"The soldiers used to talk about the freedom in America and how great life was there, but they used to make jokes about gays," Bashar told DNA. "The Americans who patrolled the streets threw a bottle of water at my friend and I because we were gay. They were driving by in their Humvees, and they had these windows where they could look out from, and I could see that they were laughing at us and calling us f*gs. They'd said that when they came here they would change things -- they would liberate us -- and here they were disrespecting us."
"Nevertheless," Bashar continued, "I began working inside the Green Zone as a translator for the American military police, who were teaching the Iraqi police how to use weapons. They gave me a hard time. They were very negative people. One day, my American friend told me, 'All the people talk about you.' I said, 'Why? I do a good job.' He said, 'They are not open-minded people. They are not predisposed to accept gay people teaching the police."
So, Bashar recounted to the Australian journalist, "I went to see the chief of the American company who had hired the translators to clarify the situation, but he was an asshole. He just looked me up and down and said, 'You are a disease. A piece of s**t. We have no place for people like you. We have enough fa**ots f**king each other in San Francisco.'"
Bashar subsequently went to work translating for other army contingents at the Camp Delta base in southern Iraq, where one night the taxi he was traveling in was stopped by five militiamen loyal to Muqtada al-Sadr, the fundamentalist extremist cleric who has egged on his own anti-gay death squads.
"They put a cape over my face and drove me somewhere," Bashar told DNA, "and when we got there, they took off my clothes and started beating me. They kept me naked for three days. I cried for hours. I couldn't sleep. They didn't give me any food or water. During the beatings I just tuned out and kept thinking of the lyrics of Madonna songs - especially the 'Erotica' album - and that gave me the courage to go through what they did to me.
"They beat me every two or three hours for 10 minutes at a time. They pissed on me many times. I said, 'Please God, I want to die. I come from a good family.' They said I was gay and that they had orders to kill gays and lesbians wherever they found them. Then they said they wanted to f**k me. I refused and they gang-raped me. There were ten of them, and they came in the room one after the other. One of them was so drunk that he threw up on me... This went on for 12 days. "
Bashar was eventually released, naked, to an interrogator ordered to murder him. But knowing Bashar's family, the interrogator instead beat him relentlessly and then took a photograph of his bloodied face to make it seem as if he had killed him.
"I told one of the Americans in charge of security inside the base what had really happened to me," Bashar recounted to the Australian journalist, "and that I hadn't been able to sleep or eat very well since, but he just laughed at me. He said, 'You're lucky to have had ten d**ks in 12 days.'"
Bashar expressed his disillusionment with the US occupier. "I was a fool back in 2003," he told DNA. "I stood in the street and applauded the American troops when they entered Baghdad. But America is living in denial about what it has done to our country...
"You think you've done such a great thing 'liberating' us from Saddam, but where is the freedom for gay men and women? Sure, we are free - free to live in hiding, free to run for our lives, and free to die for the 'crime' of being gay. You in the West do not think about your freedom. It's nothing to you. But there is a price to be paid for freedom."
And Bashar ultimately paid that price in a hail of machine gun bullets.

The above is from Doug Ireland's "Key Gay Leader Slain in Iraq" (Gay City News) and it was published last month. What's being described isn't uncommon in Iraq.

However, it is illuminating. Not only are Iraqi LGBTs targeted by extremist thugs from their own country, they're also targeted by US service members. Complain, be told you're lucky you were gang-raped. Complain, be dismissed. These crimes take place because they are tolerated and not just by Iraqis but by the occupying power which is supposed to be on Iraqi soil to protect the people. But that's not what happens. It's a real shame the US elected to install thugs of the Shi'ite persuasion and then train thugs from the Sunni pool. It's a damn shame that the US stood around saying, "What's with the brain drain? Why are these people leaving?"

They were leaving because it wasn't safe and it wasn't safe because the White House wasn't attempting to create safety. If Iraq hadn't had the brain drain, it would be a lot less easy to attempt to push them around. And an educated class would have been far less dependent upon US handlers for 'training.'

UK Gay News quoted Peter Tatchell on the assassination of Bashar:

This morning, I received news from Iraq that the coordinator of Iraqi LGBT in Baghdad, Bashar, aged 27, a university student, has been assassinated in a barber shop.
Militias burst in and sprayed his body with bullets at point blank range.
He was the organiser of the safe houses for gays and lesbians in Baghdad. His efforts saved the lives of dozens of people.
Bashar was a kind, generous and extremely brave young man -- a true hero who put his life on the line to save the lives of others.
My thoughts go out to his loved ones and to the other members of Iraqi LGBT.
Their courage is an inspiration to all people everywhere fighting against injustice.
Bashir was far from the first one targeted and not even the first for 2008. Tatchell wrote about for the Guardian of London in "Sexual cleansing in Iraq:"

The "improved" security situation in Iraq is not benefiting all Iraqis, especially not those who are gay. Islamist death squads are engaged in a homophobic killing spree with the active encouragement of leading Muslim clerics, such as Moqtada al-Sadr, as Newsweek recently revealed.
One of these clerics, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, issued a fatwa urging the killing of lesbians and gays in the "most severe way possible".
The short film, Queer Fear -- Gay Life, Gay Death in Iraq, produced by David Grey for Village Film, documents the tragic fates of a several individual gay Iraqis. You can view it here. Watch and weep. It is a truly poignant and moving documentary about the terrorisation and murder of Iraqi lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.
Since this film was made, the killings have continued and, many say, got worse. For gay Iraqis there is little evidence of the transition to democracy. They don't experience any newfound respect for human rights. Life for them is even worse than under the tyrant Saddam Hussein.

At the end of July, Frederik Pleitgen, Mohammed Tawfeeq and Wayne Drash's "Gays in Iraq terrorized by threats, rape, murder" (CNN) reported:


Kamal was just 16 when gunmen snatched him off the streets of Baghdad, stuffed him in the trunk of a car and whisked him away to a house. But the real terror was about to begin.
The men realized he was gay, Kamal said, when he took his shirt off and they saw that his chest was shaved.
"They told me to take off my clothes to rape me or they would kill me immediately. This moment was the worst moment in my life," he said, weeping as he spoke of the 2005 ordeal.
"I was watching them taking off their clothes, preparing to rape me. I did not know what to do, so I started shouting loudly, 'Please do not do that! I will ask my family to give you whatever you want.' " Watch the tormented life of gays in Iraq »
His pleas went unheeded. "The other two kidnappers took off my clothes by force, and, at that time, I saw them as three dirty animals trying to tear my body apart."
He was held for 15 days, released only after his family paid a $1,500 ransom. He was raped every day. Only once, he said, was he allowed to talk to his family during captivity. "I told my family that I was beaten by them, but I did not dare to tell my family that I was raped by them. I could not say it, it's too much shame."

Iraqi LGBT is an organization working to improve conditions for Iraq's gay community. Let's jump back to the reaction Bashir recevied from the US military. That attitude can be stopped but it has to come from the top. And what has come from the top has been homophobia. The same as what Barack's offered whether putting homophobes onstage in his primary campaign and in his general election campaign and letting them 'preach' their homophobia or whether it is surrounding himself with homophobes as advisers and supporters. Saturday's "Robin Morgan's homophobic candidate" noted Barack's favorite t-bagger Wlliam McPeak and his insulting homophobic remarks that he should have been held accountable for but instead got waived on through. ("If you want to do something like racial integration or the integration of openly homosexual soldiers, sailors and marines, airmen, the service leadership will have to get ahead of it. Service leadership will have to go to the gay and lesbian annual ball and lead the first dance. I've spoken many, many times at black history week and am proud to do it. . . . But I couldn't see how I could become an advocate for open homosexuality in Air Force combat units. I don't see how people can do it today.") And of course there's always Collie Powell, a major homophobe.
James Kirchick's "Powell's Cautionary Tale" (The Atlantic) provides some background on Collie:

But there is something else that should give those liberals pause: Powell's record on a signature civil rights issue of the age has been nothing short of disgraceful. Powell did more than any uniformed officer to undermine the attempt by President Clinton to allow openly gay people to serve in the military, an explicit promise Clinton made in his presidential campaign. This is a baleful, not to mention dangerous (given the number of gay linguists who have been booted from the uniformed services) policy that the president could, and ought to, have changed by executive order. (The military, seemingly unbeknownst to Powell throughout his decades of government service, operates under civilian control.) But for various reasons (his draft-dodging past chief among them) Clinton refused to stand up to the uniformed officers under his command.
And no officer took better advantage of Clinton's spinelessness than Powell. At one point, he even threatened to resign if Clinton pressed the issue further than the compromise "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy--a policy that soon resulted in the discharge of even more gay soldiers than under the previous protocol. At the time, Powell sought to downplay any comparison between the racial integration of the military and the potential inclusion of open homosexuals, writing in a letter to congresswoman Pat Schroeder that "skin color is a benign, non-behavioral characteristic. Sexual orientation is perhaps the most profound of human behavioral characteristics." That Powell, the highest achieving beneficiary of Harry Truman's decision to unilaterally desegregate the military, would be the individual most responsible for preventing the similar integration of gays is to his everlasting shame.
To be sure, Powell has since softened his stance on the issue. In 2007 he told Tim Russert that his "own judgment is that gays and lesbians should be allowed to have maximum access to all aspects of society," though he did not go so far as to say that the ban should be lifted. Powell's newfound, post-government (read: professionally convenient and less politically consequential) enlightenment on this issue, more than 12,500 unnecessary honorable discharges later, does not absolve him of his original impetuosity nor the weakening effect its had on the caliber of the nation's armed forces.

"Maximum access"? Doesn't sound like equality, does it. A point The Atlantic leaves out is that while Powell's slight shift of positions too late to do any good, it's also true that Collie now depends on coporate monies and bookings and homophobia so upfront rarely flies in corporate America these days. It's not good for the image so if Collie wants to cash in, he knows he has to tone it down. These are the type of people who back Barack, McPeak and Powell. And they are the ones who have institutionalized homophobia in the military and done everything they can to make sure it remains there.

It's over, I'm done writing songs about love
There's a war going on
So I'm holding my gun with a strap and a glove
And I'm writing a song about war
And it goes
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Na na na na na na na
I hate the war
Oh oh oh oh
-- "I Hate The War" (written by Greg Goldberg, on The Ballet's Mattachine!)

Last Thursday, ICCC's number of US troops killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war was 4189. Tonight? 4191. Just Foreign Policy lists 1,284,105 finally up from weeks and weeks at 1,273,378.

