Tuesday, November 11. 2008.  Chaos and violence continue, attempted land-grabs continue, the treaty is still in a holding pattern, and Katrina vanden Heuvel preps her comedy act.   Today Iraq's cabinet met for six hours during which they were to address the issue of the treaty masquerading as a Status Of Forces Agreement.  However, AFP reports that they dispensed with the treaty quickly and quotes the Minister of Science and Techonology Raid Jahid Fahmi explaining, "The council of ministers will wait until we have a complete translation in Arabic of the American proposal and have consulted legal advisors before making a final decision." Despite this, the US remains publicly upbeat.  AP quotes an e-mail from a US Embassy official (unnamed) which informs them, "We understand the Iraqi government is continuing to study the agreement text. We believe that an agreement can be reached that meets the needs of both parties."  While Iraq decides to wait and the US tries to appear optimistic, Baghdad attempts to reassure its neighbors.  Sana Abdallah (Middle East Times) reports, "Iraq's National Security Minister Shirwan al-Waeli, who delivered a message to the Arab League from Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki outlining the security pact with the United States, said the accord contains 'basic content that no violations are undertaken from Iraqi soil against any neibhoring, Arab or friendly country, and it does not undermine Iraqi sovereignty'." That was already a fear on the part of some neighbors before October 26th.  Following that day's US attack on Syria, it's only become more of a fear.  Sara Flounders (Workers World) explains of that attack which killed 8 Syrians, "It is a violation of international law, the UN Charter, and U.S. law, specifically the War Powers Act."  Brooke Anderson (San Francisco Chronicle) observes, "Syria has demanded that Washington apologize for the strike and has threatened to cut off cooperation on Iraqi border security.  The government has also ordered all foreign staff of the American Language Center and American Cultural Center in Damascus to leave the country, and postponed a Nov. 12 meeting of a joint Syrian-Iraqi committee in Baghdad to improve troubled relations."  Xinhua notes that Hoshyar Zebari, Iraq's Foreign Minister, has "paid a surprise visit to Syria" today "as tension between the two neighbors rose after a U.S. cross-border raid killed eight Syrians last month."  While there, he again repeated the claim that Iraq will not allow itself to be used as a base for attacks on its neighbors.   Today Khaled Yacoub Oweis (Reuters) reports Syria refused to allow a World Food Program ship to unload rice "at the country's main port" due to "the percentage of cracked rice in the cargo" (according to a Syiran official).  The rice was intended for some of the estimated 194,000 refugees from Iraq currently living in Syria.    Iran is another neighbor and Fars News Agency reports Iraq's Ambassador to Iran Mohammed Majeed al-Sheikh met with Iranian MP Heshmatollah Falahatpishe who told the ambassador that "Iraq must not turn to the strategic territory of the United States and what the agreement must be geared to is paving the way for stabilizing an independent Iraqi state."   Today is Veterans Day and Survivor Corps has started Operation Survivor: "The traumatic effects of war, left unaddressed, will have far-reaching negative consequences for service members, their families, and their communities. Based on our ten years of global experience helping survivors of conflict overcome trauma and give back to their communities, Survivor Corps founded Operation Survivor to provide the same kind of life-changing support to American veterans and service members."   And IVAW's co-chair Adam Kokesh will also be noted here.  Kimberly Wilder (On The Wilder Side) is noting the following: Tomorrow, Wednesday, Nov 12th is the first date, when one of the demonstrators, an IVAW member from D.C., Adam Kokesh, will have his day in court. It is Adams' trial. If you are off work, please, please come. It will be difficult to get enough people out here in Long Island on short notice. These veterans and demonstrators are worthy of support. And, it will be important, but difficult, to get a crowd out for all 15 of them, on 15 different days. Please spread the word: Subject: Please come to court in Nassau County on Wed, Nov 12th at 8am to support the Hempstead 15 from the Hofstra Demo Subject: Hempstead 15 plead not guilty while cops defend brutalizing veterans It was a sad day for Nassau County, but a proud one for veterans and activists nation-wide when the Hempstead 15 plead not guilty Nov. 10 in the Nassau County District Courthouse to charges of disorderly conduct while a crowd of nearly 100 supporters cheered them from in and outside the building. Video of the court support demo is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNGTnxWJFW8   Returning to tensions in Iraq, Ed Johnson and Bill Varner (Bloomberg News) report the United Nations has warned the provincial elections scheduled for January 31st "may trigger more attacks" and the reporters note UN Secretary-General delivering a report to the UN Security Council Monday in which he termed "the security gains 'fragile'." Michele Montas handled Monday's UN briefing in NYC and she stated that Iraqi ministries no longer provide the United Nations with fatality information. She also noted Ban Ki-moon released a report and that he states the provincial elections " represent the most significant events in the coming months, as they can advance political dialogue, establish representative provincial councils and empower community leaders to meet the needs of local citizens in cooperation with the Government of Iraq. At the same time, he warns, there is potential for election-related violence and instability." Take "he warns" out of the previous quote and that's page 14 of the Secretary General's report (item 55). The United Nations report is entitled [PDF format warning] "Report of the Secretary-General pursuant to paragraph 6 of resolution 1830 (2008)."  