The disaster known as The Alberto Gonzales Show has been cancelled. The White House is hoping to retool the show with Michael Chertoff in the leading role as AG -- Abuser in General.



America just couldn't buy a madcap AG determined to wipe his rear with the Constitution while spying on American citizens, 'legalizing' torture and badgering the ill. Below, Alberto charges into a hospital room on May 28, 2007:







He reflected that spying was always better when "my buddy" tagged along:

And what does the future hold for Alberto Gonzales? As he did on April, 2007, he spoke of possibly opening a used car dealership:





As he skipped away, he sang the chorus to his show's theme song: "Hate is all around, No need to find it, You can destroy a town, And you wouldn't mind it, You're going to shred the Constitution after all."

bully boy finds new ways to invade our privacy
alberto gonzales from the land of denial
the world today just nuts

comic

alberto gonzales

the common ills

Isaiah's latest The World Today Just Nuts "Bully Boy Funds Terrorists." Bully Boy, geared up for Jenna's wedding in his own bridal number, declares, "America, it's tough work getting ready for a wedding. Diets, pedicures . . . I don't have the time to keep coming out here explaining. Yes, your tax dollars are funding attacks on U.S. soldiers in Iraq. But remember when I told you we were fighting them there so we wouldn't have to fight them here? Well we're paying them there too! Coz labor's cheaper overseas!"

the world today just nuts
bully boy
bully boy funds terrorists
comic
the common ills

Today's primary talking point is the the puppet of the occupation, Nouri al-Maliki, has accomplished something. No, not the release of prisoners. The puppet's masters really don't give a damn about that.

As Waleed Ibrahim and Wisam Mohammed (Reuters) note, the talking point is the 'oil law' which is finally (allgedly) going from the ministry to the Parliament. (For those confused, yes, the Parliament is supposed to write their own legislation, not rubber stamp what al-Maliki's government sends them. A process that confused US Democrats in Congress all the time -- most recently with their rubber stamp for Bully Boy's illegal spying, granted as they rushed off for their summer vacations.) The 'oil law' is not the revenue sharing which the Parliament has already discussed. This is the 'privatization' (theft) of Iraqi oil that will hand as much as 70% of all proceeds over to foreign companies. Sunni Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi is already putting a damper on the spin by declaring that more talks are required. The reporters tell you that al-Maliki also took shots at US Senators Carl Levin and Hillary Clinton by name, stating that Iraq is not their backyard. Left unstated was al-Maliki's belief that it is the backyard of the Bully Boy.

Wisam Mohammed (Reuters) reports that the Sunni Iraqi Accordance Front is already saying that meeting or not, it "will not be enough to lure boycotting Sunni Arabs back into the government".

Chris Collins (McClatchy Newspapers) reminds that al-Maliki has lashed out others in the past, including the administration and former US Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad; however, he added a new target for his rage: the US military which he declared was making "big mistakes."
Carol J. Williams (Los Angeles Times) informs that the lashing out took place at "a hastily called news conference" where al-Maliki also attacked France's Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner.

And what's up with that? Wasn't Kouchner just in Iraq last week? Didn't he make the first official visit to Iraq? Petter Allen (Telegraph of London) cites a Newsweek interview with Kouchner where he explains he was on the phone with US Secretary of State and Anger Condi Rice and told her, "Listen, he's got to be replaced." He?

Though one can dream that he was referring to the Bully Boy, the reality was that he meant the puppet, Nouri al-Maliki. Kouchner declared the Iraqi 'government' wasn't accomplished anything and that this might be addressed were it not for the fact "Bush is attached to Mr Maliki. But the government is not functioning."

CNN reports the puppet has a host of demands including that Carl Levin and Hillary clinton must "come to their senses" (stand in line, al-Maliki, stand in line) and "talk in a respectful way about Iraq" (in other words, he wants them to lie) while the government of France must issue an immediate apology.

In other words, the publicly paranoid puppet is becoming increasingly unhinged and experienced a very public meltdown yesterday.

James Glanz (New York Times) observes that al-Maliki's paranoia is bi-partisan since he "previously reacted with anger to President Bush's criticism of the Iraqi government's lack of political process" and that al-"Maliki appeared to reach a new level of stridency" in his attacks on Levin and Clinton. For those who do not possess a New York Times to English Glossary, when the paper calls you "strident," they've issued their ultimate insult and you're now open game in their blood sport of attacks ("See: Bella Abzug," would read the glossary -- among other examples).

Why is he lashing out at the US military? Concern for all of Iraq? Oh, you're joking. Martha notes Megan Greenwell's "Iraqi Leaders Reach Accord On Prisoners, Ex-Baathists" (Washington Post) which explains the puppet "denounced U.S. military raids in Shiite neighborhoods of Baghdad". Yes, al-Sadr's support remains the most important thing to al-Maliki because the other support has dried up and if the US waives the Kurdish north forward on creating their own province, al-Maliki won't have the weak support they've given him previously.


No doubt al-Maliki is longing for the happier days of April captured in Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "My Cousin Maliki" (April 22, 2007).






And Isaiah's latest? It's in the inbox. But it isn't. Isaiah just called and said, "Don't post that one. I'm doing a new one and it'll be done in about half and hour." (After which, I'll have to upload it to Flickr, so add a few minutes there -- if Flickr's not acting up.)