Off topic for a community note. Stan has started his own site, Oh Boy It Never Ends.

And back to the topic of this entry, we'll close with Leslie Feinberg's "New York Times admits: 'Life better for gay & lesbian Iraqis under Hussein' Lavender & red, part 119" (Workers World, January 27, 2008 ):

The New York Times--an imperialist mouthpiece--admitted in a mid-December article that social life was better for those who it described as "gay and lesbian Iraqis" under the secular government of Saddam Hussein. The Times also confirmed that sanctions, war and occupation crushed that social progress and ushered in death-squad terror.
The Dec. 18 article was a political feature, not based on breaking news. The original headline summed up: "Gays Living in Shadows of New Iraq: Violence Replaces Tacit Acceptance."
Times journalist Cara Buckley interviewed Iraqis who she described as gay. She reported, "And, until the [U.S.] American invasion, they said, Iraqi society had quietly accepted them."
Buckley said those Iraqis she interviewed offered this view of life before sanctions and war: "For a brief, exhilarating time, from the mid-1980s until the early 1990s, they say, gay night life flourished in Iraq. Whereas neighboring Iran turned inward after its Islamic revolution in 1979, Baghdad allowed a measure of liberation after the end of the Iran-Iraq war."
The New York Times newspaper--"all the news that's fit to print" --doesn't see fit to mention that U.S. imperialism instigated the Iran-Iraq war. The Reagan administration armed both sides. Instead, the article continues to attempt to pit the two oil-rich countries against each other.
At the end of the Iran-Iraq war in 1988, Buckley continued, "Abu Nuwas Boulevard, which hugs the Tigris River opposite what is now the Green Zone, became a promenade known for cruising. Discos opened in the city’s best hotels, the Ishtar Sheraton, the Palestine and Saddam Hussein's prized Al-Rasheed Hotel becoming magnets for gay men. Young men with rouged cheeks and glossed lips paraded the streets of Mansour, an affluent neighborhood in Baghdad."
The Times quotes Ali Hili, who left Iraq in 2000 and is now living in London, where he heads the organization Iraqi LGBT-UK. Hili stressed that before the U.S. war and sanctions, "There were so many guys, from Kuwait, from Saudi Arabia, guys in the street with makeup," Hili recalled. "Up until 1991, there was sexual freedom. It was a revolutionary time."
Buckley noted, "Then came the Persian Gulf War, and afterward Saddam Hussein put an end to nightclubs. Iraq staggered under the yoke of economic sanctions."
The late Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, a bourgeois nationalist, reportedly added a religious law that made anal intercourse, prostitution, rape and incest a capital offense in 2001. The edict came after almost a decade of economic strangulation, as the U.S. pressed for shock-and-awe military invasion.
Buckley asked two of the Iraqis she interviewed what life was like in Iraq for them and acquaintances after the 2001 law was written. She reported, "While anti-gay laws were increasingly enforced, Mohammed and Mr. Hili said they still felt safe. Homosexuality seemed accepted, as long as it was practiced in private. And even when it was not tolerated, prison time could be evaded with a well-placed bribe."
The admission by the New York Times that social attitudes towards male-male or female-female sexuality were freer under the secular Ba'athist government of Saddam Hussein is particularly shocking after U.S. finance capital has enforced 12 years of economic warfare, unleashed two blitzkrieg wars and continues to be the military occupation force against the entire population of Iraq based in part on the Big Lie.
Prewar media agitation about a virtual fascist dictatorship for "gays" in Iraq targeted newspapers aimed at lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans audiences in the U.S. and Britain, and helped sell the war as "liberation."
But imperialism, and colonialism before it, has never brought liberation to the Middle East. Just the opposite is true. For example, the Times neglected to mention that British finance capital outlawed "sodomy" in Iraq--almost a century ago.
For the purposes of the Dec. 18 New York Times feature, however, Iraqi history begins with the mid-1980s, and "gay" and "lesbian" are fixed categories, identical to Western concepts, and transcend economic and social relations, cultures and eras.
Translating sex & love
More than a century ago, as the historical sun rose on capitalist economic and accompanying military expansion, Europeans also judged and condemned, speculated and sensationalized, categorized and theorized regarding Arab sexualities, particularly about expressions of love between adult men and adolescent males.
Scholar and author Khaled El-Rouayheb pointed out, "The tendency is very much in evidence already in Sir Richard Burton’s remarks on 'Pederasty' in the 'Terminal Essay' to his translation of The Arabian Nights in 1886. Writing before the term 'homosexuality' was introduced into the English language, Burton still assumed that he was faced with one phenomenon, 'pederasty,' which he claimed was widespread in the Islamic world and regarded as at worse a peccadillo."
El-Rouayheb is the author of a meticulously researched book, entitled "Before Homosexuality in the Arab-Islamic World., 1500-1800," that was published by the University of Chicago Press in 2005.
Khaled El-Rouayheb cautioned, "The assumption that it is unproblematic to speak of either tolerance or intolerance of homosexuality in the pre-modern Middle East, would seem to derive from the assumption that homosexuality is a self-evident fact about the human world to which a particular culture reacts with a certain degree of tolerance or repression.
"From this perspective," he continued, "writing the history of homosexuality is seen as analogous to writing, say, the history of women. One assumes that the concept 'homosexual,' like the concept 'woman,' is shared across historical periods, and that what varies and may be investigated historically is merely the changing cultural (popular, scientific, legal, etc.) attitude toward such people."
El-Rouayheb concluded, "The concept of male homosexuality did not exist in the Arab-Islamic Middle East in the early Ottoman period. There was simply no native concept that was applicable to all and only those men who were sexually attracted to members of their own sex, rather than to women."
Next: British outlawed 'sodomy' in Iraq.
E-mail: lfeinberg@workers.org
Articles copyright 1995-2008 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.

iraq
i hate the war
the ballet
doug ireland
frederik pleitgen
mohammed tawfeeq
wayne drash
peter tatchell
james kirchick
leslie feinberg
oh boy it never ends

Yesterday (late) the US military announced: "A Multi-National Division – Center Soldier died of non-combat related causes Nov. 5." That brings the total number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 4191. We'll come back to fatalities in a minute. In this morning's Washington Post, Ann Scott Tyson's "Combat Brigade Is Cut 6 Weeks Early in Iraq" runs on A10 and informs that former top US commander in Iraq and now head of Centcom Gen David Petraeus is cutting the brigade numbers down to fourteen from fifteen and doing so "as a result of dramatically lower violence there, Pentagon officials said yesterday. . . . Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has stated that further increases in U.S. troop levels in Afghanistan -- where American commanders say they need three more brigades and thousands of support forces to combat a growing insurgency -- will be contingent upon further withdrawals from Iraq next year."

Tyson reports the decision was made on reduced violence (which does not appear to include the attacks on Iraqi Christians last month) and deaths of US service members which the paper lists as 12 for October ("Twelve American service members died last month, including six from noncombat causes."). That is wrong. The number is fourteen. From ICCC:

29-Oct-2008	2	| US: 2 | UK: 0 | Other: 0
	US	Private 1st Class Bradley S. Coleman	Qayyarah Airfield - Ninawa	Non-hostile
	US	Sergeant Scott J. Metcalf	Mosul (died in Balad) - Ninawa	Non-hostile
24-Oct-2008	1	| US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 0
	US	Private 1st Class Cody J. Eggleston	National Naval Medical Center, Bethesda	Hostile - hostile fire - indirect fire
23-Oct-2008	1	| US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 0
	US	Staff Sergeant Brian P. Hause	Balad Air Base - Salah Ad Din	Non-hostile - medical
20-Oct-2008	1	| US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 0
	US	Lance Corporal Stacy A. Dryden	Al Asad - Anbar	Non-hostile
16-Oct-2008	1	| US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 0
	US	Private 1st Class Heath K. Pickard	Ba'qubah - Diyala	Hostile - hostile fire - indirect fire
15-Oct-2008	1	| US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 0
	US	Specialist Justin A. Saint	Baghdad	Non-hostile
14-Oct-2008	1	| US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 0
	US	Private 1st Class Christopher A. McCraw	Baghdad (Nasar Wa Salam)	Hostile - hostile fire - small arms fire
12-Oct-2008	1	| US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 0
	US	Specialist Geoffrey G. Johnson	Baghdad	Non-hostile
11-Oct-2008	1	| US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 0
	US	Corporal Reuben M. Fernandez III	Majar Al Kabir (Amara) - Maysan	Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack
07-Oct-2008	1	| US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 0
	US	Sergeant Michael K. Clark	Mosul - Ninewa	Hostile - hostile fire - small arms fire
05-Oct-2008	2	| US: 2 | UK: 0 | Other: 0
	US	Colonel Michael R. Stahlman	Anbar Province	Non-hostile
	US	Sergeant William P. Rudd	Mosul - Ninewa	Hostile - hostile fire - small arms fire
03-Oct-2008	1	| US: 1 | UK: 0 | Other: 0
	US	Private 1st Class Tavarus D. Setzler	Majar al-Kabir - Maysan	Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack
02-Oct-2008	0	| US: 0 | UK: 0 | Other: 0
Total	14	| US: 14 | UK: 0 | Other: 0

On the subject of Afhganistan, Anne Geran's "Tough morning for Obama: Russian threats and Afghan deaths greet the president-elect" (AP) explains:

In Afghanistan, the U.S.-backed president demanded that Obama change U.S. tactics as villagers said U.S. warplanes killed 37 people -- nearly all of them women and children -- during a cat-and-mouse hunt for militants.
"We cannot win the fight against terrorism with airstrikes," President Hamid Karzai said. "This is my first demand of the new president of the United States -- to put an end to civilian casualties."

And it's only Karzai's "first demand of the new president". As al-Maliki has so aptly demonstrated, sometimes the puppet pulls the strings.

On the subject of Iraqi Christians, IRIN reports:

About 400 Christian families, (some 2,400 individuals) have returned to their homes in the northern city of Mosul after a spate of threats and killings led them to flee in early October, according to officials.
"We have so far registered nearly 400 Christian families who have returned to their houses and jobs, and resumed normal lives thanks to the deployment of security forces," said Jawdat Ismaiel, head of the Ministry of Displacement and Migration in the province.

That's IRIN reporting today, dropping back to Monday, they issued an alert again stating that it was not safe for refugees to return to Iraq:

The Iraqi government should review its policy of encouraging Iraqi refugees to return home by offering them free plane or bus tickets, until it is able to ensure security, local and international NGOs said.
"For the time being, the government should take care of the refugees and meet their daily needs in their host countries until it can secure suitable life conditions to allow them to go back to their homes," said Basil al-Azawi, head of the Baghdad-based Commission for Civil Society Enterprises, an umbrella group of over 1,000 NGOs operating inside and outside Iraq.

