It is a big deal in Canada.

Back in May, Gregory Levey (Salon) became the first at a US news outlet
to explore this story. It was an explosive story but if you thought it got traction after Levey covered it, think again. No one in big or small media has picked up on the story (several other outlets ran Levey's groundbreaking story). Only surprising if you haven't noticed how very little attention is given war resistance period.



There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Zamesha Dominique, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Carla Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Jeremy Hinzman, Stephen Funk, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, forty-one US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.


Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline, Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. IVAW and others will be joining Veterans For Peace's conference in St. Louis, Missouri August 15th to 19th.


Yesterday Sean McCormack, US State Dept. flack, declared the US government was working with al-Maliki and "not only with Prime Minister Maliki, but also with important political party leaders, some of whom are in the government or have representatives in the government, some of whom are not in the government." (Click here for text, click here for a/v.) "Some of whom are not in the government"? Needless to say, there was no follow up asking exactly what that meant. Nouri al-Maliki, puppet of the occupation, has a cabinet that is falling down. Megan Greenwell (Washington Post) reported this morning that, apparently refreshed from his trips last week to Turkey and Iran, al-Maliki now says he wants to work with others and that he has big hopes that he can rebuild the cabinet. This after he he trashed those that walked out and entertained the kind of conspiracy theories that usually has the MSM using their index finger to make a circular motion while saying, "Koo, koo, koo, koo." Possibly due to the trashing, not all who were boycotting in the cabinet were forgiving. Reuters reports only three who had been boycotting showed up for a cabinet session today.

In other bad news, though northern Iraq keeps promoting itself as "The Other Iraq" (honestly, they should stop the check on the p.r. agency that dusted off the "other white meat" slogan and sold it to them) reality slaps back. Just last week, the push was on again for "The Other Iraq." C.J. Chivers (New York Times) reports that: "A European civil aviation authority said yesterday that it was reviewing security conditions at airports in northern Iraq after two pilots reported that their passenger airliner had been attacked by ground fire last week while taking off from Sulaimaniya." And Louise Nordstrom (AP) reports that Sweden has now suspended all their "commercial flights to and from Iraq". Chivers also notes the Brookings Institute's figure of "at least 34 helicopters" -- US -- shot down during the illegal war thus far.

Helicopter crashes? Megan Greenwell (Washington Post) is reporting that a US helicopter crashed today in Anbar resulting in the deaths of 5 US soldiers. (This is web, not print. By Wednesday am, the link may or may not go to the story.) CBS and AP note the "emergency response crews had sealed off the site" and that it "is about 45 miles west of Baghdad in restive Anbar province". And for those fretting, it's okay to use "crash" -- even the US military is using it in their press release noting the five deaths ("Helicopter crashes in Al Anbar Province").


Turning to other violence today . . .

Bombings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad bombing targeting Thira'a Dijla bridge claimed 10 lives and left six wounded. Reuters reports "three civilian cars" were sent into the Tigris. Carol J. Williams (Los Angeles Times) notes that that the "bomber detonated a truckload of explosives on a key bridge north of the Iraqi capital today, plunging the concrete span and at least three vans packed with passengers into the murky waters of a wide canal linking the Tigris and Euphrates rivers." Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) also notes a Baghdad bombing that left two people wounded, a Baghdad mortar attack left three people wounded, 3 Kirkuk bombings left eight police officers and five civilians wounded, and, dropping back to yesterday, 2 people lost their lives (a third was wounded) in a Basra rocket attack on a residence. CBS and AP note an attack in "northwester Iraq" where Yazidi members were targeted by a bombing that claimed 9 lives (fourteen wounded). But Reueters has an update: "At least 175 people were killed when three suicide bombers driving fuel tankers attacked residential compounds home to the ancienty minority Yazidi sect".

Shootings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports two people were wounded while the Iraqi army and unknown assailants had a shoot out "in Shorja market neighborhood downtown Baghdad" and a civilian was shot dead in the capital (four more wounded).