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

mcclatchy newspapers
the washington post
the new york times
the world today just nuts
comic
robert gates
nouri al-maliki

Whose funding the 'insurgents' in Iraq? It's early, so don't spook the Bully Boy with the news but in Anbar Province the funding comes from the US government. Hannah Allam's "Iraqi insurgents taking cut of U.S. rebuilding money" (McClatchy Newspapers) reports Iraqi contractors in Anbar Province state that they've been using US funds to pay off 'insurgents' and one contractor tells her, "I put it right in my contracts as a line item for 'logistics and security'."
Hoshyar Zebari, Iraq's Foreign Minister, admits to being "aware" of what he calls an "insurgent tax" and explains, "It's part of a taxation they put on trucks through all these territories, but it's very difficult to establish if it's going directly to insurgents." So why does he call it an "insurgent tax"?

More upfront is Barham Saleh, the Deputy Prime Minister of Iraq, who admits the payments take place and allows 'insurgents' to purchase "more weapons and vehicles" and explains, "I'm a realist." From the article:
One Iraqi contractor who is working on an American-funded rebuilding project in the provincial capital of Ramadi said he faced two choices when he wanted to bring in a crane, heavy machinery and workers from Baghdad: either hire a private security company to escort the supplies for up to $6,000 a truck, or pay off locals with insurgent connections.
He chose the latter, and got $120,000 for a U.S. contract he estimates to be worth no more than $20,000. The contractor asked that specific details of the project not be disclosed for fear he'll be identified and lose the job.

So now we know who has been funding the 'insurgents': the US. When someone breaks the news to the Bully Boy, no doubt he will put the US on a "terrorist watch list".

Lloyd and Martha both highlight Megan Greenwell's "Iraqi Leaders Reach Accord On Prisoners, Ex-Baathists" (Washington Post) and we'll go with Llyod's highlight for this entry and save Martha's for the next. A 'meeting' took place yesterday (see next entry) and in it Iraqi 'leaders' decided that they would "release an estimated 1,700 prisoners who are being detained without specific charges." Whether they will release them or not remains to be seen but the talking points the puppet wants in the press today are the oil law (next entry) and the release of prisoner's held without charges. The Iraqi Accordance Front is maintains that this "was just one of 11 demands" and that they "left the government and we are not going back unless they meet all of the demands."


And Brendan notes Workers World's "The Pentagon's problem:"

The failed and failing occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan are bringing the U.S. military's basic problem to a boiling point. Such a boiling over can affect the Pentagon's role for decades, despite its overwhelming advantage in strategic warfare and air power.
Warfare still requires humans. This is the root of the Pentagon's problem.
The resistance movements in Iraq and Afghanistan continue to attract people who are willing to fight and ready to die to liberate their countries from the U.S. occupation. Most of the U.S. soldiers and marines, on the other hand, only grudgingly and wearily follow their orders to fight a war they see more and more for the crime it is, a crime against the Iraqi and Afghan people, and a crime against themselves.
A sign of the growing despair among U.S. forces is that troop suicides reached a high point for the last 26 years in 2006, and that the rate was growing for those troops now stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The combination of longer tours in Iraq--now at 15 months--and the knowledge that the war had lost the support of the U.S. population drove the U.S. troops not just to despair but to unprecedented expressions of dissent. An opinion piece in the Sunday New York Times written by seven enlisted soldiers in the 82nd Airborne Division offered its own analysis of the war that differed entirely with the chain of command, up to the president, and called on the U.S. to get out of Iraq.
Those committed to ending the occupations of those countries can only applaud the recent decision of the Iraq Veterans Against the War to actively support war resisters. The IVAW's choice of a 2003 anti-war hero--resister Staff Sgt. Camilo Mejia--as chair of the IVAW board underlines that step toward promoting active-duty resistance.
Add to this the Pentagon's difficulty in attracting new cannon fodder. The African-American community's near 100-percent rejection of the war has driven the enlistment of new Black recruits to a low point. In Puerto Rico, a popular movement has been preventing U.S. military recruiters from luring high-school students.
As a result, the U.S. areas providing most new "volunteers" are poor rural towns and small cities, where even recruitment bonuses of $20,000 and a $3.2 billion recruitment campaign were barely keeping the numbers on target.
Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute--Bush's "war czar"-- raised one solution for the recruiting problem in a recent radio interview. Lute spoke of reinstating military conscription of U.S. youth: the draft. Even the Bush administration, which has arrogantly stonewalled the growing mass opposition to the war in Iraq, fears a draft and has denied it will happen--up to now. It fears a draft might turn 40 million U.S. youth from passive avoiders of imperialist war to impassioned political activists against it.
The troops have moved from compliance to demoralization to despair to dissent. They are moving toward military resistance. Those troops who resist deserve the unstinting support of the anti-war movement. The Pentagon's problem is an opportunity for humanity.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Articles copyright 1995-2007 Workers World. Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.
Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Email: ww@workers.org
Subscribe wwnews-subscribe@workersworld.net
Support independent news http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php