On the issue of any decline in violence, we'll note these observations by Andrew North (BBC) :

This uncertain situation is now encased in an incredible amount of concrete - the blast barriers that have become one of the signature images of Baghdad
There were plenty in place when I was last here a year ago. Now there are even more and journeys take longer than ever.
There are checkpoints with heavy machine-guns every 300 metres on many roads now - far more than you ever saw under the police-state rule of Saddam Hussein.
Baghdad is a city under complete military occupation. So the relative quiet here may be deceptive.

Leila Fadel's "Does a New American President Change Iraq?" (Baghdad Observer, McClatchy Newspapers) is a roundup she did prior to the election results.

"The American elections have no importance to me at all. Their presidency is one thing and their policy is another, therefore there is no real difference who wins. American foreign policy is constant. Iraqis are not ignorant, we have seen this over the years; one president goes and another comes and he does nothing to remedy his predecessor's mistakes only what concerns the American people. As for people in other countries they don't count because they don't vote." -- Aqeel Mohammed, 37, a Shiite minibus driver from southern Baghdad

"What possible change can either of them bring? And if they do anything, it is only to the interests of their own country – not for our sake. They might "bring their boys home" and "stop spending their money in Iraq" and "let Iraqis shoulder their own responsibilities"…. Where are we in all this?

Maybe Obama would withdraw their forces – but is that good? I would be happy to see them go – but I am also afraid.

What they do, they do for themselves. -- Widad Hamid, 74, a Sunni Arab retired high school teacher from western Baghdad.

"We do follow the news, but I don't expect any change at all. I have no faith in their promises because they say only what they think the American people want to hear. They dissemble their own people – not others. They don't care about the Iraqi people. It's all about their security freedoms, their boys, their money and their democracy. American foreign policy is one line, presidents come and go." -- Khalid Abu Abdullah, a Sunni Arab shopowner from northern Baghdad

"The residents of Sadr city don't car about the American presidential election, now we care only about the blocked roads and the traffic jams...I don't think the American policy will change towards our country," -- Khaleel Abu Ahmad, 37, a Shiite engineer from the east Baghdad district of Sadr City.

the washington post
ann scott tyson
leila fadel
mcclatchy newspapers
anne geran
andrew north

The U.S. embassy used the elections as the reason to have its first official function at the new embassy in Baghdad. Security was tight around the compound and dozens of private security personnel stood outside the embassy area. Inside, a projector displayed the latest elections news from CNN on a wall, and information sheets on the two presidential candidates and other information about the American electoral process lined a table. In the back of the room was a gigantic cake.
U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker told the crowd of Iraqi officials, journalists and others that the elections marked the historic occasion of the first African-American elected to the U.S. presidency. But Mr. Crocker also emphasized the democratic traditions that were represented in the U.S. race. Mr. Obama's win marked the 44th peaceful transition of power in the U.S. and the 22nd time a new political party was taking over the presidency through democratic means, Mr. Crocker said.
Mr. Crocker then cited an excerpt from Mr. Obama's victory speech: "To those who would tear the world down: We will defeat you. To those who seek peace and security: We support you. And to all those who have wondered if America’s beacon still burns as bright: Tonight we proved once more that the true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals: democracy, liberty, opportunity and unyielding hope."
The ambassador said he couldn't think of a place where Mr. Obama's words were more important than in Iraq, where two elections are scheduled to take place next year.

The above is from Gina Chon's "Obama’s Victory Came as a Surprise to Many Iraqis" (Baghdad Life, Wall St. Journal) and it's not at all surprising that Barack's threat was used as such in Iraq. As noted in yesterday's snapshot, Gary Leupp's "" (Dissident Voice) offered a decoding of Barack's bullying:

"To those -- to those who would tear the world down: We will defeat you."

In other words: Under my administration we Americans will continue to simplistically conceptualize the existence of an enemy that is pure evil and wants to destroy the world, and imagine we can "defeat" it through the War on Terror.

"To those who seek peace and security: We support you."

In other words: You Georgians facing Russia. You Afghans facing Pakistan-based attacks. You Israelis facing what you imagine to be the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran. You can trust an Obama administration to behave just like other recent U.S. administrations have behaved: with threats and sanctions, illegal cross-border raids and more war. Have no fear. As the world's greatest imperialist country, with bases in over half the countries on the planet, we can seek peace and security and support whoever we want. Yes we can!

Yesterday's snapshot also noted Corey Flintoff (NPR's All Things Considered) report on Crocker entertaining at the embassy for those needing or preferring audio. Suada al-Salhy and Katherine Zoepf cover it in this morning's New York Times with "U.S. Envoy Hosts First Event at New Embassy in Baghdad" which explains the US embassy/fortress hosted approximately "250 Iraqi officials, diplomats and dignitaries . . . Wednesday morning" for a beyond tacky meet up that served up bad sheet cake (I'm calling it bad based on reports beyond NYT, they merely mention how large it was) and "green-tinted fruit punch." As a general rule, serving any green colored liquid should be done on St. Patrick's Day and, even then, done in moderation. Maybe it was to symbolize the Green Zone? It certainly wasn't to appear appetizing. Crocker stressed that nothing's changed and, of course, nothing has. The reporters note:

Yet the embassy, built like a fortress, suggested a degree of permanence to the American presence here that at least some of the Iraqi guests seemed to find comforting.
"The size of this embassy and the number of employees who will occupy it are a sign of the American government’s commitment to democracy in Iraq," said Hoshyar Zebari, Iraq’s foreign minister. He did not remember the details of the original lease agreement for the land, he said, "but it was a very long lease."

Amazing that Americans can't be informed how long the lease is, isn't it? They are the ones footing the bill. No doubt it's a 'national security' issue that must be kept classified.

A visitor e-mailed the public account asking that we note Sam Smith's "The real Obama" and a few points. Smith is a bad reporter, a really bad one. You don't need to know his work during the Clinton administration to know that but it does show you how truly bad he is. In this article, he brags about being "a good boy" (he's over 65, grow the hell up) and sitting on issues relating to Barack. That goes to the fact that he's not a reporter. A reporter does not try to influence the outcome and certainly doesn't keep facts hidden. We'll note his late to the party piece but via Green Change and not via Sam Smith's bad website:

There is one story from Chicago, however, that remains relevant. A citizen walks into his alderman's office looking for a job. "Who sent you?" he asks. "Nobody," he replies. Says the staffer: "We don't want nobody nobody sent."
Who sent Barack Obama remains a mystery. He has risen from an unknown state senator to president in exactly four years and that only happens when somebody sends for you.
The black liberal image falters on a number of other scores including Obama's affection for extreme right wingers like Chuck Hagel and an obvious indifference to anybody who votes like, say, a state senator from Hyde Park. Think back over the campaign and try to recall a single instance when Obama reached out to the progressive wing of the Democratic Party or to the better angels of the Congressional Black Caucus. Instead his ads attacked as 'extreme' the single payer health insurance backed by many of his own supporters, he dissed ACORN and Colin Powell was as radical a black as he wanted to be seen palling around with.
The key issue that has driven Obama throughout his career has been Obama. He has achieved virtually nothing for any other cause. His politics reflects whatever elite consensus he gathers around himself. This is why his "post partisanship" needs to be watched so carefully. If Bernie Sanders and John Conyers don't get to White House meetings as often as Chuck Hagel, Obama will glide easily to the right, as every president has done over the past thirty years. If liberals, as they did with Clinton, watch without a murmur as their president redesigns their party to fit his personal ambitions, then the whole country will continue to move to the right as well.
Since the real Obama doesn't exist yet, it is impossible to predict with any precision what he will do. But here is some of the evidence gathered over the past months that should serve both as a warning and as a prod to progressives not to take today's dreams as a reasonable facsimile of reality [. . .]

Late to the party. Expect to see a lot more come crawling out over the coming months. And for those who don't grasp how bad a 'reporter' Sam Smith is, please note, he's one of those "They killed Vince Foster!" nutcakes. And, to be clear, he didn't just sit on Barack concerns while savaging the Republicans, he refused to cover Ralph Nader or Cynthia McKinney. He's a bag boy for Barack. He is not a journalist. He never was. During the 90s spectacle, you could find him and the drunken Chris Hitchens blathering on with their crazed conspiracy talk.

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

iraq
gina chon
the wall street journal
gary leupp
npr
all things considered
corey flintoff
the new york times
katherine zoepf
suadad al-salhy