Kidnappings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports Abdul Jabbar Al Wagga'a and 2 of his body guards "and 4 general directors" were kidnapped by unknown men who "were wearing a military uniform" when they invaded the marketing building of the Baghdad Oil Ministry (five people were wounded during the kidnapping).


Corpses?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 15 corpses were discovered in Baghdad.


In addition to the five dead from the helicopter crash, today the US military announced: "Three Task Force Lightning Soldiers died as a result of injuriessustained from an explosion near their vehicle while conducting operations in Ninewah Province, Monday." And they announced: "One Multi-National Division-Baghdad Soldier was killed and three others wounded during combat operations in a western section of the Iraqi capital Aug. 14." ICCC's total for the month thus far is 41 with 3699 US service members being the total killed in the illegal war since it started. The 3700 mark looms closer. It will be passed, as will other marks, before this illegal war is ended.
[CBS and AP report the 3700 mark has been passed: "The deaths raised to at least 3,700 members of the U.S. military who have died since the Iraq war started in March 2003, according to an Associated Press count." Before the 5 deaths from the helicopter crash, Reuters reported: "United States 3,694." Adding five to that, you have 3,699.]

Sticking with reality, Leila Fadel (Baghdad Observer, McClatchy Newspapers) addresses the charges and counter-charges being exchanged between Sunni and Shia leaders in Iraq and weighs in with this: "People are fighting to be the bigger victim. Shiite politicians don't openly condemn the situation, instead they ask 'who picked the fight?' and talk about the higher number of Shiites killed in Iraq. Shiite and Sunni groups compete for the anonymous bodies at the morgue. Each side wants to raise the body count of their population by burying them in their graveyards. A question was raised to me during interviews this week. There is an assumption that the Shiite-led government will try to solve the crisis. But no one official asked 'What if the intent is to continue the purge?' No American officials ever asks this question publicly. No one ever asks whether the true intentions of the current government may be to solidify power by ridding themselves of a restive minority. Are American officials banking on a government that was born under U.S. supervision but may not be the best thing for the future of Iraq?"

The chosen ones, by the US government, were the Shi'ites. They now toy with backing the Sunnis. Whether they will or not remains to be seen but it does, a government run counter-insurgency is supposed to, keep everyone off balance with the hopes of fostering a dependence upon the occupying power (US).

It was really 'cute' at the start of the month when the Iraqi Air Force Commander, Lt. General Kamal Araznji declared, "As everybody knows, the Iraqi air force is basically one of the oldest air force in the region and it was established since 1931. But now, we've started a new beginning since 2004 on a new basis with support and from the abilities and experience by the international air force, particularly by the western countries." He continues but search in that statement, bragging about Iraqi Air Force's long history for any indication that 1931 doesn't matter at all. That's because the US disbanded the military. That's because when it was built back up certain groups weren't allowed back in. This is part of the who got put in control story that Fadel's asking about. It's equally true that when someone tosses out "1931" and starts rambling about the history of the Iraqi Air Force, they're just gas bagging. The military was disbanded. There is no history to speak of. Of course, when asked if the Iraqi military was "working with people who are essentially war criminals?", Fox responded, "I wouldn't necessarily jump or characterize, you know, that we're embracing any particular segment or sect or group of people" but that is what happened and what has happened. So to return to the question Fadel notes American officials don't want to ask in public, "What if the intent" of those currently in charge "is to continue the purge?"

iraq
agustin aguayo

joshua key
kyle snyder
gregory levey
mary wiltenburg
the christian science monitor
the new york times
megan greenwell
the washington post
the los angeles times