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

mcclatchy newspapers
the washington post

Desperate to shore up support for continuing his unpopular war on Iraq, George W. Bush drew an analogy with Vietnam when he addressed the Veterans of Foreign Wars. "The price of America's withdrawal [from Vietnam] was paid by millions of innocent citizens," Bush declared. But he overlooked the four million Indochinese and 58,000 American soldiers who paid the ultimate price for that imperial war. And the myriad Vietnamese and Americans who continue to suffer the devastating effects of the defoliant Agent Orange the U.S. forces dropped on Vietnam. The 10 years it took to end our war there claimed untold numbers of lives.
Bush cited the "killing fields," referring to the more than one million Cambodians who died after we pulled out of Vietnam. He failed to mention that if Richard Nixon had ended the war by 1969, as the antiwar movement was demanding, the war wouldn't have extended into Cambodia. Secret U.S. carpet bombing of Cambodia destroyed that country, enabling Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge to come to power. Nixon, too, had warned of a bloodbath in Vietnam to justify continuing his war.
Contrary to the picture Bush painted, Vietnam is a unified, stable country that doesn't threaten the region; it has become a trading partner of the United States.
In his desperation to rationalize the death and destruction he is wreaking in Iraq, Bush credited the United States with the great progress South Korea and Japan have made. He didn't say that the people of North and South Korea seek to reunify their country but the United States stands in the way. And Bush neglected to add that his government is pressuring Japan to repeal Article 9 of its Peace Constitution which now forbids the aggressive use of military force.
George Bush also reiterated that Iraq is "the central front" of the war on terror. But for his invasion, war and occupation of Iraq, however, al Qaeda wouldn't be there.

The above is from "Turning Iraq Into Vietnam"(Common Dreams) by National Lawyers Guild president Marjorie Cohn and Mike's the one who caught that. Bully Boy's illegal war got a little bit of truth (slowly) from the mainstream press and it was time to spin yet again. The US fatalities were coming in at 100 and more a month, the Democrats learned that (suprise, suprise) you can't con the people and they're not going to forget why they voted you into office in less than a year's time. Voters were angry and demanding the Democratic Party provide something other than 'symoblism,' the illegal war (which they bought into by funding it this year) was, like Bully Boy's legacy, in the toilet. So it was time to insist everyone wait for the September report and use that bought-with-blood time to try a new rollout. Bully Boy's back to selling the fear. So he lies about the realities of Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos and really did avoid getting called out by many. (Check what others have elected to write about since Bully Boy gave that lying, dishonest, historically inaccurate speech.)

And the Dems will go along. Some will stand up, but some have been for the illegal war all along even if they made a few public statements that were seen as 'strong.' Dianne Feinstein's husband certainly learned how rich one could get off an illegal war. From Peter Byrne's "Feinstein Resigns" (MetroNews):

SEN. Dianne Feinstein has resigned from the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee. As previously and extensively reviewed in these pages, Feinstein was chairperson and ranking member of MILCON for six years, during which time she had a conflict of interest due to her husband Richard C. Blum's ownership of two major defense contractors, who were awarded billions of dollars for military construction projects approved by Feinstein.
As MILCON leader, Feinstein relished the details of military construction, even micromanaging one project at the level of its sewer design. She regularly took junkets to military bases around the world to inspect construction projects, some of which were contracted to her husband's companies, Perini Corp. and URS Corp. Perhaps she resigned from MILCON because she could not take the heat generated by Metro's expose of her ethics (which was partially funded by the Investigative Fund of the Nation Institute). Or was her work on the subcommittee finished because Blum divested ownership of his military construction and advanced weapons manufacturing firms in late 2005?

Did you catch that, by the way? The Nation has seen fit to fret over Hillary Clinton's potential problems with female voters. But the non-journalistic magazine that would boast in print of 'dozens' of photos of abuse didn't bother to report on DiFi's war profits. And you have to wonder if they ever will or if they exist at this point for any reason other than to create a make-work project that brings in a lot of dollars? It should have been a cover story in the magazine. It wasn't. That's because war is big bucks and Mia notes Norman Solomon's "How to Survive at the Pentagon on $2 Billion a Day" (CounterPunch):

The USA's military spending is now close to $2 billion a day. This fall, the country will begin its seventh year of continuous war, with no end in sight. On the horizon is the very real threat of a massive air assault on Iran. And few in Congress seem willing or able to articulate a rejection of the warfare state.
While the Bush-Cheney administration is the most dangerous of our lifetimes -- and ousting Republicans from the White House is imperative -- such truths are apt to smooth the way for progressive evasions. We hear that "the people must take back the government," but how can "the people" take back what they never really had? And when rhetoric calls for "returning to a foreign policy based on human rights and democracy," we're encouraged to be nostalgic for good old days that never existed.
The warfare state didn't suddenly arrive in 2001, and it won't disappear when the current lunatic in the Oval Office moves on.

No, it won't. And you only have to look at Congress' refusal to end the illegal war to grasp that.

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 3703. Tonight? 3728 with 70 for the month thus far. Iraqis? Just Foreign Policy lists the death toll at 1,019,627.

Reuters reports today saw the US drop bombs (from the air -- this is the air war) on a home and the result were the deaths of 5 children and 2 women, one woman and six people (three children included in the wounded) were shot dead in Baghdad, anoter woman ("female shepherd") was killed in Kirkuk by a roadside bombing. Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports "an American patrol opened fire (a machine gun)" in Baghdad and at least one person died while six more were wounded, three police officers were wounded in an attack in Baghdad, a Baghdad mortar attack on Baghdad University left "a caravan inside the campus," a second Baghdad mortar attack claimed the life of 1 child and left two people wounded, 11 corpses were discovered today in Baghdad and: "The spokesman of Kurdistan's forces guards and the deputy of the Peshmerga minister, Jabbar Yaour, said that 'two American helicopters and two plane fighters bombed early Sunday morning two locations of emergency police of Kurdistan region of about 500 meters of Qara Taba village (70 kilometers north of Baquba, which is the capital of Diyala province) killing four policemen and injuring eight others . Also two police cars were destroyed. Also, Yaour said that 'Kurdish police are in north Diyala to keep peace and fight terrorism in the area with the knowledge and approval of the collation troops and central government and the bombing was by mistake'."