Wednesday, November 5, 2008.  Chaos and violence continue, the empire gets a new ruler, Nouri al-Maliki claims credit, the treaty remains stalled, Iraqis are far from overwhelmed and more.      Yesterday the US elected a new ruler for the empire, War Hawk Barack Obama.  David A. G. Fischer (Dissident Voice) reports on an election night panel independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader took part in:   He goes on to contrast his campaign with that of Obama as not having any hoopla, hope or rhetoric; Ralph continues to campaign on the real issues affecting the people in spite of overwhelming odds -- he is a champion despite Obama's victory. Along the same line and with applause, his lack of hoopla and rhetoric is still so out-of-sync with the media cartel's disinformation campaign that he was once again ignored by the mainstream. What we have here is a man who refuses to sell out and complacently surrender to the status quo, he is a man based on strong principle who perceives reality for what it is -- a sham directed by the controlling institutions of power, of which Obama is just another cog in their finely-tuned machine. But what do we really know about Mr. Barack Obama? Here we have a candidate who received hundreds of millions in campaign donations by corporate America and Wall Street. Nader sensibly asks something I've pointed out many times, "Why are the corporations investing in Obama?" By looking at his voting record it is obvious who he supports with approbation for illegal surveillance, a permanent presence in Iraq with a potential spread to neighboring countries, offshore drilling which he used to be against, an economic bailout lacking oversight and transparency, and so forth. Where is this great change that he has been spewing forth to the public for the past twenty months? It is likely just more of what the public wants to hear, but it's apparent by voter turnout that they fail to feel the hot air blowing by them.  Part of the problem with Obama, as Nader points out, is that while Obama is pulled to the right by the corporate establishment, there are no demands being put on him by organized groups such as labor and unions to pull him the other direction and thus "make him better."   Glen Ford (Black Agenda Report) notes this refusal to make demands on Barack as well:   We have learned that Black politicians and activist-poseurs have an infinite capacity to celebrate not having engaged in struggle with Power, and that the Black masses can be made drunk by the prospect of vicariously (through Obama) coming to power. Having failed to make even the mildest of demands on Obama in return for unquestioning support, Black misleadership vowed they would press for firm commitments on issues of importance to African Americans once Obama had passed the final hurdle. (White progressives who were similarly self-neutered during the campaign also promise to begin acting like real people's advocates, any day now...just you wait and see.) We have already learned that "Progressives for Obama" of all ethnicities, who failed to put pressure on the candidate early on, when it might have made a difference, are full of crap.   Yes, they are full of crap.  Including the Agency-fronted political closet case who has already shown up with a pep-talk about how the economic crisis is a good thing, a really, really good thing!  Those in the closet politically might want to check their language so they don't expose themselves by accident.  But lets' move to the economy.  The San Francisco Business Times observes, "A day after the United States made history by electing Barack Obama president, the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 486 points Wednesday, ending at 9,139.27."  The Phoenix Business Journal notes that news as well: "The election is over and the Dow Jones Industrial Average has taken a dive of nearly 500 points."  No, there was no magical 'cure' nor was there going to be.  Any zowie-wowie article on the election today notes in cautionary tales how things will have to be scaled back or dropped.  That's your preparation for expecting nothing from the man who promised even less.  Larry Pinkney (Information Clearing House) offers a list of things to expect:   In relative short order - inside the United States itself - under a Barack Obama presidency, the living conditions of the majority of Black, White, Brown, Red, and Yellow peoples will continue to steadily and massively deteriorate while the corporate Wall Street barons prolong their glut of the every day people's finances, resources, hopes, and dreams. Under an Obama presidency those non Blacks who stand in opposition to Barack Obama's de facto pro Wall Street backers and their blood-sucking policies will be branded as racists and traitors, while those Blacks who oppose Obama's policies will be ignored and/or branded as fringe radicals and traitors. Thus, the horrors of the U.S. Empire will continue unabated, and in many respects, under Barack Obama, actually worsen. The blame for the deteriorating economy and continued war will of course quickly be laid by the Obama / Biden regime and the Democratic Party Republicrats on the previous Bush / Cheney regime, despite the fact that it was the complicity of the Democratic Party itself with the Bush / Cheney Republican Republicrat regime that facilitated the despicable policies and practices of the Bush / Cheney regime. The fact is that the Democratic and Republican Parties are de facto Republicrats with the objective of exploiting the majority of people and maintaining U.S. Empire abroad. After the Democratic Party Republicrats so-called election euphoria and celebrating is over, the Obama / Biden Republicrat regime will get down to the business of placing the ongoing exploitation of the every day people of this nation on fast track. The masses of Black Americans, along with the oppressed and exploited Brown, Red, Yellow, and White peoples of this nation will learn first hand that, notwithstanding the deceptive Obama rhetoric, exploitation nationally and internationally will be intensified. The "clash between those who want freedom, justice, equality for everyone and those who want to continue the system of exploitation" about which Malcolm X referred, will be intensified under Barack Obama, with Obama representing the interests of the oppressors. The political contradictions in this regard will also be increasingly obvious. Those so-called leftist and progressives who were and are collaborators with U.S. Empire will, for a time, try to pretend that their support of Barack Obama was not a sell out, and that they simply need more time to persuade the U.S. Empire's colored corporate emperor to do the right thing. Meanwhile, Black, Brown, Red, Yellow, and White peoples will be enduring an unprecedented rate of economic and social suffering. The anger of the people will ultimately peak and explode, as a result of having bought into false hope and raised expectations. This is precisely why the U.S. corporate government has already made military contingency plans to contain and massively quash dissention within the United States. Barack Obama will serve to provide his corporate / military masters with colored political cover for political repression in this nation; and he will have already provided a small respite of wiggling room for them in this regard. Nevertheless, as brutal reality forces the proverbial scales of blindness to drop from eyes of the masses, it will become crystal clear that the supposed "change" to which Barack Obama referred in his campaign rhetoric, was nothing more than a vicious ruse of double-speak by him, backed by his corporate and military handlers. Indeed, the emperor will be shown to "have no clothes." But what of the fate of millions of Black, White, Brown, Red, and Yellow peoples inside the U.S.? How many horrible sacrifices will have been, and will yet need to be made by the people in order to get the boot of economic blood-sucking and political repression off their / our necks?   Emperor Barack gave his victory speech in Chicago.  Gary Leupp (Dissident Voice) decodes it:   "And to all those watching tonight from beyond our shores, from parliaments and palaces, to those who are huddled around radios in the forgotten corners of the world, our stories are singular, but our destiny is shared, and a new dawn of American leadership is at hand." In other words: Don't worry, world. The bad old days of George Bush are over. "To those -- to those who would tear the world down: We will defeat you." In other words: Under my administration we Americans will continue to simplistically conceptualize the existence of an enemy that is pure evil and wants to destroy the world, and imagine we can "defeat" it through the War on Terror.     Exit polls demonstrate that the economy was the number one issue, ahead of the illegal war.  Going unnoticed is how Iraq was taken off the table by All Things Media Big and Small.  When the faux activists of CODESTINK are protesting Wall St. -- not for the war machinery they manufacture and sell but over the economic meltdown -- and Jodi's given everything but her uterus to Barack's campaign, don't pretend anyone's being encouraged to give a damn about ending the Iraq War.  To really ensure that it be a non-issue, did someone else take it off the table?  Damien McElroy (Telegraph of London) reports that Nouri al-Maliki is claiming to "close aides" that he gave the election to Barack because "he took the Iraqi issue 'off the table' for Obama by endorsing his timetable during his visit to Baghdad in July."  Don't be too angry with al-Maliki, CIA assets tend to face very violent rub-outs when they've exhuasted their usefulness and al-Maliki's pretty much squeezed out.  al-Maliki reportedly believes he can get further concessions from Barack on the treaty between the White House and the puppet government. At the US State Dept today, Sean McCormack was asked about the treaty and the spokesperson stated that the US has not yet responded (officially) to the amendments suggested by Iraq and that US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker will convey communications to al-Maliki. As for whether the amendments will fly or not, McCormack declared, "Well, again, I go back to what -- you know, what I've said and what Dana Perino has said over at the White House in terms of the bar for any changes.  You know, it's a pretty high bar for any changes.  But again, we'll take a look at what is suggested.  We're formulating our responses.  The Iraqis took some time to think through what they wanted to provide us by way of comments, and we're taking our time in providing that response back to them."   One thing Ambassador Crocker already conveyed to the Iraqi government was, "While this historic election has changed a great many things, we will also have full continuity of policy and purpose as we move through our transition."  NPR's Corey Flintoff (All Things Considered) reported that today and on the reaction of Iraqis to the election results with Abu Osama stating, "We don't know whether he'll change now that he's elected" and Rana Sa'ad Diyab stating she's not seen any improvements in six years and "she'll wait and see whether Obama's policies bring any changes in security or her family's standard of living, but she doubts that will happen."  Hameed Kamil Hilal tells Leila Fadel and Corinne Reilly (McClatchy Newspapers), "We have seen nothing positive from any American president, and McCain and Obama are two faces of one coin, one policy."  Meanwhile Demetri Sevastopulo (Financial Times of London) explains that it's not just Iraqis who are doubtful that any 'change' will take place, "On Iraq, the Illinois senator campaigned on a pledge to remove US combat troops within sixteen months, but some military officers privately argue that he will show more flexibility on timing after assuming responsibility for the war started by George W. Bush."   In some of today's reported violence . . .   Bombings?   Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad car bombing where the driver killed him/herself and 4 people with nine more wounded, a Baghdad roadside bombing where three people were wounded and a Mosul roadside bombing that claimed 1 life with three more wounded.   Shootings?   Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 police officers shot dead in Mosul.   Corpses?   Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 corpse discovered in Mosul Tuesday night and, also Tuesday night, 2 corpses discovered outside of Kirkuk.   In peace news, Cindy Sheehan ran for the US Congress from California's 8th district.  She lost to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi yesterday.  While others tried to hop a bandwagon and refused to challenge Democrats, Cindy had the strength to stand up.  At Information Clearing House she shares her thoughts:     This past month, I kept on saying to my supporters, staff, interns, volunteers and myself, that no matter what happened on November 4th that we could hold our heads up high and be very proud of our campaign. Until yesterday, I wasn't sure that what I said would be true, but I feel an incredibly sense of peace and pride in our accomplishments. There were so many victories over the last year that the American paradigm of "winner-take all" just doesn't fit. We moved into San Francisco a little over a year ago with less than nothing. We used savings and credit cards to open our office and sometimes to keep it open. We transformed a former "sex shop" to a fully functioning and vibrant campaign office. Our "natural base" never materialized, so we had to build a foundation in less than a few months. In August, we historically gained ballot access as only the 6th independent campaign in California history to do so. Our platform based on humane economics was in place long before the recent collapses and resultant bailouts. Our labor platform was hailed all over the world, while unions here in SF supported the corporate "rescuer" Nancy Pelosi. Cindy for Congress never once sold out our solid principles based campaign and would never sell out the voters of San Francisco like Nancy Pelosi has. Nancy Pelosi ran from my campaign and our demands to debate me and we persevered and did so amazingly well after a near total media black out and several attempts at political intimidation. We got to the end of this stage with a barrel full of integrity and a boatload of dedication and love. Dozens of activists came from all over the country to be here to help us spread our progressive, peace based message and thousands donated to help keep our campaign afloat. We have moved right through November 4th because this is a movement for peace and against corporate control of our political system. Movements can't stop, we must keep moving.   iraq gary leupp glen ford black agenda report larry pinkney npr corey flintoff demetri sevastopulo leila fadel mcclatchy newspapers hussein kadhim corinne reilly damien mcelroy cindy

The elections will feature political races heavily influenced by Iraq's complex and sectarian conflicts.
They could exacerbate tensions in southern Iraq between U.S.-backed Prime Minister Nouri Maliki's nationalist Islamic Dawa Party and the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, the two main Shiite Muslim parties in the country.
The results of the internal Shiite rivalry are likely to determine whether Iraq is broken up into semiautonomous regions or retains a strong central government. The Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council wants to push for the creation of a nine-province federal region, which Dawa fears could jeopardize Iraq's unity.
"Much is at stake in Basra and other oil-bearing governorates," said Joost Hiltermann, an expert on Iraq for the International Crisis Group think tank. "And Baghdad is the prize for those who seek the restoration of strong central government in Iraq."