Schweinfurt, Germany -- The US Army sergeants waited on the couch, studying the floor. Family dogs skirted the sofa, growling. From time to time, one of the soldiers extended a conciliatory hand to them.
On the floor, sixth-grader Rebecca Aguayo played a video game; her twin rollerbladed outside. Just one voice fed the tension in the living room: Their mother, Helga, sat in an armchair, bawling. "It was the ugly crying, with the snot and everything," Mrs. Aguayo recalls, "I wanted them to see how much they were hurting us."
Her husband, Army Spc. Agustín Aguayo, hurried around their military base apartment in central Germany that afternoon, under orders to assemble his battle gear. Two-and-a-half years earlier, in February 2004, the medic had applied to leave the Army as a conscientious objector (CO), someone whose beliefs forbid him to participate in war. While his claim was being evaluated, Aguayo served a year in Iraq with an unloaded weapon; when the claim was rejected, he sued for another review.
That legal process was under way on Sept. 1, 2006, the afternoon Aguayo's unit assembled to begin its second Iraq tour. Unwilling to deploy, Aguayo took an officer's advice and stayed home so as not to "make people very upset on a very stressful day." That evening, his commander, Capt. R.J. Torres, called Helga, saying Aguayo would be punished unless he appeared.
Aguayo did not show up before his comrades left that night. The next morning he turned himself in to the military police, prepared to serve prison time for "missing movement." Instead, Captain Torres ordered him taken to Iraq by force. The two sergeants drove him home to get his gear.
"I needed to show that I was ready to do anything except hurt people" rather than return to war, Aguayo says. So, as the men sat in his living room, he stuffed jeans and a T-shirt into a plastic shopping bag, opened a first-floor bedroom window, took out the screen, and jumped.
Aguayo, a military court would later decide, deserted. It's something nearly 37,000 active duty US troops did between October 2001 and October 2006. But the medic's situation was more complex than that. In his mind -- and in the minds of superiors who attested that he was "absolutely sincere" -- he was a conscientious objector, a hardworking soldier who'd grown opposed to all wars and should have been honorably discharged.

The above is from part two of Mary Wiltenburg's look at Agustin Aguayo and is entitled "US Army struggles with soldier who won't pull the trigger" (Christian Science Monitor). Again, you should be asking why the mainstream can and has covered this issue while the print edition of The Nation has elected to sit it out for all of 2006 and 2007 thus far. In news of other suck ups, John F. Burns (New York Times) sold his integrity enough to get face time (or at least trail behind time) with David Petraeus and contributes a feature story so bad even People would turn it down. Read at your own risk. No doubt Burnsie has many interesting anecdotes he will be peddling when he next takes to the right-wing radio circuit.

In Iraq today, there's been another bombing of a bridge. Reuters reports 10 people lost their lives and "three civilian cars" were sent into the Tigris. Martha notes Megan Greenwell's "Iraqi Summit Set to Begin: Factions in Divided Government Agree on Outline for Talks" (Washington Post) which addresses puppet al-Maliki's hopes that he can rebuild, he can make it better (reality is Reuters reports only three who had been boycotting showed up for a cabinet session today). From Greenwell's article:

Meanwhile, police in the northern city of Kirkuk said that a tribal sheik, Muhsin al-Jabouri, was gunned down as revenge for his work with the U.S. military. Two other religious leaders were killed over the weekend; both had taken part in an expanding American strategy of paying Sunnis to fight insurgents in their neighborhoods.


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

agustin aguayo
mary wiltenburg
the christian science monitor
the new york times
megan greenwell
the washington post

Today the US military announced: "Three Task Force Lightning Soldiers died as a result of injuriessustained from an explosion near their vehicle while conducting operations in Ninewah Province, Monday." ICCC's total for the month thus far is 35 with 3693 US service members being the total killed in the illegal war since it started.

In other news of 'progress' (the liars in the administration and many of their MSM flunkies claim a 'turned corner'), Alexandra Zavis (Los Angeles Times) addresses the realities of the issue of electricity in Iraq:

When the power fails and there is no gas for the generator, Mohammed Azzawi has a plan to make it through the stifling summer nights. He collects the fans from old computer hard drives and powers them with backup batteries.
Faced with their fifth summer without a regular supply of electricity, Baghdad residents have come up with some novel ways to cool off.
Decades of corruption, neglect and war have left Iraq's electricity grid on the verge of collapse. Iraq is generating enough power to meet only half the nationwide demand, and most Baghdad residents are down to an hour or two of electricity a day. The shortfalls are the worst since U.S.-led forces ousted Saddam Hussein in 2003, Electricity Ministry spokesman Aziz Shimari said.