The report covers a wide range of topics involving gains and things still needed.  Regarding elections, it notes: Following intense negotiations, the Council of Representatives adopted the provincial election law on 24 September and the Presidency Council ratified the measure on 7 October. The law was amended on 3 November to include provisions for minority representation in Baghdad, Basra and Ninawa. Provincial council elections are now scheduled to take place in early 2009 in 14 of the 18 governorates in Iraq.    Starting in August, attempts at intimdation aginst Christians in Mosul were reported with a dramatic increase in violence in the first two weeks of October. Over 2,200 families, more than 10,000 individuals, have reportedly fled their homes and most have sought temporary shelter in the Ninawa plains, leading my Special Representative to publicly express concern and strongly condemn the killing of civilians on 12 October. The development comes at a very sensitive time, and against a backdrop of heightened political tensions regarding the unresolved issues of minority representation in the provincial elections and disputed internal boundaries.   [. . .]  On 26 October, United States forces from Iraq launched an attack on a house in the village of Sukkariyah in the Syrian Arab Republic. I expressed my deep regret over the loss of civilian lives and I called for regional cooperation to solve issues of common concern, including border security. The situation in the region is fragile and we therefore must stay focused on initial positive steps towards regional dialogue.          And regarding Kirkuk and minorities, we'll note this from the report: During the reporting period my Special Representative and his political and electoral teams faciliated the negotiations on the provincial election law between the major political party blocs, the Presidency Council, members of the Council of Representatives and the President of the Kurdistan Regional Government. Following the passage of the election law, engagement with the parties continued with a view to their reconsidering the issue of minority representation in the provincial councils. An amendment addressing this issue was passed on 3 November. My Special Representative met with key leaders from the Christian, Yezidi, Shebek and Sabean Mandean communities to reassure them of the continued engagement of the United Nations on the issue of minority representation.  The provincial election stipulates special arrangements for Kirkuk Governorate, whereby a committee comprised of seven representatives (two Members of Parliament each from Kirkuk's Arab, Turkmen and Kurdish components and one Christian representative) is to submit a consense report to the Council of Representatives by 31 March 2009 on (a) mechanisms for sharing administrative and security powers and civil service positions in Kirkuk; (b) a review of violations against public and private property within the Governorate of Kirkuk before and after 9 April 2003, with the Government of Iraq guaranteeing the correction of those violations in accordance with the laws applied in Iraq; and (c) an examination of all data and records related to the demographic situation including the voter registry. The committee's findings will be binding recommendations for implementation by the Independent High Electoral Commission. The committee's mandate concerns the issues that lie at the epicentre of what has so far been irreconcilable Kurdish, Arab, Turkmen and Christian claims on the future administrative status of Kirku. UNAMI is ready, should it be invited, to provide advice and assistance to the committee. Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) notes that "world attention has focused on the battle to control oil-rick Kirkuk"; however, "the strip of small villages connecting Sinjar to Khanaqeen has turned into a powder keg as Kurdish and Arab parties compete for the loyalties of the minorities. Both sides are using economic incentives, intimidation, detention and in some cases murder."  Fadel focuses on Yazidi Murad Kashtu who has been taken into custody by Kurdish forces three times (twice he was beaten while in their custody) while threatening him over his work "with an Arab party in territory that the Kruds covet."  Asi tells Fadel, "Any man who is not with them (the Kurds) -- and especially not with the party (the Kurdistan Democratic Party) -- cannot live in the area because he will suffer, and for this reason I think all of us will leave the area."   Staying with violence but dropping back to yesterday's Baghdad bombings, Anwar J. Ali and Katherine Zoepf (New York Times) report the "synchronized triple-bombing" claimed 28 lives according to the Ministry of the Interior and that is and the "suicide attack in Baquba on Monday, seem to be part of a rise in violence after a relatively quiet few weeks here.  . . . The Associated Press counted at least 19 bombings in Baghdad this month as of Sunday, compared with 28 for all of October and 22 in September."  Mary Beth Sheridan and Qais Mizher (Washington Post) describe the scene: "Walls define much of this historic city -- slabs of concrete erected by U.S. soldiers or residents that have turned neighborhoods into mazes aimed at frustrating attackers.  Only recently, as security improved, did someone wedge open the barriers by Karim's Abu Wael restaurant.  No one noticed when someone drove a white Volkswagen Passat through the opening and parked.  At about 8 a.m. Monday, explosives in the Passat's trunk detonated, just as a minibus packed with 20 people passed by on the busy road on the other side of the barriers, witnesses and U.S. officials said."  Hussein Kadhim and Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) explain that there is some confusion as to whether there were three or four bombings: "Witnesses said they saw two car bombs followed by two roadise bombs, while police blamed a suicide bomber and two roadside bombs for the fatalities."  AP's Robert H. Reid and Qassim Abdul-Zahra raise the death toll to 31 and they add, "Witnesses said the suicide bomber mingled among rescuers and bystanders, then detonated an explosives belt, which probably accounted for most of the casualties."   Baghdad was again the scene of coordinated bombings this morning. BBC reports a double-bombing "during the morning rush hour.  The target appeared to be a newspaper distribution; the first blast hit a delivery lorry and the second a row of vendors waiting to collect newspapers."  AFP adds, "Three day labourers were killed and another 14 wounded when a bomb went off in an empty lot where they were waiting for work near Palestine street, one of the main thoroughfares of Baghdad." McClatchy's Sahar Issa notes 2 dead from the two bombings and seventeen wounded.   Other bombings today?   Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad mortar attack that left six people wounded a Baghdad roadside bombing that wounded six people, another Baghdad roadside bombing also injured six ("including three policemen"), a Nineveh car bombing that wounded fifteen people and the Turkish military bombed Dohuk last night and this morning.     Reflecting on the US election last week, former US House Rep and Senator  James G. Abourezk (CounterPunch) observes:   Of course, we all understood that Nader would not win the election, but the movement of Arab Americans away from him regrettably deprives him of the political influence he might have gained to press his positions, including his strong criticism of Israel's illegal occupation.  His voice is considerably weakened because of the movement of Arab American voters to other candidates, which is unfortunate for those Palestinians who live in desperation on a daily basis.  The same is true for the people of Lebanon and Syria who are in constant fear of being bombed by U.S. warplanes flown by Israeli pilots.   In this election, a great many Arab American joined Obama's winning coalition, despite Obama's clear indication that he wanted nothing to do with Arabs, either Christian or Muslim.  We saw, during his campaign, that his staff prevented Muslim women with head scarves from sitting behind him in view of the television cameras during his campaign rallies.  He visited Christian churches and Jewish Synagogues, but he refused to visit even one Mosque during the campaign.  And, finally, joining John McCain, he made the obligatory bow and scrape to the Israeli Lobby -- AIPAC -- during that group's 2008 convention.  He made no attempt to hide any of these clearly pro-Israeli actions from Arab Americans.  Had he done the same toward any other ethnic group, we would expect that the group would find another electoral home for their support and their votes.  But that, apparently, is not what happened this year.  Arab Americans voted overwhelming in support of Obama, rushing right past Ralph Nader, who has articulated the community's feelings about the Israeli occupation.    This is a continuation of the self-destructive attitude held by people of Arab descent.  We see it in the Arab world, and we see it among the Arab diaspora.  We see the urge to defeat or to overlook one of our own in favor of catering to those we think are certain to hold power.   Team Obama launched, encouraged and fed on some of the most sexist attacks the country's seen in years.  In a landscape where feminist 'leaders' rolled over and took it (with a smile!) The New Agenda was among the organizations springing up to promote self-respect and self-worth.  Amy Siskind notes that today is the quarter birthdray of New Agenda and recaps the recent history:   The New Agenda is formed on August 11th, and it's no longer just about Hillary  Playing hardball with Matthews on August 14th    Advancing our Platform to the Obama Campaign and the McCain Campaign  Clinton's journey awakens a new feminist movement and welcome to the fourth wave of feminism   We speak out about using the term "shrill" demanding an apology from Sen. Reid and The Wall Street Journal   The New Agenda is the first women's rights group to speak out against the sexism against Gov. Palin, which we do within 48 hours  Chris Matthews remains in our sights  We question NOW's endorsement of the Obama/Biden ticket, but refuse to appear on MSNBC saying "Thanks, but no thanks."  