Their Parliament (like the US Congress) is out of session until September 4th. Their puppet? From Lelia Fadel's "Iraqi prime minister's isolation growing" (McClatchy Newspapers):

Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki, harshly criticized by Washington politicians last week for failing to bring about reconciliation among Iraq's political and ethnic factions, is increasingly isolated among his own countrymen as well.
He has lost the Shiite Muslim power base that brought him to power. Analysts say his support among Kurds could easily vanish, too, if the Kurds receive the go-ahead from the Bush administration. Nearly half of his cabinet ministers have resigned their posts or are refusing to participate in cabinet meetings.
Many say he is on his last legs as prime minister.
"He has to resign," said Salim Abdullah, a leading member of the Iraqi Accordance Front, the Sunni alliance that officially withdrew its ministers from the government earlier this month. "We have nothing against Maliki as a person but there are reasons he failed. His advisors are yes men and he doesn't have the authority to do anything."

Pru gets the last highlight, Great Britain's Socialist Worker's "Defeated in Iraq:"

And it's a lie to say Britain can win in Afghanistan
The cat is finally out of the bag. Military commanders, politicians and newspaper headlines all now admit that Britain has lost the war in the south of Iraq.
"Run Out Of Town" is how the Financial Times described the British army's decision to pull out of the centre of Basra to a fortress outside the city.
Soldiers are under constant mortar fire and their armoured vehicles are being hit by explosive devices. Foot soldiers now have to accompany the vehicles -- and they in turn become vulnerable to small arms fire.
The only reason that British troops remain in Iraq is that Gordon Brown promised George Bush that Britain would not pull out completely before the US did.
Yet the army commanders and politicians who now admit that British troops should be pulled out of Iraq argue that they should be sent into Afghanistan instead.
Afghanistan is a "winnable war", they say -- but this another lie from the warmongers. The conflict in Afghanistan gets bloodier by the day -- more than 700 British soldiers serving on Afghanistan's battlefields have required treatment since April.
More intense
Defence secretary Des Browne claims British forces have reached a "turning point" and are now stabilising Afghanistan. But this assessment simply ignores the fighting that rages throughout the country.
Jon Hill is a soldier with the Worcestershire and Sherwood Foresters regiment. He served in Iraq three times -- but says Afghanistan's war is "much more intense".
An army officer told the Daily Mail this week, "The West's dirty little secret is that we don't have enough infantry to hold the ground. It's now very likely that the numbers freed up from Iraq will be soaked up in Afghanistan."
Six years after the US declared "victory" in Afghanistan, the country remains one of the poorest on earth.Thousands of civilians have been killed by occupying forces, fuelling popular support for the resistance.
Extra troops are not the solution to the chaos. This strategy was tried in Iraq with Bush's "surge" -- and it failed.
War and occupation have brought disaster to both countries. We need to withdraw the troops from Iraq immediately -- and withdraw them immediately from Afghanistan too.
The following should be read alongside this article: » Britain's failing presence in Iraq and Afghanistan
© Copyright Socialist Worker (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original and leave this notice in place.
If you found this article useful please help us maintain SW by » making a donation.

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


iraq
and the war drags on
donovan
marjorie cohn
the national lawyers guild
norman solomon
the socialist worker

First, a few points. Ruth doesn't have a report this week. She phoned Saturday afternoon and mentioned she was planning on focusing on GreenStone Media to which I replied, "Great, we can link to it in the piece for Third." She then noted that she'd like to take part in that piece and, I'm sorry, I'm not going to let her miss out on all the sleep (I've been up since 6:00 am Saturday morning). I told her to forget the report and that we'd love her help at The Third Estate Sunday Review. Isaiah called Saturday around midnight (his time) because he'd just noticed that he was out of drawing paper. I told him not to run out and get any, that we could run his comic on Sunday. So anyone upset about either should be aware that the blame goes to me.

With that out of the way, let's move quickly to the New York Times. On first glance, it can be disappointing. There's no round up of the violence in Iraq yesterday. What it does offer is a front page article by Sheryl Gay Stolberg and Damien Cave entitled "Hear a General, Hug a Sheik: Congress Does the Iraq Circuit." This is a really strong article. The focus is on the attempts to woo Congress to support the continued illegal war. (If their past record can be any guide, no arm twisting will be required.) Congress is taking trips to Iraq and, as the reporters note, it leads to a lot of "'how I spent my summer vacation' sameness" with some, such as House Rep Peter Roskam doing a conference call from Baghdad with 6,000 constituents.