When you consider how many worthless writers the Times of New York has, it may be a distant memory but once upon a time they did (briefly) address the issue of potable water. (For any confused, our transition was papers with "Times" in them, Zavis was not insulted in the previous sentence.) C.J. Chivers at least appears to be functioning today. From "Pilots Say Missile Was Fired at Airliner in Northern Iraq:"

A European civil aviation authority said yesterday that it was reviewing security conditions at airports in northern Iraq after two pilots reported that their passenger airliner had been attacked by ground fire last week while taking off from Sulaimaniya.

This would be the heavily spun "Other Iraq." The 'safe' region, the area promoting tourism. Chivers also cites the centrist Brookings Institute to note that during the illegal war "at least 34 helicopters have been shot down".

Now remember little Stevie yesterday deciding that a real reporter was one that repeated military lingo and avoided serious issues? Ross Colvin (Reuters) notes some realities, not many mind you, but a few, such as this about Fatima:


After receiving adoption inquiries, the hospital's chief doctor made enquiries at the U.S. embassy, staff said. They replied that "Iraqi law does not currently permit full adoptions as they are currently understood in the United States".

So there has been interest in adopting Fatima but the decision was made to keep her as a US military base pet. If that's not clear, note that she has five siblings and, apparently not qualifiying for 'cute' and 'small,' they're at an orphanage. Colvin writes, "Her presence is a welcome distraction for staff." Well, as long as the US gets to have a pet. This is disgraceful, we noted so yesterday. It shows a complete breakdown in the chain of command and it endangers Fatima. It's not a 'pretty' story, no matter how hard they try to spin it.

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

alexandra zavis
the los angeles times
c.j. chivers
the new york times

Isaiah's latest The World Today Just Nuts "Karl Rove Leaves the Administration." Karl Rove is wobbling off while a man cries, "But it's his brain!" Condi replies, "Nonsense. Our Bully Boy will be just fine. It'll be a cakewalk. Another cakewalk." Bully Boy, seated on the floor in his diaper, says, "Condi, I made pooh-pooh in my pants."

the world today just nuts
bully boy
karl rove leaves the administration
karl rove
condi rice
comic
the common ills

*Sean Penn, for replying, when asked if he wants the United States to win the war in Iraq, "I think we’re past that point in human evolution where there’s such a thing as winning wars."



The above is from Paul Krassner's "Ass----- of the Week" (CounterPunch). On the title, we can say "ass" but the other word would cause problems for some members accessing at work computers. I'll note that right off because there's an e-mail about Rebecca's comment at The Third Estate Sunday Review that uses "*" instead of letters and says I've taken "your puritan ways" over to The Third Estate Sunday Review. I type "-" (dashes). So I clearly did not type up that piece. In terms of the language they use their, it can be whatever is wanted. But I have to be given time to do a mass e-mail to members who would get in trouble for using work computers to access sites with certain language so that they have a heads up. I'm not a puritan and my own language is far worse than even Rebecca's. The Common Ills is a work safe environment in terms of language. It's been that way since it started. There are a limited number of words we can use when it comes to foul language. Which is probably a good thing or most entries (and titles) here would repeatedly include the f-word (although, truth be told the word I use most often is the s-word).