The above is from Ned Parker's "Iraq looks ahead to provincial, national elections" (Los Angeles Times) and will the Iraqi elections receive even a fourth of the attention worldwide that the US elections did? No, of course not.



Kimberly Wilder (On The Wilder Side) live blogged the election and she is highlighting the following by Ronald Hardy:

I am sure that there are many who might feel disappointed in these results, but I have to ask if you are really all that surprised by them? Cynthia McKinney was the only major candidate left off of CNN's radar, and what "main stream media" coverage she did get (Washington Post, FoxNews) were hit pieces meant to further discredit the campaign. Cynthia McKinney is a 6 term Congresswoman with more experience in government than Obama, but she got less coverage than Chuck Baldwin, a radio minister. Wayne Allyn Root got more coverage than Cynthia McKinney. Why? Why the Blackout? It can’t be because she is an African American, can it? It can’t be because she is a woman, can it? Was it her message? Was it her lack of money?However, I am not depressed by the outcome. The results of the Presidential election are of course disappointing, but on the other hand, over 150,000 Americans, of those who even had the opportunity, voted for Cynthia McKinney, despite the lack of coverage, despite the ballot access, and despite the politics of fear.

McKinney may have received more votes. The same is true for Ralph Nader, Bob Barr, Chuck Baldwin and other presidential candidates. Write-in ballots aren't a first priority when it comes to counting so the 150,000 referred to above is the preliminary count.

That said, Cynthia was savaged and she was stabbed in the back. Look at (Democratic) Women's Media Center. Supposedly a site highlighting and making women visible. They ignored Cynthia and Rosa's run and only did a story on them (October 31st) finally due to (a) pressure (including the site being called "racist") and (b) they thought it would serve as counter to Robin Morgan's latest foaming at the mouth insanity against Sarah Palin. WMC can't endorse candidates but they damn well did, didn't they? When you cheerlead one campaign over and over and ignore another (one article on Cynthia the entire election?), you are endorsing.

Like every other woman who wouldn't whore herself out for Barack in 2008, Cynthia had to be ignored and demonized at the same time. That's just the way it worked. And the feminist 'leadership' is so damn pathetic that they not only allowed it to happen, they took part in it. They did so when it was Hillary, they did so with Palin and they did so with Cynthia. They sent the message very loud and clear that no woman was good enough and that they will always suck up to a man. It's a message they made clear in 1972 as well and why Shirley Chisholm had a great deal to say about what passed for 'leadership.'

'Leadership' is too old and out of it to lead anymore and expect major shake ups in the near future. It's really amazing that the likes of Robin Morgan elected to go out this way. Susan Faludi's Backlash is an amazing book but the Sleepless in Seattle reference becomes more true every day. Had most actually read the book, they'd know what lies ahead. Backlash didn't just call out the Newsweek lie re: marriage. Backlash called out all the women who contributed to the backlash and, yes, that did include Ms. magazine. The next major feminist book will do the same and when Robin's called out for lying, a few years from now when young women are finding out that Robin Morgan (who they won't give a damn about and really shouldn't because she hasn't done anything of great value since 1972) used lies to tear apart a woman and build up a man, it won't be pretty. And if it's further noted that Morgan's (Democratic) Women's Media Center ignored Cynthia McKinney, it will be down right ugly.

We're not talking the 1800s here. Feminists are damn well aware of the charge (usually incorrect) that the feminist movement is a White movement. So a few years from now when feminists discover that Robin Morgan blacked-out Cynthia, it won't be pretty. It will be the sort of thing that moves her to the list of others who fell into disrepute over racial issues (some of the feminists from the post-Civil War era). Because feminism isn't about telling someone how to vote (though Robin Morgan -- Socialist that she is -- never learned that lesson). Feminism is about opportunities and access. When a so-called feminist outlet like WMC refuses to cover the presidential campaign of a woman (while filing non-stop garbage on a male running for president), opportunities and access for women have been limited.

It's all the more appalling when we're speaking of a woman who stood up for women's rights, reproductive rights and more during her terms in Congress. But she got written off because it was so much more important (and so much more 'feminist') for women to go gaa-gaa over a man. This was Shirley's point, by the way, all those years ago: When women won't even support a woman's right to run, what does that say about the feminist movement?

Thirty-six years later and we're left with the same question.

A visitor e-mailed to complain about Greg Palast. When I have time, his tired ass is pulled from the links. We haven't linked to him in an entry here in years. Yeah, Greggie went and endorsed Barack even though he damn well used Cynthia for years. It really doesn't matter with Palast, he's trash. Only trash choose to publish in H**tler magazine. Had I known he'd done that, he'd never have been added to a link. He's trash. He's human trash. He was never going to endorse Cynthia, his thoughts on women are clear by his decision to be Larry F**nt's buddy.

But back to the issue of the failure of 'leadership.' Here's reality, in the past, 'leaders' didn't hang on so desperately. Current 'leadership' has been in place since the last years of the 60s and need to step their asses down. They wanted 'change' and the 'youth' was so important -- they said. That's why they endorsed Barack.

Well get your tired asses out of 'leadership.' Who the hell are you anyway, Fidel Castro? Goodness, how long are you going to desperately try to hold on? Really, it's past time for all of you to take your asses onto the golden years and let other women step up. If you can't do that, you'll be shoved out of the way and that's what should be happening right now.

It's that baby boomer stranglehold. No other generation has ever been allowed to control and impose for so very damn long. Come on, gals, show us some 'change' -- 'change we can believe in!' Sit your tired asses down, and stop repeating the same talking point you've made for nearly forty years. It's time to go.

We live in a society where women are conditioned to be 'nice' and to put others 'first.' As a result, women's reactions are rarely immediate. They build slowly. We saw that with Anita Hill and we'll be seeing in the near future with regards to what went down this year.

2008 saw open season on Hillary Clinton. She was the first. And some, like Robin, might think that defending Hillary means they accomplished something. Robin accomplished nothing. In her defense of Hillary, she rightly said that Hillary is not responsible for Bill's actions and shouldn't be held accountable for them. But when it was time to rip apart Sarah Palin, Robin was more than fine with snarling over Todd Palin's two decades old DUI or DWI. (I don't know which and I don't give a damn, something that happened 20 years ago and wasn't done by the candidate? Not interested in that gutter nonsense.) That's what Robin still can't grasp and why women are so furious with her right now.

It's not about politics. It's about feminism. And feminism didn't require that any woman vote for Hillary in the Democratic Party primary or that they vote for Cynthia in the general election or for McCain because Palin was on the ticket.

Feminsim did require that we all stood up to sexist coverage in the media. Not just for our personal favorite but for all women running on presidential tickets.

Robin made it very clear that you could stone Sarah Palin and she'd never call you out or even be bothered by it.

That's not feminism.

In two pieces, she trashed Sarah Palin -- "trashed" in the feminist sense of the word. She used gossip and lies and she behaved like the stereotypical "harpy" -- she didn't just embarrass herself, she embarrassed all feminists and the movement itself.

Though she could blather on and on about Barack, she never wrote a word about Cynthia. Actually, she did. She didn't name Cynthia, but she ridiculed Ralph (by name) and all candidates not of the two-major parties. Remember, no one ever carries as much water for the Democratci Party as a Socialist (Robin) or Communist trying to fit in.

In 2012, a woman may run again. Why she'd bother is a question many might have after 2008.

But it needs to be noted that the tired 'leadership' of the feminist movement has made it very clear that women can be ripped apart in the press and attacked for their clothes, for their hair, for their looks and for the gender. It's been made clear that unless you're a feminist 'fave' (Hillary), you won't be defended. Even if you're a feminist -- and all three women are feminists: Hillary, Cynthia and Sarah -- you won't be defended strongly.

So what women can expect is three types of treatment:

1) The Hillary: You're old and unattractive! We want a young man! You married your way in! You pimp your daughter! You're calculating and ambitious! Power-hungry! Look at your clothes!

2) The Sarah: You're an idiot! You're a beauty queen! You're calculating and ambitious! Power-hungry! (Ava and I will be going into this in great detail at Third Sunday.) Look at your clothes!

3) The Cynthia: You don't exist! You're not even worthy of my time! You are invisible! You need to drop out of the race because you could hurt the man! Look at your clothes!

That's the message that was sent. 'No woman is worthy, therefore there's no point in the feminist movement defending any woman.'

"Leadership" failed women and the first thing they should be doing right now is apologizing for that. The seeds were sewn early in the year as non-Democrats like Eve Ensler and others stuck their noses into a Democratic Party primary and started questioning Hillary's gender. That should have resulted in the Red Queen Evie being sent packing. She's not really a feminist and she's never done anything but line her own pockets with that bad 'play' she 'wrote.' But she and others were allowed to rip apart Hillary in the 'name of feminism' and do so in the most sexist manner.

"Leadership" failed women by playing favorites when they offered minimal media criticism. Sexism was all over the airwaves. It was not confined to MSNBC. But they became the Whipping Boys.

I think we'd all agree that making racist remarks is racism. I think we'd also all agree that refusing to include accomplishments by people of color is racism. And yet, MSNBC got called out for sexism while so many others walked free. Some of whom made sexist remarks but all of whom (and especially focus on PBS here) were happy to refuse the accomplishments of women.

Leadership needs to apologize to the grassroots for:

A) Refusing to stand up for women
B) Joining in the attacks on women
C) Refusing to lead

Leading is not bullying people into voting for a candidate.

I'm biting my tongue because of a piece Ava and I are doing but one thing this week, if you caught it, on TV, may have underscored how low women have fallen. And that happened due to 'leadership' focusing on other things.

Instead of fretting over presidential candidates or hoping they could get Bob to ask a question at the debates, feminist 'leaders' should have been calling out the fact that women were marginalized. That happened in debates, that happened in panels. No, it's not a new development but it has never been this bad.

When nearly ten people were discussing First Ladies and women's advances on PBS during the Republican Party convention, feminist 'leaders' damn well should have made a huge issue out of the fact that not one person was a woman. But they didn't even notice. "Don't call out PBS, it's our friend!"

There are no passes. Feminism is independent movement. That's always been the case. Women couldn't matter in 2008 because feminist 'leaders' didn't act as if women mattered.

Apologies need to be made to the grassroots and resignations need to be offered.

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

iraq
the los angeles times
ned parker
kimberly wilder

So many different kind of people
Trying to be the same
"No way," baby
He said
Baby there's no way


So the breakdown currently is 62,509,207 votes for Barack and 55,438,509 for McCain making it 349 electoral college votes for Barack and 147 for McCain. Not the blow out they wanted and not a landslide by any real definition of the word. It's not all that different from the election it resembles in so many ways, 1968's where Tricky Dick got 301 electoral votes and
Hubert Humphrey got 191.