They note that the Congressional trips have led US House Rep Brian Baird to support the continued, illegal war. Baird is House Rep Crazy to Senator Crazy (McCain) because he tells the reporters how great it was to be able to speak with the mayor of Yusufiya and two sheiks and be there as they "embraced us in front of everybody out on the street". Though the reporters don't note whether Baird was panting heavy and had a wet spot on the front pants, they do quote House Rep Crazy explaining he had his "flack jacket on, and your Kevlar helment and you're surrounding by guys with automatic weapons as you're standing there, talking to the mayor." Yeah, just your typical no-security visit, right? Baird's not the 'anti-war' voice he's repeatedly portrayed as. He slimed Barabara Lee (without naming her) in a 2006 press release. He's a Blue Dog who repeatedly votes Republican although he is in name a Democrat (link goes to Washington Post voting record for Baird). He did not change his mind on Iraq due to a recent August trip and his voting record bears that out (despite what the press says). He voted for HR 2206 which was funding for the illegal war without timetables (May 24th and his position was the same as the GOP). He was one of 86 Dems voting for it (140 voted against it) and 194 Republicans also voted for it. (11 didn't vote for anyone doing math.) On HR 553 which (Robert Gates should begin reducing the number of US forces in Iraq) the GOP voted no and so did he, on July 12, 2007. HR 601 and HR 3159 had to do with mandating downtime for troops between deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan -- he was rone of 3 Democrats to vote with the Republican minority on the former and one of 12 Democrats to vote with the Republican minority on the latter. So let's stop calling him an "anti-war" Rep because he's nothing of the sort. These votes were all before NPR reported (August 21st) on Baird's trip "last week" to Iraq that the press keeps telling you changed his mind. His voting record demonstrates he changed his mind before that trip. It's a nice little spin and what would Congress be without it's Big Liars?

He voted against the illegal war before it started (many say that vote required UN authorization -- many say that's a naive take on it). He's voted with Republicans on the illegal war repeatedly. He grasps the p.r. in playing it like he visited Iraq and then changed his mind (a lot of people learned to pull the Lieberman Turncoat on). But the reality is that he is not "anti-war" and that he has repeatedly voted with Republicans (and against the Democratic majority) on the issue of Iraq.


You also learn what Gen. David Petraeues recently served Congressional visitors: asparagus soup and lobster tortellini. Isn't that just lovely? While troops exist on MRIs and really bad fast food, while Iraqis are malnutritioned, Petraeus dines on lobster and asparagus. Congressional visitors as well. How sweet that must be. Of course, not so sweet to the tax payers because that's who bought that meal. They didn't get to eat it, they just paid for it.

New content at The Third Estate Sunday Review:

Truest statement of the week
Truest statement of the week II
A Note to Our Readers
Editorial: IVAW supports war resisters, do you?
TV: Fox tried to tell news 'jokes', no one laughed...
Thoughts on GreenStone Media and the real lesson
Bully Boy lies about Vietnam -- who calls him out?...
FAIR late to the party and a little lost
Obama sucks up again
Highlights
Supermarket check out?

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

ruths report
the world today just nuts
the new york times
sheryl gay stolberg
damien cave
the third estate sunday review

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad car bombing that claimed 6 lives (thirty wounded) and 10 corpses discovered the capital and drops back to yesterday to note an Iraqi soldier was shot dead in Kirkuk and Joseph Abed Ibrahemm was also shot dead in Kirkuk which was also the setting for the kidnapping of an Iraqi soldier. Reuters updates the number killed in the Baghdad car bombing to 7 (the number wounded remains the same) and notes a ban in the capital on motorcyles, carts and bicycles, while dropping back to yesterday to note an Iraqi soldier was shot dead in Baghdad yesterday and a civilian was shot dead in Najaf.
On the ban, CNN reports: "The Interior Ministry said that as of 6 p.m. (10 a.m. ET) and until further notice, Iraq's capital will be under the ban. The faithful are headed to Karbala to commemorate Sha'abaniya, the birthday of the Mehdi, the 12th imam revered by Shiites." They also note a 'foreign fighter' (not from the 'coalition') has been arrested in Iraq and, yet again, it's not an Iranian (he's Egyptian).

Carlos notes "Patience has limits" (Inside Iraq, McClatchy Newspapers' blog where Iraqi journalists blog)

Those people who were able to say no to Saddam they will be able too to say no to new tyrants.
Yes, the government must understand that Iraqi people can't be patient forever. The day will come when Iraqi people will say no again.
They can't watch daily tragedy in all of Iraq, or the sectarian fight in which governmental parties are involved and foreign influence from Saudi Arabia, Iran and Washington.
The day will come when the Iraqis will create their reality by themselves.

McClatchy Newspapers has another blog from Iraq, this one by Leila Fadel, and Lynda highlights from it writing that if Bully Boy's so concerned about vocab, he should learn the word "Enaalso." From Fadel's "The Changing Language of War" (Baghdad Observer):

Two days ago an entire Sunni family was killed. The next day the Mahdi Army came back to kill a Shiite witness, he said. His family was spared, they live outside Iraq.
"Enaalso," he said in Iraqi slang. It's a new Iraqi word, a phrase used to explain being turned in by an informant to a militia and then being killed. Literally it means he was "chewed up."
It's what Iraqis now repeatedly say to explain the killings of families by militias that control their neighborhoods with fear and weapons; a word to explain the corpses that show up in the streets.


From Tina Susman's "GIs' morale dips as Iraq war drags on" (Los Angeles Times), we'll note:

In the dining hall of a U.S. Army post south of Baghdad, President Bush was on the wide-screen TV, giving a speech about the war in Iraq.
The soldiers didn't look up from their chicken and mashed potatoes.
As military and political leaders prepare to deliver a progress report on the conflict to Congress next month, many soldiers are increasingly disdainful of the happy talk that they say commanders on the ground and White House officials are using in their discussions about the war.