Both the f-word and the s-word have popped up in the TV pieces Ava and I write for The Third Estate Sunday Review. When they have gone up in full, it's been because I was already going to have to do a mass e-mailing about another feature that would be going up so we figured, what the hell? While I certainly have input at that site, I have no input at Rebecca's site. The visitor thinks Rebecca's "cleaned up her act" for me. Were I to ever call Rebecca about her language, she would laugh in my face. She is now using "*" and so is Mike. I would assume that's because people have e-mailed them saying they enjoy the sites but can't read if the language is in there. Not because they are puritans but because they'll get written up at work. When that issue was first raised here, in the early days of this site, I understood completely because I had a friend who'd already been written up for going to a site with the f-word. The site? Washington Post. Their story on Dick Cheney's use of the word. I couldn't believe it (that it would happen, a write up for a news site) but it does happen. I have no idea what word I used here (that was so long ago -- it wasn't the f-word or the s-word) but it did raise concerns/worries for some members and as a result we worked on a policy based on various members work place guidelines.



It's a small number of words that are allowed (or, to someone with my cursing vocabulary, it is a small number) and we operate under it due to the fact that I don't want anyone to get written up for the 'crime' of reading. I didn't even realize Rebecca was doing that, I read it without noticing it, I did notice on Mike's because he was using "crap" all the time lately (he uses the s-word as much as I do in conversations -- and previously used it at his site freely). I may owe Rebecca an apology because I don't know how the long policy has been in place but right after she had her baby, I did a guest post at her site and may have used some foul language (I may not have, that was a last minute thing). (And I didn't promote it here or link to it or say, "Check out my post!")



But no one's trying to be a prude at any site. As to why something goes up there, if it's not The Common Ills, I'm not responsible. If it's not The Third Estate Sunday Review, I'm not responsible even in part.



Lyle noted Sean Penn's quote last night and e-mailed this morning to note where he'd seen it, Krassner is 'awarding' 'honors' to various people and at the end of the piece, note some people who really do deserve credit for last week, among them Penn. The quote is from the Esquire cover story on sale this month. Here's the magazine's website but they don't have the Penn article up currently (they've still got last month's issue up with the John Edwards cover).



Martha notes Megan Greenwell's "Maliki Aims To Reconcile With Cabinet" (Washington Post):



Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki on Sunday expressed optimism about the chances of reconciliation within Iraq's fractured government, even as a political rival accused him of protecting militias with ties to Iran.
Meanwhile, the U.S. military announced that five soldiers were killed Saturday when a sniper shot one, then lured the others to a house rigged to explode. It was the single deadliest attack against American forces this month.
[. . .]
Maliki announced Sunday that a meeting of Iraq's leaders would begin this week, possibly on Monday, in an attempt to resolve the growing political crisis. His primary goal will be to reconcile with nearly half of his cabinet members, who have stopped attending meetings in three separate protests against his leadership.



For those who are still waking up, al-Maliki most recently referred to those opponents as obstructionists. It's a sure sign of how shaky the ground he stands on is that now he wants to make public overtures after his repeated public snit-fits and talk of the conspiracies (within the Iraqi Parliament) to destroy him. Reuters reports that Adnan al-Dulaimi ("a senior figure in the main Sunni Arab political bloc in Baghdad") has declared (in an open statement to al-Maliki), "Your brothers in Baghdad are suffering in genocide carried out by militias and the death squads with Iranian planning, instructions and weapons. If you think what is happening to us will end at Baghdad then you are wrong. By God, this war that started in Baghdad will not stop here. It will extend to every Arab spot where the Arabic tongue is spoken. It is a war of history."

He is not the only Sunni sounding alarms. Suleiman al-Khalidi (Reuters) reports Sheikh Harith al-Dari ("the top Sunni cleric") stated, "If the Americans remain with this policy and rely on the same men who proved their failure again and again then they will leave Iraq in failure. . . . The U.S. administration should rectify its position in Iraq and stop depending on puppets . . . who have proven their failure."

Tim Reid (Times of London) reports the Bully Boy thinks he can continue the escalation "well into next year" and cites a "a string of positive reports" on Iraq that Reid maintains have "left Democrats increasinly powerless to end the war." String of reports? Congress receives no reports until next month (they're currently on vacation). Reid's referring to the waves of Operation Happy Talk. So if you're one of the ones who engaged in that ('from the left') and repeated lies at the start of this month instead of challenging them, Congratulation! Consider the blood on your hands as well. If you used your position (big or small) to repeat talking points that quickly imploded, you've earned the blood. Now maybe you conceeded the lies because you had a bigger point to get to. Well when you don't call out the lies, they spread and spread. So next time, hold your big point until after you address reality.