As in that year, the presidency flipped parties. As in that election, an illegal war started by one party's president was turned over to another and continued.

Laurie Kellman (AP) notes in her election overview:

Exit polls showed that voters were deeply anxious about the economy and dissatisfied with President Bush. They haven't been thrilled by Democrats in Congress, either, largely because the new majority could not agree on how to end the Iraq war as promised.
Exit polling showed that the war remains unpopular, and distaste for the conflict helped Obama. Nearly two-thirds disapprove of the conflict, and that group overwhelmingly backed the Democrat.
But that issue faded this year. Politically, the economy was the number one issue with voters and nothing else came close, exit polls showed. That hurt McCain and trickled down-ballot, hurting some Republican candidates.

The Democratic Congress (2006 to 2008) couldn't end the illegal war and doesn't plan to now. Get used to it. Get used to more lies from them. More reasons they just can't -- though they really, really, really want to, honest! -- end the illegal war. Get used to them continuing to play dumb about what's going on.

It's not just that in two years they couldn't end the illegal (and highly unpopular) war they were elected to end, it's that they couldn't impeach the Bully Boy who leaves office with the lowest approval ratings in polling history. And they said that control of even one house would mean this amazing investigative power (as heads of committees) and what the hell have they done?

The only thing that there's been any improvement has to do with veterans care and that did not result from Congress. That resulted from the Washington Post (with their expose on Walter Reed) and CBS News (with their expose on the actual suicide rate as opposed to the number Veterans Affairs wanted to emphasize). There have been many for-show hearings but when did anything actually happen? Never. Not with Blackwater, not with anything. For-show hearings that resulted in nothing.

Oh, they grabbed some headlines, they just didn't do any actual work. The for-show Congress continues. The Dems didn't see the huge increase they wanted (and some races are still not called) but they got an increase.

In the process, the illegal war just got a little longer. President John McCain would have meant what passes for the left in this country could have been active and active from day one of the next adminsitration. President Barack Obama means more passes, more 'tingles,' more whores offering excuses and throwing hissy-fits when the Christ-child is expected to meet the same standards as any other adult.

The hallmark of this decade will not be the financial crisis. That's not saying that mess is over because it's not. But that's pointing out that the illegal war will be the hallmark. The Iraq War, more than any other event, will sum up this decade in the history books and it hits year six in March. The Katrina vanden Heuvels, the Matthew Rothschilds, the Amy Goodmans and all the other losers of Panhandle Media don't give a damn about ending the illegal war. Like the Democratic Party, they raked it in over the illegal war. It gave them a certain level of fame. And when it came down to actually have to do something, they moved on. But when they -- like Democrats -- could make some superficial remarks against the illegal war and get some loud cheers and applause, they were more than happy to ride it to what passed for fame.

And their failure to end the illegal war, their failure to build any serious opposition to the illegal war is the reason their broadcast audience and readership shrinks and shrinks. In 2003, they were posing as something they weren't -- independent and journalists.

They're just more hucksters trying to stick their hands down someone else's pocket to steal a wallet and their actions have prolonged the illegal war.

They're all failures. Abject failures who couldn't succeed at real jobs and couldn't even succeed in the fringe world of 'journalism via begging.'

Remember that a few didn't lie and they actually are journalists. The list includes: John Pilger, Glen Ford, Margaret Kimberley, Bruce Dixon, Paul Street, Chris Hedges, Joshua Frank and a few others.

So the war drags on for much longer as a result of liars tricking the American people into believing that Barack would end the illegal war. (Ten months! cried Tom Hayden. At the end of ten months, that would be November 1, 2009, start booing Tom Hayden in public and give the little nothing something to cry about.)

The War Hawk will be president and that's when every liar will have to answer and that will include one little liar who rode 2004 to greater fame by calling out their peers but, you'll note, despite tossing out that lecture in 2008, the liar did just as their peers did.


Caro at Make Them Accountable observes:

In 2000 and 2004, it was Republicans who used thuggery and hate to win the presidency. In 2008, it was Democrats.
Congratulations, Democrats, for a job well done.
And for setting back respect for women more than 50 years.
Bro's before ho's. You wanted it, you got it.
Now, we'll all have to live with it.


If we could start again
Well who knows
Have we really changed
Some say we have
Reflecting our past
Who can say
Who can say

2008 when Democrats truly became Republicans. It wasn't that difficult, just grab even more corporate money (and, in the process, destroy public financing) while knowing that the likes of Katty-van-van and Matty Roth would never, ever call you out or hold you to any standard of human decency. Democrats couldn't transform into Republicans without Panhandle Media agreeing not to hold them accountable.


Races are run
Some people win
Some people always have to lose

And the losers are the American people and the Iraqi people. Don't forget Afghanistan where War Hawk Barack will oversea the deaths of even more people than did the Bully Boy. Don't forget AFRICOM. Don't forget that the Cult of Barack wants war in Sudan. And don't forget that it took a Democrat (Jimmy Carter) to bring back registration for the draft.

Lyrics are "Races are run" off Buckingham & Nicks (Stevie Nicks and Lindsey Buckingham).
The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.