We organize actions to counter the sexism and misogyny aimed at Gov. Palin and we make a difference  We say "NO" to Larry Summers for Treasury Secretary, not once but twice  Oh, and we have one heck of a good time together each Monday night at 10 p.m. EST on Chewing the Fat with Ophelia     On Governor Palin, we noted Sunday at Third, "Palin is seen as a strong voice in the Republican Party's future so naturally the press violates all the rules to spread a whisper campaign. No, The New York Times is not supposed to allow opponents to attack someone without coming forward. Strange that when they acknowledge that policy these days, it's usually when someone in the entertainment industry threatens to sue the paper. The threat of lawsuit will always force the paper to issue one of those, 'Oops, we goofed. It is not our policy to allow character assaults to be launched by unnamed persons.' Maybe Palin should threaten to sue?" As Debra J. Saunders (San Francisco Chronicle) points out today, "It tells you everything that the Palin smear stories come from anonymous staffers.  There is no documentation.  There is no way to prove the rumors false.  Think graffiti in a junior high school girls' room."  Saunders goes on to note, "The political press corps doesn't win any awards in this episode, either.  Remember when the pack would not jump on National Enquirer stories about John Edwards' relations with Rielle Hunter and child -- because the story had not been nailed down?  It seems that there is a different standard for Palin -- to wit, anything goes."   Today the Times continues their efforts to smear Palin and Michael Cooper should be ashamed of himself.  He accuses her of "not going quietly into the sunsent" which is strange when you consider no one launched accusations like that at John Edwards who, following the 2004 election, immediately launched his 2008 presidential campaign.  He finds it shocking that "she will be given a starring role when the Republican Governors Associations meets in Miami" -- why the hell shouldn't she?  She's one of the few exctiing people that party has.  It's her or Ahnuld.  And she just came off a campaign where she packed in huge crowds.    "She seems determined to remain highly visible," Cooper frets.  Was she supposed to die?  Was she supposed to hang her head in shame?  Exactly what does the New York Times want from Governor Palin and how long is the paper going to allow the double-standard to remain so obvious in print?  He then goes on to declare that "Palin remains popular among some Republicans, and she is still mentioned as a possible presidential candidate in 2012."  Among some?  Jeremy P. Jacobs (PolitickerMA) reports the latest Rasmussen poll finds "64% of 1,000 likely Republican voters would support Palin over Rmoney, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, Louisian Gov. Bobby Jindal, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty and Florida Gov. Charlie Crist" for the 2012 GOP presidential nominee.  Among some? 8% judged Palin unfavorable in the poll (that's "somewhat" and "very") while 91% judged her favorable (that's "somewhat" and "very lumped together).  This echoes Rasmussen's earlier poll this month, "Seventy-one percent (71%) of Republicans say John McCain made the right choice by picking Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate, Palin has been the subject of largely critical media coverage but has attracted some of the most enthusiastic crowds of either campaign.  Sixty-five percent (65%) of GOP voters say the party picked the right nominee for president."  With Republicans, Palin was more popular than was McCain.   And that's in spire of non-stop attacks.   As soon as Palin was announced, Barack's operatives set about smearing her with one vile lie after another.  Early on, it was noted here (back in August) that we wouldn't repeat that nonsense but if Palin commented on it, we'd quote her.  She's commented on one of the big early lies, that Trig was not her son.  She did so on Fox's On the Record With Greta which has transcript and video:   VAN SUSTEREN: Is there anything else that has been raised or said about you in the media, either during the convention -- I mean, during the campaign or since the campaign ended, that you think you need to address that has been, you know, an allegation about you?   PALIN: Well, unfortunately, early on, there are a tremendous number of examples that we can give regarding my record and things that could have, should have been so easily corrected if -- if the media would have taken one step further and -- and investigated a little bit, not just gone on some blogger probably sitting there in their parents' basement, wearing their pajamas, blogging some kind of gossip or -- or a lie regarding, for instance, the -- the discussion about who was Trig's real mom? You know, Was it one of her daughters or was she faking her pregnancy?      And that was in mainstream media, the question that was asked, instead of just coming to me and -- and -- and you know, setting the record straight. And then when we tried to correct that, that, yes, truly, I am Trig's mother, for it to take days for it ever to have been corrected, that -- that kind of right out of the chute was one of the oddities of this campaign and the messaging.   