Or wallow in the blood of the dead because it's yours now, it's all yours.

It was never a surprise that they'd push the rollout to August. Bully Boy needs this month while Congress vacations to sell the illegal war. He can't do it in the midst of reports coming in (and the independent report is thought to be more damning than what Patreaus will deliver, although Joe Biden has stated he will be very clear in his questioning of Patreaus).

Also planned is stationing US troops in southern Iraq. Sean Rayment and Philip Sherwell (Telegraph of London) report: "America is preparing to pour thousands of extra troops into southern Iraq amid fears that Gordon Brown is committed to withdrawing British troops from the region early next year." And they note:

The Sunday Telegraph has also learnt that neither the British nor the Americans have a "Plan B" for sending troops back into Iraq if the country descends into chaos when the coalition finally withdraws. One senior source said: "Whether or not we go back in if it all goes horribly wrong is the strategic question to which neither the US nor the British government has an answer.

That "senior source" is apparently US and they go continue to quote him. Of interest, his first concern is the oil ("the world's second-largest oil reserve") before getting to the talking point of chaos! Chaos!

Chaos came knocking at Iraq's door in March of 2003 when the illegal war started.

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


paul krassner
megan greenwell
the washington post
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
mikey likes it
the third estate sunday review

Abbotsford Police are heading up an investigation into a series of complaints against the Nelson City Police Department and its chief, but some complainants are skeptical about a process that sees police investigating police.
Nelson Police Chief Dan Maluta asked Abbotsford Police to do an external investigation into complaints filed around the arrest of military deserter Kyle Snyder.
Snyder -- who fled to Canada after deserting his Army unit on mid-tour while on leave from Iraq in 2005 -- was arrested without a warrant by Nelson Police in February.
He was released when Immigration Canada informed police they had no legal basis for arresting him.
It's still unclear as to why and under what authority Snyder was arrested. Maluta has refused to reveal the source of the allegations against Snyder which led to his arrest.
Snyder has alleged the US Army initiated the arrest.

The above, noted by Vic, is from Rochelle Baker's "APD investigates Nelson deserter issue" (The Abbotsford News). Kyle Snyder has alleged that? I believe that charge came from Citizenship and Immigration Canada. If we're going to talk allegations, we might talk about all the allegations Dan Maluta has made which have been exposed as lies such as when he claimed the order came from the Canada Border Service Agency and that agency made very clear that not only did they not give any such order, Maluta called them (after Snyder had been arrested).

They had no right to arrest him. The orders came from somewhere. Snyder turned himself in October of 2006 and the US military went back on their agreement. Snyder checked himself back out. He then went around the US publicly speaking (and doing some volunteer construction work in New Orleans. He spoke out at Fort Benning and you know that really ticked the military off. As he continued speaking out, the military began phoning in tips to local police. Snyder went back to Canada when he was done speaking in the US. The police show up to arrest him when he's about to marry Maleah Friesen, a Canadian citizen. You can be sure the 'tipsters' were especially troubled by that since, once married to Friesen, Snyder didn't need the (non-existant) refugee status from the Canadian government.

They were probably high fiving over that. Thrilled that the US military has issued orders to the Canadian police and that the Canadian police had obeyed despite the fact that there was no jurisdicition and despite the fact that it is not a crime in Canada to leave the US military.

The US military would follow their Snyder 'sweep' by sending two members into Canada to pose as Canadian police and look for war resister Joshua Key. They would be accompanied on their rounds by a Canadian police officer. They would LIE to Winnie Ng that they were all Canadian police and they would ask of Key's where abouts. The Canadian police officer in question stayed silent when Ng was called a liar. He stayed silent for a reason, he had no reason to accompany two US military members on a search for Joshua Key. In fact, the real question, if anyone wants to dig too deep, is whether or not he was on duty or not. If he was on duty, then he had orders from high up. Winnie Ng told the truth and eventually the Canadian police was forced to admit that one of their officers did take two US military members to her house. They want to insist that there was no effort to pass the two off as Canadian police.