iraq
stevie nicks
make them accountable

Tuesday, November 4, 2008.  Chaos and violence continue, the illegal war is not ending anytime soon judging by most signals, Talabani and Barzani continue to have conflict, the treaty is said to be progressing . . . to a national referendum (?) and more.     In the US voting takes place today.  It does not mean life stops or that the entire world does.  Gina Chon (Baghdad Life, Wall St. Journal) writes of "Samir Ahmed, a government employee, said he had also once assumed a different U.S. administration would mean a different policy towards Iraq.  The presidential race he was thinking of was between Bill Clinton and the first George Bush.  Mr. Clinton won, but continue a tough stance against Iraq.  Today, he expects that no matter who wins the current race, American policy toward Iraq will remain the same."  Mariam Toma agrees and tells Chon, "Both of them will not withdraw U.S. forces.  In contrast, maybe the will actually find another reason to stay even longer in Iraq."  Meanwhile Stephen Farrell, Mudhafer al-Husaini and Abeer Mohammed (Baghdad Bureau, New York Times) did a snap-poll, "an informal snapshot of Iraqis living or working in the Green Zone.  Of 200 Iraqis spoken to after they streamed out of two Green Zone exists into the 'real' Baghdad on Monday, just over a third of them wanted the Americans to leave Iraq as soon as possile while just under half wanted them to stay.  The remainder offered options somewhere in between." These are Green Zoners and they do fear the fall of the Green Zone and the puppet government.  They're protected while,  everywhere else, Iraqis aren't so lucky.    Meanwhile Germany's increasingly pathetic Der Speigel (which has been justifying and supporting the illegal war for sometime if you'd bothered to pay attention) runs the craked musings of Peter Ross Range who just knows Barack will win the presidency and calls for him to "revise" the 16-month 'plan' for 'withdrawal.'  PeePee Ross Range is a DLC-er (Der Spiegel calls him "moderate") and he cheerleader the illegal war before it started and justified it for years and years.  As late as July 22, 2005, he was whining that 'liberals' and 'progressives' needed to praise Saddam being disposed and be less criticisl ("Liberal's War" published in the DLC bible). January 8, 2004, he was writing that the US shouldn't withdraw or even "pull-back" ("Remembering the Middle Class," ibid).  October 21, 2005 PeePee was whining, "Many war opponents, often still traumatized by Vietnam, are preoccupied with what invading Iraq says about America rather than what it does for the Iraqis" ("War of Conscience"). Der Spiegel's become an embarrassment but for those who know PeePee's work, it's probably worth a chuckle -- September 30, 2002, he was wondering if Germany was "Anti-American" or "Anti-Bush"?  Translation, the two deserve one another.   Barack's 'plan' for withdrawal?  Are we actually back to that lie?  Droping back to a Third editorial from June:   Here's the interview Panhandle Media couldn't tell you about: Stephen Sackur: You said that he'll revisit it [the decision to pull troops] when he goes to the White House. So what the American public thinks is a commitment to get combat forces out within sixteen months, isn't a commitment is it? Samantha Power: You can't make a commitment in whatever month we're in now, in March of 2008 about what circumstances are going to be like in January 2009. We can'te ven tell what Bush is up to in terms of troops pauses and so forth. He will of course not rely upon some plan that he's crafted as a presidential candidate or as a US Senator.   When Power gave that interview, she was still his foreign policy advisor. And backing up her claims that promises weren't really promises, here's Barack speaking to Candy Crowley June 5th on CNN when asked about his 'promise' to withdraw (combat troops): Well, you know, I'd never say there's 'nothing' or 'never' or 'no way' in which I'd change my mind." Obviously, I'm open to the facts and to reason. And there's no doubt that we've seen significant improvements in security on the ground in Iraq. And our troops, and Gen. Petraeus, deserve enormous credit for that. I have to look at this issue from a broader perspective, though. In April Power tells the BBC that Barack's 'pledges' and 'promises' on Iraq are non-binding and, if elected, he'll decide what to do then. June 5th, Barack echoes that to CNN. And Panhandle Media works overtime to ignore reality.  And if you like being played, you'll love what they have planned.   --- End of excerpt.  Get it.  No 'plan,' no 'promise.' That's reality.  So why is PeePee asking Barack to rethink a non-pledge?  Because PeePee's audience isn't Barack, it's you.  PeePee wants to soften the public up to the idea that Barack in the White House doesn't have to mean an end to the illegal war.  If elected, Barack can't break what so many wrongly believe was a 'promise' on his own.  He needs a lot of liars who can soften up public opinion.      There's no rush to leave Iraq or even a desire.  That needs to be grasped.  Iraqi General Nasier Abadi made that pretty clear during Sunday's press conference in the Green Zone.  Questioned by the Washington Post's Mary Beth Sheridan as to when the Iraqis would be able to handle "their own internal security . . . how many years are you away from reaching that goal," Abadi tried to distract by listing duties before declaring, "We have no duties or missions to protect the air on the borders of the country.  But in case we have this responsibility, there is a brief that -- to the minister of defense, if he ask us to -- task us with that, a reportw ent also to the Prime Minister, what are the capabilities and the army's specifics to do those duties?"  Asked how many years again, he responded, "Building an aerial force, building an Army is not easy, but it's still easier than building naval and air force.  The naval force, as I said before, that the first ship will come in 2009 and the fourth will arrive in . . . at the end of 2011.  In regard to 200- . . . Air Force, the first aircraft we will receive in 2011 until 2015.  And that depends on the support and the help that the coalition forces can secure to Iraq so we can be able to maintain and defend our airspace and territories.  Without that, there will be also agreements with the neighboring countries on the security of Iraq.  But it's possible that we will go with those missions without having an air force or naval force because this is a common battle, it's not just an army's duty."  Setting aside the naval force and focusing only on the air, if the period they'll be taking possession of aircraft will last from 2011 through 2015, how likely is it that they will be prepared to handle their own airspaceby the end of 2011?   At the Pentagon today, spokesperson Bryan Whitman informed reporters that there was a plan in place for transition from the Bully Boy to the winner of today's election. A comparison was rightly made between LBJ and Tricky Dick.  Nixon didn't end the illegal war, he only continued it.  Whitman declared, "One of the important components of this is ensuring that we've identified and highlighted some of the key department events, actions, milestones that a new administration will face in its first 90 days."   Turning to the topic of the Status Of Forces Agreement masquerading as a treaty, CNN reports Sami al-Askari (Nouri al-Maliki adviser) states that the White House "has signaled to Iraqi officials that it is seriously considering proposed changes to an agreement that would set the terms for U.S. troops in Iraq".  Al Jazeera notes that al-Askari has no official response from the White House and that Iraq's Sunni vice president Tareq al-Hashemi is advocating that the treaty be put up for approval to all Iraqis (not just the Parliament), "This agreement is an important and sensitive subject . . . Iraqis should have their say."  Khalid al-Ansary, Missy Ryan and Kevin Liffey (Reuters) add that al-Hashemi is indicateing that the agreement be placed on the ballot with "provincial elections scheduled to take place by the end of January."  At which point, who would be in Iraq?  The United Nations mandate that governs the occupation expires December 31st at which point, if no new agreement has been reached, there is no legal authority for foreign forces to be on Iraqi soil.  The White House has attempted political blackmail insisting that they will cut off this and that if Baghdad won't sign off on the treaty. Richard Tomkins (UPI) notes, "Iraq, with no air control capability at present, nonetheless would have to take over air traffic control and also assume total responsibility for guarding its borders."  Al Bawaba notes that today's "Baghdad edition of the London-based newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat said the Americans had agreed to three of the five latest changes proposed by Iraq.  It said, quoting unnamed sources, that Washington had dropped the clause that authorises Baghdad and Washington to seek an extension for retaining troops in the cities beyond 2009 and in the country beyond 2011."  Maria Appakova (UPI) explains:   However, Americans are in no hurry to raise this question at the U.N. Security Council.  Staying in Iraq in accordance with an international mandate is one thing, but having a strategic partnership treaty and receiving dividends from it is quite another matter.    Yet Washington has no choice -- it cannot take offense at Iraqis and pull out its troops from Iraq.  It won't be able to attach the blame for withdrawal to Russia, since Moscow does not mind Americans continuing their presence there for a while, and Russia is not in favor of an upsurge of terror in the region, after all. [. . .] [US} House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton stated that he is "deeply concerned" with what he heard.  Skelton is referring to the agreement's provisions that recently leaked to the press, which include, for example, the Iraqi government's ability to put American servicemen and private security companies' personnel on trial for cirmes they committed while on leave and outside military bases.  It must be said that if this provision really has been included in the draft, it is quite a victory for the Iraqi government.   Meanwhile Gulf Daily News notes continued conflict between the Baghdad government and the Kurdish one with the country's President Jalal Talabani stating the US cannot set up bases anywhere in Iraq "without the approval of the central government" in Baghdad which was a strong rebuke to KRG president Massud Barzani who stated last week that, should the US and Baghdad not sign off on a treaty, the US could just set up bases in the Kurdish region.  The tensions between the Kurdish region and Iraq are never not on display.  Last Wednesday, at the White House, Barzani was being translated when he cut in to correct the translator:   Translator: And in terms of SOFA, we do believe that it is in the interest of the Iraqi government --   Massud Barzani: Iraqi people.   Translator: -- it's in the interest of this country and we have been and we will continue to support it and support its ratification.   Hoda Abdel-Hamid (Al Jazeera) notes that the US popularity in the Kurdish region is sinking (after years of sucking up) and quotes Barzan Mohamed stating, "America was not honest with the Kurds.  They've let them down in the past and they only follow their interests.  They can leave the Kurds any time and I don't trust having an alliance with them or even friendship.  Yes, they rid us of dictatorship, but they came here to control the region and the Middle East."  Iran's Press TV states that Talabani made a point to praise Iran Sunday for their help with Iraq's security and that Talabani also cited Syria and that, on the treaty, Talabani "said that Iraq is a unified country and no one has the right to object the Iraqi government's decision, should it refuse the security deal.  Talabani was referring to a recent interview by Massud Barzani, the president of the local government of Iraq's Kurdistan during which he said that the Kurdistan region would provide the U.S. with military bases if Baghdad refuses to sign the security deal with Washington."     We've noted the Iraqi Air Force twice in today's snapshot.  1) It's not due to be ready until 2015 at the earliest and 2) the US is using the lack of one to threaten Baghdad into signing off on the treaty.  For those not grasping how "shambles" is too mild a word to be applied to IAF, let's drop back to October 24th.  M-NF trumpeted "Iraqi Air Force celebrates another milestone."  Sounds good, right?  Yeah, as long as you don't go beneath the headline.  If you do, you find: "The Iraqi Air Force surpassed another milestone Oct. 22 when an all-Iraqi flight crew took to the air in the King Air Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance aircraft for the first time in support of an Iraqi Special Operations Forces training exercise."  Five years after the start of the illegal war (six this March) and that's where the IAF is?  They've just finished their first "all-Iraqi flight crew" flight?    Moving on to some of today's reported violence . . .   Bombings?   Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad sticky bomb wounded three people (all family members), another Baghdad sticky bombing reulted 1 person being killed and seven more wounded, a third Baghdad sticky bombing claimed 1 life and left five wounded, a Baghdad roadside bombing resulted in 4 deaths and eight people being wounded and another Baghdad bombing claimed 7 lives with eighteen people wounded. Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) updates the seven dead by 4 for eleven and notes that the bomb was "hidden in a car at a bus stop" (wounded rose to twenty-one). Reuters notes a Mosul roadside bombing that claimed 1 life and left one person wounded and another Mosul roadside bombing resulted in five people being injured and a Mosul "suicide car" bombing left four police officers injured.   Shootings?   Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 Iraqi police officer was shot dead in Baghdad (three more wounded) and 1 "Lieutenant Colonel working for the ministry of interior affairs" was shot dead in Baghdad. Reuters notes 2 police officers was shot dead in Mosul while 2 civilians were shot dead in different incidents.   Corpses?   Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 corpses were discovered in Nineveh Province.   Today Michael Birnbaum (Washington Post) reports that DoD "announced yesterday the death of Pfc. Bradly Shane Colemn of Mratinsville, VA, who had been serving in Iraq" and whose October 29th death is under investigation.  His death brings the toll to 14 for the month of October.   Meanwhile Scott Fontaine (News Tribune via Seattle Post-Intelligencer) reports that the Fort Lewis Stryker's "3rd Brigade is getting ready to make its third deployment to Iraq next year."  This as Will Dunham (Reuters) notes, "More than 2 million U.S. children have had parents deployed to fight in Iraq since 2003 or in Afghanistan since 2001."   As Katharine Q. Seelye (New York Times) points out, "The fact is, there is plent of mystery -- nad there is only one poll that counts." It is election day and anything can happen. Kimberly Wilder (On The Wilder Side) will live blog the election tonight beginning at 8:00 p.m. EST. So check out her site which will go beyond the D and R to include other letters in the alphabet. Including "G" (Wilder is a Green.)  Starting with independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader and his running mate Matt Gonzalez.  Team Nader notes:   We're having a party! A Nader/Gonzalez party! Tonight, we celebrate. If you are a skeptic, you might be asking -- what, pray tell, are you celebrating? To which we answer -- The power of the people. The power of you -- our loyal supporters. Against all odds -- and in the face of a major media blackout -- together, we have given the American people a choice today. For the Nader/Gonzalez shift the power agenda. With eight months of hard work, we have put that agenda on the ballot in 45 states and the District of Columbia. Ralph has campaigned in all 50 states. And together we have organized a network of American citizens to press onward for single payer health insurance, a living wage, a cut in the bloated, wasteful military budget, for a reversal of U.S. policy in the Middle East -- everything the Nader/Gonzalez campaign stands for. So, today, if you haven't already done so, vote with pride for Nader/Gonzalez. And then, no matter what the outcome tonight, celebrate! Congratulations! With the coming disintegration of two party domination of our politics, you have chosen to be on the winning side of history. So, celebrate tonight! And while celebrating, follow Ralph's results on the net or television. (Unfortunately, most of the major news outlets apparently will not include third party and independent candidates in their result totals -- but Fox News' map apparently will (fair and balanced?) -- county by county and nationwide. Check it out here. And finally, only 500 copies left! Let's move them today! Get one of the last copies now! It's autographed by Ralph! And is bound to be a collector's item! Of course, we're talking about the 40th Anniversary edition of Unsafe at Any Speed -- Ralph's classic expose of the American automobile industry. And we have only 500 copies left! If you donate $100 or more today -- up to the legal maximum of $2,300 -- we will ship to you one of the last copies we have of this classic -- autographed by the man himself. Let's move the last 500 copies today -- and hit our goal of $4 million by midnight tonight. Onward     Today Nader held his one-word press conference and Jimmy Orr (Christian Science Monitor) provides an excerpt:   What is your opinion of Obama? "Clever." What is your opinion of Palin? "Developing." How much money did you raise for your campaign? "Insufficient." Why do you keep running for president? "Justice." Will you be elected president? "No." When do you think you will win? "Sometime." What should Bush do on his last day in office? "Surrender." Will Obama be able to provide tax cuts to 95 percent of the population? "Impossible." What is your opinion of the media? "Servile."   John McCain is the Republican presidential candidate, Sarah Palin is his running mate.  John and Cindy McCain have four children and Meghan McCain is the one who blogs online (at McCainBloggette.com and has also written a book for children about her father) and she notes today:    What a long strange journey it's been. Dad I love you so much and am so proud to be your daughter every day. If you need to know why you should vote for Dad, click here. Thank you to everyone for everything... And yes, we will be posting about election night. You didn't think I would leave my loyal readers hanging, did you? Now get out and vote!   McCain - Palin will hold their election night party in Manchester, New Hampshire at Jillian's (50 Phillippe Cote Street) starting at 8:00 p.m.  Of Govenor Palin, Scott Conroy (CBS News) reports:   After campaigning coast to coast on Monday, Sarah Palin caught a few winks on a red-eye flight to her home state, where fresh snow glistened in the early-morning moonlight as the temperature hovered around 14 degrees. Palin voted early this morning inside the tiny City Hall building where just six years ago she presided as mayor of this once unknown frontier town outside Anchorage. Proudly donning her "I Voted Today" sticker, the Alaska governor delivered a short statement to reporters and took a few questions before she heads to Phoenix to find out whether she'll become the first female vice president of the United States. It's been a whirlwind couple of months for Palin, who has fallen under perhaps more scrutiny than any vice presidential candidate in the nation's history. But as usual, she portrayed an almost mystifying sense of calm, considering all that she has been through in such a relatively short time.     And Kimberly Wilder (On The Wilder Side) notes, "Green Party Presidential Candidate Cynthia McKinney will be spending Election Night with California Congressional Candidate and Peace Mom Cindy Sheehan. There will be live streaming here starting at 8pm."   iraq gina chon the wall street journal the new york times stephen farrell abeer mohammed katharine q. seelye michael birnbaum the washington post the los angeles times ned parker scott conroy cbs news kimberly wilder