Steven R. Hurst (AP) reports:

Baghdad, however, still accounts for slightly more than half of all war-related killings -- the same percentage as a year ago, according to figures compiled by The Associated Press.
The tallies and trends offer a sobering snapshot after an additional 30,000 U.S. troops began campaigns in February to regain control of the Baghdad area. It also highlights one of the major themes expected in next month's Iraq progress report to Congress: some military headway, but extremist factions are far from broken.
In street-level terms, it means life for average Iraqis appears to be even more perilous and unpredictable.
The AP tracking includes Iraqi civilians, government officials, police and security forces killed in attacks such as gunfights and bombings, which are frequently blamed on Sunni suicide strikes. It also includes execution-style killings -- largely the work of Shiite death squads. The figures are considered a minimum based on AP reporting. The actual numbers are likely higher, as many killings go unreported or uncounted. Insurgent deaths are not a part of the Iraqi count.

And ". . . Brig. Gen. Richard Sherlock, deputy director for operational planning for the Pentagon's Joint Chiefs of Staff, said violence in Iraq "has continued to decline and is at the lowest level since June 2006." He offered no statistics to back his claim . . ."

Jeremy Pelofsky (Reuters) reports Bully Boy used his radio address today as a forum from which he "pleaded with Americans" to allow his illegal war to continue. Reuters also notes that Iraq's "1920 Revolution Brigade" will no longer be called "insurgents" but instead "concerned local nationals" according to US Col. David Sutherland. It's a rebranding! (For the record, 'insurgents' is only used in quotes here because the term is applied based on the US military's press releases and statements and not independently verified. For example, some reported 'insurgents' taking part in car bombings were unaware that their car had a bomb.) The New York Times? Not worth the paper it's printed on this morning. Whispers! Whispers! And more whispers! How about we all wait for the report to be delivered before we get excited about what may or may not be in it? A6 also contains the headline (on Afghanistan) "U.S. Bomb Dropped; 3 British Soldiers Die". From? The bomb the US dropped. But that's just too much information for the headline, apparently. "3 British Soldiers Die From U.S. Bomb Dropped" is reality.

Mia notes Alexander Cockburn's "Don't Carpool with Nouri al-Maliki" (CounterPunch) and, before we get to the excerpt, reminds we noted a defense of Cockburn's stand (it should also be said, I had no problem with it personally so that the defender -- whose name I'm blanking on, sorry -- isn't standing alone) from Dissident Voices a few week back. It was a reply to Phyllis Bennis' response to Cockburn. We don't link to the site Bennis was posted at but Cockburn includes her comments in the second half of the piece if you haven't read them (I haven't, I'll do so after I've finished this entry). The first section is addressing the potential realities awaiting al-Maliki:

The final grim news for al-Maliki came on Wednesday when President Bush affirmed confidence in the prime minister, declaring him to be a fine fellow.
Levin, Clinton and Bush all simultaneously declared that they believe the briefings of the United States military commanders in Iraq. They exult that the "surge", advocated and presided over by General David Petraeus last winter, is now working. Baghdad is more secure. Casualties are down. The sectarian groupings in Iraq have been checked. Nation-building can proceed.
None of these chirpy bulletins has anything to do with the actual situation on the ground in Iraq, where the extremely hot summer months have seen a regular annual drop in activities by Iraq's resistance groups. Even so, car bombings in Baghdad car bombings in Baghdad in July were 5 per cent higher than before the "surge" began and there has been a corresponding rise in civilian casualties from explosions. Meanwhile there are graphic reports of the extreme exhaustion of US troops, forced into multiple tours and extended time on active duty because of the overall shortage in manpower and equipment.
Nor can any silver lining be detected in the larger political military picture, in terms of erosion the Shi'a majority coalition, seriously reducing the power of Moqtada al-Sadr, or denting the Sunni resistance.
But here on the home front, Levin, Clinton and other leading Democrats are determined not to be wrong-footed by White House attacks accusing them of stabbing America's fighting men and women in the back by questioning the surge's supposed success. On an hourly basis, the right-wing radio demagogues are accusing them of just such treachery. Flag-wagging and drum-thumping are traditional at Veterans of Foreign Wars' conventions.
In a rhetorical counter-move, the Democrats emphasize the failure of Bush's man, al-Maliki, to resolve Iraq's political divisions at equal speed. Amid their rather hollow assertions of confidence in al-Maliki, Bush and the Republicans recognize that al-Maliki is expendable and can be forced out, just as his predecessor was ditched.

Mia also notes Norman Solomon's latest and we'll lead with that Sunday night. It was going to be noted Thursday night but we had to other things that had to be noted (PBS' NOW with David Brancaccio and Robert Parry's "Bush's Bogus Vietnam History Kills") and it got put on hold. The hope was to note it in yesterday's snapshot but we noted Grace Paley due to the fact that a lot of left outlets were either on vacation or playing dumb. On Paley, Stacey's working on a paper and asked about the page numbers, Paley's essay ran on pages 537-540 of Sisterhood Is Forever and the excerpt from "Why Peace Is (More Than Ever) a Feminist Issue" ran on page 539. In fact, let's quote her one more time:

Today's wars are about oil. But alternate energies exist now -- solar, wind -- for every important energy-using activity in our lives. The only human work that cannot be done without oil is war.
So men lead us to war for enough oil to continue to go to war for oil.
I'm now sure that these men can't stop themselves anymore -- even those who say they want to. There are too many interesting weapons. Besides, theirs is a habit of centuries, eons. They will not break that habit themselves.
For ourselves, for our girl and boy children, women will have to organize as we have done before -- and also as we have never done before -- to break that habit for them, once and for all.