Winnie Ng has consistently maintained otherwise. While the Canadian police has altered their story at least three times, Ng has remained consistent. Ng is telling the truth.

This is a big issue in Canada (and should be in the US as well) because it goes to issues of borders and to issues of who is in charge in Canada.

Over at the New York Times this morning, they're in happy mode because they've got an
illegal war to sell (the whole point of the domestic story that ran on the front page of yesterday's paper). Stephen Farrell offers Operation Happy Talk, if not reporting, in "Troops Shelter an Unlikely Survivor in Baghdad:"

Nine months old, underweight, malnourished, fatherless and half Sunni, half Shiite, she already had enough deadly handicaps growing up in Saydia, a battlefield suburb that has become one of the worst sectarian killing zones in Baghdad.
On July 25, a death squad shot her mother and uncle -- each three times in the head -- in their dilapidated half-finished squat. E.J.K.'s, in American military shorthand: extrajudicial killings.
Fatima’s 7-year-old brother fled and flagged down a joint patrol of the Iraqi National Police and American soldiers. The Iraqis found the bodies and collected up Fatima’s siblings from neighboring houses. But the 7-year-old kept asking, "What about my sister?"

First off, there's no point in the "E.J.K." being in the article except to show that Farrell can hang with the US military. Second of all the death squads didn't exist until after the illegal war. The Salvadoran option as the US administration termed it. Third of all, who armed them? Credit to the US, cries Farrell, forgetting that's a bit like congratulating an arsonist who rescues one victim of a burning building.

And here's the thing. Fatima, the child, is not a dog. She's a human being. She is not a pet for the US military. Farrell's so kind that he repeats the claim by the US military that in the past, when 'insurgents' (Major Andy Yerkes uses that term) were turned over to the hospitals, they were killed. How he, Yerkes, knows that isn't in the story or why, if he knows people are being killed, no one was brought up on charges, isn't in the story. What is in the story is Yerkes' claim that 'insurgents' turned over to Iraqi hospitals have been killed.

Are we supposed to believe 9-month-old Fatima would be seen as 'insurgent' by Iraqi hospital workers? It's as though the Times decided today to print the racist lyrics to Disney's Pocahontes (FYI, Disney has increased the insult and offense by allowing "Savages" to be made available as a "ring tone").

There are aid agenices within Iraq and outside of Iraq. There are also probably members of Fatima's family who could step forward were an illegal war not going on. A child is not a pet and a home is not a military base in the midst of a war zone. It shows a tremendous breakdown in leadership that the US military has been allowed to 'keep' a child as a pet.

This isn't a 'happy' story and only a foolish scribe would attempt to sell it as such. The US will be leaving. Do those serving on the base intend to take Fatima with them and raise her under some extended, multi-partied, joint custody agreement?

Fatima is a child, not a pet. She's not there to look cute or to play with. The chain of command has completely broken down and, it needs to be noted, in many outfits they wouldn't even be allowed to have a dog. That the superiors are fine with denying a child a life goes to either their own stupidity or their desire to get another wave of Operation Happy Talk going.

If the US leaves in two years or five, Fatima "pet of the US military base" is not going to be welcomed in Iraq. The longer they are allowed to 'keep' her, the more damage they do to her life. Relief agencies exist and should have been contacted some time ago. It's not a cute story, it is a story of the willful pride and arrogance of the US military. And the stupidity of leadership. You could add in, it's also the tale of really bad reporting since none of these issues were raised by Farrell though he did have time to toss around some military lingo. Macho head butt for Farrell, all the way home . . . from his extended childhood. Are there no American adults in the Green Zone?


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

kyle snyder
the new york times
stephen farrell