Iraq? Find the coverage. It's not in the New York Times. Do you see it anywhere? Reuters runs an article claiming that October had the lowest death toll for US service members. Oh really? No, they're lying through their teeth. 13 is the death toll for US service members. 13 was the death toll in July and when you embarrass yourself by claiming you're referring to X-type of deaths, you damn well better grasp that some deaths from October are still under investigation. Translation, you don't know how the service members died so stick with the data, don't go inventing.

Remember that? It's from Saturday's "Robin Morgan's homophobic candidate" and we're starting with that because, golly goodness, M-NF sat on a death. 13 wasn't the lowest (July also had 13) but the number was actually 14 for the month of October. Why so many enjoy being punked by M-NF month after month is anyone's guess. Maybe they believe it makes them Charlie Brown attempting to kick that football? (Though why anyone would want to be sad sack Charlie Brown . . . ) Staying with the issue of deaths of service members, this is from Michael Birnbaum's "Va. Soldier's Death Under Investigation" (Washington Post)


The Defense Department announced yesterday the death of Pfc. Bradley Shane Coleman of Martinsville, Va., who had been serving in Iraq.
Coleman, 24, died Oct. 29 of noncombat injuries, and the death is under investigation, according to a department news release. He was assigned to the 51st Transportation Company, based in Mannheim, Germany.
Yolanda Coleman, his stepmother, told the Martinsville Bulletin on Sunday that he died of a gunshot wound. She declined to be interviewed yesterday.

From Iraq, Corinne Reilly's "Iraq still thirsting for water that's safe to drink" (McClatchy Newspapers) reports the never-improving-realities under which Iraqis continue to live:

From electricity and health care to education and the economy, Iraq has many needs, and safe drinking water is among the most urgent.
"The water situation in Iraq is a crisis," said Bushra Jabbar al Kinani, an Iraqi lawmaker and a member of the parliament's services and public works committee. "We see the consequences in the health of our people, and they are very bad."
Waterborne diseases such as cholera and typhoid are endemic. A cholera outbreak this summer sickened hundreds in Baghdad and Babil province. Diarrhea is among the leading causes of childhood illness and death in Iraq, according to the Iraqi Red Crescent Organization, a nonprofit aid agency.
"Everywhere there is not clean water there is disease," said Jalil al Shimari, a doctor with Baghdad's health directorate. "We see a steady number of people still getting sick from the water problems."

We'll drop back to Thursday's snapshot to note the ICRC's warning:

Yesterday, the International Comittee of the Red Cross issued a warning regarding Iraq's water:

"There has been some improvement in recent months, both in terms of security and essential services. More people now have access to health services and clean water. But far too many Iraqis still have no choice but to drink dirty water and live in insalubrious conditions," said Juan-Pedro Schaerer, the ICRC's head of delegation for Iraq. "This leads to more sick people seeking treatment in a health-care system already stretched to the limit."

The ICRC is particularly concerned about people living in households not connected to a water network (some 40 per cent of the total, and mainly in the countryside and suburbs). They must either buy water -- at an average cost of 50 US cents for 10 litres -- or, if they are too poor to do so, collect it from rivers and wells, which are often polluted. Even households that do have piped water regularly experience problems owing to a chronic lack of maintenance and innumerable illegal connections to the network. Furthermore, many Iraqis have to live with the health hazards of uncollected household waste and untreated sewage.

As a result, many people contract water-borne diseases, further straining hospitals and clinics already struggling with a lack of resources. "My daughter is here because she drank dirty water," said a mother at Abu Ghraib General Hospital, near Baghdad. "We have no clean water at home. The only water we get is from the river."

Medical staff are struggling with chronic shortages of supplies and equipment. Dilapidated and sometimes outdated medical facilities lack proper maintenance and sanitation. Electricity shortages are common and many facilities have to rely on back-up generators. Many Iraqis simply cannot afford the treatment they need. Specialized surgery and treatment for diseases such as cancer are often available only in certain hospitals in the main cities.

Imogen Foulkes (BBC) spoke with the ICRC's Beatrice Megevand who noted the cholera outbreak (the now yearly cholera outbreak) and "said she was especially concerned about the lack of clean water supplies. Ms Megevand Roggo said even the most basic infrastructure in Iraq is not functioning."

Reuters notes a Baghdad bombing today has claimed at least 13 lives.

Returning to the topic of service members, Victoria Kim's "Gunman on 101 Freeway overpass in Santa Barbara is arrested" (Los Angeles Times) offers

A masked gunman who was waving an American flag on a 101 Freeway overpass in Santa Barbara was in police custody after an hours-long standoff that shut down the freeway in both directions and caused a rush-hour traffic snarl this morning, officials said.
Edward Van Tassel, a 28-year-old Army veteran who served in Iraq, first surrendered his handgun to police, officials said. As part of the negotiation, Van Tassel asked authorities for a Barack Obama sign, which he posted on a chain-link fence on the overpass along with the flag he was holding, said Sgt. Lorenzo Duarte of the Santa Barbara Police Department.



Turning to the US presidential race. It is election day. Finally. As Katharine Q. Seelye notes on the front page of today's New York Times ["Election Night (Popcorn Included)"], "The fact is, there is plent of mystery -- nad there is only one poll that counts." Anything can happen. Kimberly Wilder (On The Wilder Side) will live blog the election tonight beginning at 8:00 p.m. EST. So check out her site which will go beyond the D and R to include other letters in the alphabet. Including "G" (Wilder is a Green.) The McKinney - Clemente website remains down but we will note this from Rosa Clemente's personal website:

We are not the alternative ; we are the imperative. Donate to the Green Party Now

M1 from dead prez speaks about Cynthia McKinney & Rosa Clemente Rosa A. Clemente released the following statement: "I am honored and excited to accept this invitation to run with Cynthia McKinney. Cynthia McKinney is a hero to me and many others across this country and around the world for her courage in standing up to George Bush while the Democratic Party establishment caved. "This campaign is the opportunity the Hip-Hop generation has been working for. This is our time to address the issues affecting our communities – rising unemployment, the high cost of food and housing, a lack of quality public education and access to higher education, the prison-industrial complex, and unaccountable corporate media. These issues are not being addressed by either the Republican or Democratic nominee. "I choose to do this, not for me, but for my generation, my community and my daughter. I don't see the Green Party as an alternative; I see it as an imperative. I trust that my Vice Presidential run will inspire all people, but especially young people of color, to recognize that we have more then two choices. Together, we can build the future we've been dreaming of." Hip-Hop artist M1 says, "I've never voted in the Presidential election; I've never felt strongly enough about a candidate to. Knowing that Rosa Clemente is down with Cynthia McKinney's run, I feel that now is the greatest opportunity for the Hip-Hop community to put our collective strength and power to the test and vote for someone who represents who we are and what we stand for." For more info visit: www.rosaclemente.com www.runcynthiarun.org

John McCain is the Republican Party presidential candidate, Sarah Palin is his running mate.
Vernon notes this from McCain - Palin '08:

McCain-Palin Campaign Launches Honest and Open Election Hotline

ARLINGTON, VA -- The McCain-Palin campaign launched the Honest and Open Election hotline to help citizens learn the location of their polling place, as well as report any instances of irregularities at the polls, including voter fraud, intimidation, violence and electioneering. The hotline can be accessed via phone at: 866-976-VOTE.

"With the tomorrow's election, our Honest and Open Election hotline will serve as an informative guide for all Americans participating in the electoral process," said McCain-Palin National Political Director Mike DuHaime. "The hotline will allow us to learn about and take steps toward remedying any voter irregularities at polling places across the country. While we are hopeful that Election Day will be free of any wrongdoing, allies of the Democrat Party, such as ACORN, have shown a willingness to commit fraud in both this election cycle and in 2004. Given the tightness of the polls, all examples of fraud must be addressed to preserve the integrity of the election."

In 2004, multiple forms of voter fraud occurred, including voter intimidation, fraudulent registrations, multiple ballots cast and votes bought for money. Already during the 2008 election cycle, a dead woman in Missouri cast an absentee ballot, individuals were arrested for voting twice in Florida and people in Ohio registered and voted on the same day.

Ralph Nader is the independent presidential candidate and Matt Gonzalez is his running mate. Lewis notes this from Team Nader:

*Election Day - Nader to Hold One-Word Press Conference

Press Release
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Marc Abizeid, 202-471-5833, marcabizeid@votenader.org

TUESDAY, NOV. 4 - Nader to Hold One-Word Response Press Conference

*NOTE CHANGE OF DATE

Special questioning/interview opportunities for members of the foreign media

In deference to the sound bite journalism that dominates presidential political media coverage, independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader will host a press conference at which he will only issue one-word responses to questions for the first 30 minutes.

Who: Ralph Nader

What: Special One-hour Press Conference. For the first half of the Press Conference, Mr. Nader will answer all questions with just a one-word response. For the second half of the press conference, foreign press credentialed media will be given priority.

Where: National Press Club, Murrow Room, 13th Floor - National Press Building, 529 14th Street NW, Washington, DC

When: 12 Noon, Tuesday, November 4

-End-

ShareThisShareThis

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

iraq
michael birnbaum
the washington post
the los angeles times
victoria kim
katharine q. seelye
the new york times
corinne reilly
mcclatchy newspapers