Rachel notes these upcoming programs on WBAI:

Sunday, August 26, 11am-noon EST
THE NEXT HOUR
A panel of satirists discuss humorous impulses from inception to delivery. With Paul Krassner, Will Durst and David Dozer. Moderated by Janet Coleman.

Monday, August 27, 2-3pm EST
CAT RADIO CAFE
Actor/playwright/Fulbright scholar Dan Hoyle on "Tings Dey Happen," a one-man show on his investigations into oil politics in Nigeria; composer and jazz trombonist Craig S. Harris on the debut of "TriHarLenium: A Sound Portrait of Harlem 1976-2006" at Lincoln Center Out of Doors; and Catherine Cappelero and Andrew Rhone on their new musical "Walmart-opia," a futuristic look at a certain corporation running the world. Hosted by Janet Coleman and David Dozer.



The following community sites have updated since yesterday morning:

Rebecca's Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude;
Cedric's Cedric's Big Mix;
Kat's Kat's Korner;
Betty's Thomas Friedman is a Great Man;
Mike's Mikey Likes It!;
Elaine's Like Maria Said Paz;
Wally's The Daily Jot;
and Trina's Trina's Kitchen

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

the los angeles times
leila fadel
mcclatchy newspapers
alexander cockburn
now with david branccacio
pbs
wbai
the next hour
cat radio cafe
like maria said paz
kats korner
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
trinas kitchen
the daily jot
cedrics big mix
mikey likes it
thomas friedman is a great man

Cleland, who was defeated for the Senate in 2002 by Republican Saxby Chambliss, said Bush has a "credibility gap'' just as political leaders during the Vietnam era did, and is ``trying to sell the American people a bill of goods on the Iraq war.''
"I've seen this movie before. I know how it ends,'' Cleland, who lost both legs and his right arm in a grenade explosion in 1968, said. "I know all the PR in the world didn't change the truth on the ground in Vietnam and won't change the truth on the ground today in Iraq.''

The above is from Molly Peterson's "Former Senator Cleland Disputes Bush's Vietnam Analogy on Iraq" (Bloomberg News). Since Max Cleland was giving the Democratic radio address, look for a number of the silent to suddenly come forward next week with "I've been thinking about Bully Boy's revisionist history and . . ." pieces. But when it mattered (and before permission was granted from a Party), they were nowhere to be found.

The list of those who addressed it in real time is a small one: Matthew Rothschild, Rosa Brooks, Robert Parry, Democracy Now!, CounterPunch, OpEdNews . . .

We've noted here (many times) that when this illegal war ends, it's important not to forget what happened and it's important not to allow the right-wing to rewrite it. We've noted that a large number of the left and 'left' allowed the right-wing to do just that with Vietnam. If you're too young to remember (or have lived through) that time, you saw an echo of it this week as so many 'brave voices' avoided even commenting on the lies Bully Boy spouted about Vietnam.

You saw a conservative hack appear on Hardball saying he was Generation X (he's kind of old for Gen X -- way too old to have been in a mosh pit in the early 90s, but whatever) and they were so tired of hearing about Vietnam (the same week, FYI, that Common Dreams decided to run one of his pieces -- apparently they're not familiar with the body of his work or his attacks on Democrats in Congress as he rushed to defend -- repeatedly -- Alberto Gonzales' actions).

I'll be kind and not name the most cowardly of all (most cowardly of all in my opinion) which, in their new print edition, has an essay by Noam Chomsky which they could have posted online but didn't. Chomsky was addressing Iraq and Vietnam. The issue's been out for several weeks and if they were all too cowardly to weigh in on the lies Bully Boy repeated this week, they could have addressed the topic just by posting Chomsky's essay. They didn't.

Brenda and Marshall caught cowardice as well. They noted websites that usually promote PBS' NOW with David Brancaccio each week but took a pass this week. Their e-mails were so strong that I suggested they write something together on it. They have done that and it will run in El Spirito Sunday so check your inboxes. NOW with David Brancaccio notified about the show to the usual suspects on Wednesday. I didn't see the e-mail that came in here Wednesday and would have missed it if a friend at PBS hadn't called to curse me out. (Seriously.) Thursday night, he wanted to know why, when NOW with David Brancaccio, was addressing a topic that we say matters, I hadn't even noted it. The answer is that I've tried to work the public account by myself largely and let everyone else work the members account (due to you know who and his threats). So I was (and am) way behind in the public account. I hadn't seen the e-mail. But I said we'd note it Thursday night and in every entry that went up Friday. If you missed it, NOW with David Brancaccio should be up online now (and if it hasn't aired yet on your local PBS station, make a point to check it out).

It's really not that surprising because in Sunday's 'debate' on ABC, Democratic candidates who are media favorites backed away from the illegal war and a lot of 'independent' outlets aren't really independent, they take their cues from the Democratic Party.

So despite the fact that the illegal war is so unpopular with Americans, the 'indepenents' found something else to talk about . . . repeatedly.

The same way they've written their (rare) articles about AWOL and desertions and repeated the lies that the US military isn't interested in those who check out, that the US military has better things to do. LIE. They have investigative units paid to troll the net for info. They make calls. They do everything but the job itself. Maybe they fear they'd be shouted down or grasp that the US military really can't be seen picking up people and hauling them off. (Police actions by the US military in the US are still off limits. Though they apparently believe Canada's a free zone for them.) So they do their hunting and then call the police and, for example, this summer say, "Search these parents' home in Colorado" (Lance Hering's parents).

Thursday, Democracy Now! addressed the realities with Camilo Mejia:

JUAN GONZALEZ: And in terms of the growth of that resistance movement over the last couple of years -- obviously since you were one of the first -- how do you see that developing?

CAMILO MEJIA: I think we’ve come a long way from the time when I resisted the war. Like Amy said, I was the first public combat veteran to refuse to redeploy to Iraq. Back then, when I went public with my refusal to go back to the war, we had approximately twenty-two cases of desertion in the military. And then, by the time I got out of jail, that number was 5,500. Today, it’s over 10,000 people within the military who are refusing to go to the war in Iraq since the war started. And just to put it in perspective, that’s almost like saying like the 101st Airborne Division was wiped out by desertion or AWOL, basically people not wanting to fight the war.

AMY GOODMAN: How many?

CAMILO MEJIA: Over 10,000 people. So that's the equivalent to an Army division.

AMY GOODMAN: The Pentagon is not talking about this.

CAMILO MEJIA: No, they're not talking about it, but USA Today reported last year, I believe, early last year, 8,000 people, and it's probably a lot more, when you talk to organizations like the GI Rights Hotline, who, you know, get a number of calls from people trying to find out information about discharges and about what happens once they go AWOL, what happens once they resist to go back to the war. And their numbers are, you know, an indication that the actual number is much higher.
Also, we have some new developments in the war. We had -- a long time ago, we all heard about the company of truck drivers who refused to go out on what they considered to be a suicide mission. We also have the case of a soldier called Eli Israel, who refused to go out on combat missions while being in Iraq and was threatened by the military with court-martial. He finally got a summarized court-martial, and he’s back in the States. But this level of resistance not just, you know, coming from people who have served in Iraq and have come back and refused to go back, but now we have people on the ground in Iraq who are refusing to go out on combat missions, which I think is pretty significant.

JUAN GONZALEZ: And one of the things, it seems to me, that has happened, talking to quite a few veterans who have returned maybe or on leave, that those who go AWOL, it’s not as if the military publicizes it or actively goes after them, unless they become public, like in your case, right?

CAMILO MEJIA: Exactly, although that also has changed. We have cases of people who have not yet gone public and yet had been seized in their home. For instance, we have the case of Suzanne Swift, who was, you know, apprehended by police without even a search warrant at her mother's house, and she had not gone public at that time. And she had refused to go back to the war, because she had been subject to military sexual assault and command rape from her leadership and being forced to go back to the war with the same unit and with the same people who had attacked her.

Today, Mark Boshnack' "Man, 22, arrested as AWOL" (The Daily Star) reports Ronald R. Roach Jr. was arrested Friday morning in New York and cites BCI Inv. Kevin More:

State police were looking for Roach for two days after receiving a request from the Army to locate him, More said.
[. . . ]
More said he received assistance from troopers and Otsego deputies in searching the house, finding Roach hiding on a shelf near the ceiling. Roach's wife was home at the time, but she has not been charged, More said.
Army spokeswoman Gini Sinclair said that Roach was with the 2nd Battalion, 8th Calvary, out of Fort Hood, Texas. He went AWOL on July 25, she said.

Names are not just entered into a database that later allows routine traffic stops to ferret out those who go AWOL and desert. That is a lie, it's a known lie and has been for some time.

Bonnie was the first to note Margaret Kimberley's "White Man’s Love" (Black Agenda Report):

Politicians and pundits are outdoing themselves displaying creepy, cult-like admiration for the white Republican men running for president. The old narrative recently brought out of the closet says that only big, manly white men should run America. Former Senator turned actor Fred Thompson has not officially declared himself a candidate for the Republican nomination, but the man-crushes have been flying in his direction at a fast and furious pace.
"We need a president of the United States after the 2008 election who will rise above the partisan challenges ... That person is 6 foot 6. He has a commanding voice. He has a commanding presence. He makes people feel secure. He makes us feel confident."
So says Republican Congressman Zack Wamp. He thinks we need a big white man in charge.
When President Bush landed a plane on the deck of the USS Lincoln to proclaim "Mission Accomplished," MSNBC's Chris Matthews could barely contain himself. "We're proud of our president. Americans love having a guy as president, a guy who has a little swagger, who's physical...." Matthews is so in love with his fellow white guys that he even likes the way they smell:
"Can you smell the English leather on this guy (Thompson), the Aqua Velva, the sort of mature man's shaving cream, or whatever, you know, after he shaved? Do you smell that sort of -- a little bit of cigar smoke?"

Chris Matthews either needs to leave his wife or stop sniffing men. The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

now with david branccaciopbs
iraq
camilo mejia
democracy now
amy goodman
juan gonzalez
mark boshnack
margaret kimberley