And then, too, things that, again, so easily could have been corrected about my supposed attempts to censor and ban books when I was the mayor of Wasilla. And one of the examples that they gave was that media was just sure that one of the books I tried to ban was Harry Potter. Of course, it hadn't even been written when I was the Mayor of Wasilla. So just issues like that that just -- you know, it was -- it was mind- boggling to consider what it was that we were going to be up against, when you could see that something was written about, something was stated in the media. I knew the truth and I had the record to prove otherwise, and yet it would either take too long to unring that bell that had just been rung or there was no attempt at all to correct the record.   That was pretty frustrating.    That's Greta Van Sustern. We don't normally link to Fox but it was noted -- back in August -- that if Palin commented on that vile trash, we would note and otherwise we wouldn't.  She's commented.       Barry Grey (WSWS) addresses realities and hype in the election:   Virtually without exception, liberal commentators and "left" political tendencies have ignored or downplayed all such indications that Obama intends to pursue a conservative course and reject anything that suggests a more democratic and egalitarian restructuring of American capitalism. This has been facilitated by their interpretation of the election almost entirely in racial terms. The obsession with race, which for 40 years has been the mainstay of liberal politics in America, has, if anything, been accentuated in the aftermath of the election.     This is despite the fact that the election was a powerful refutation of the portrayal of American working people as racist, backward and hopelessly in the thrall of religion and conservative "values"--a political myth that assumed the status of an unassailable truth after the reelection of Bush in 2004.   Typical is the column in the Sunday New York Times by Frank Rich, which begins, "On the morning after a black man won the White House, America's tears of catharsis gave way to unadulterated joy." Rich notes approvingly that the election disproved what "we've been told by those in power… that we are small, bigoted and stupid--easily divided and easily frightened." He then makes the significant admission that "We heard this slander of America so often that we all started to believe it, liberals most certainly included." It is obvious that Rich, speaking for liberals in general, employs the same superficial impressionism, buttressed by an obsession with race, that led him to buy into the old illusions in order to embrace a new one--that Obama represents a new dawn of democracy and progress in America.      It is legitimate to recognize that the vote for Obama would not have been possible were it not for the fact that social attitudes in America have changed profoundly over the past 50 years--something that was for all practical purposes denied by Rich and his fellow liberals. Nor is there any doubt that the movement to the left of broad sections of the working class overcame any hesitations linked to the lingering influence of racial attitudes.  But there is a disturbing undercurrent in the response of Rich and other liberal and "left" commentators to the election. For them, it is all about race, and not about the social sentiments, policy questions and class issues that actually determined the outcome. They define the election as the victory of a black man, not the result of a wave of popular opposition to Bush and a Republican administration that lifted a candidate into the White House who happens to be black.     On the hype machine, Roger Snyder (Greens for Greens) expresses that he's reached his saturation level:   I sorry to say I'm over it. While I was moved by the first reports of people celebrating in the streets, and can still understand the feeling that many people (many of my neighbors) have, the plethora of bad analysis and false claims has left me not wanting to hear any more. For example: Obama's Historic Victory by Howard Zinn "But, as the first African American in the White House, elected by an enthusiastic citizenry which expects a decisive move towards peace and social justice, he presents a possibility for important change. Obama becomes president in a situation which cries out for such change. The nation has been engaged in two futile and immoral wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the American people have turned decisively against those wars." No and no. What people did was vote against Bush. They didn't like him anymore, and took it out on McCain. The McCain tactic of claiming to have years of inside experience backfired when the economic went south and the voters blamed those in power for the collapse. And they couldn't tell or didn't care that Obama was no different than McCain on the economy. And the economy was the issue. Obama was a likely loser before it came along. Not the wars. Not social justice.     Cynthia McKinney was the Green Party's presidential candidate and Rosa Clemente was her running mate.  Unlike other presidential tickets, Cynthia regularly raised the issue of the prison-industrial-complex and the death penalty throughout her campaign.  Gloria Rubac (Workers World) reports, "Cynthia McKinney made history in Texas Oct. 30.  Never has any politician or any candidate for public office been in Huntsville, Texas, on an execution night to join in with those protesting.  . . . As [Greg] Wright's stepdaughter stood outside of the death house holding a cell phone in one hand and a framed photo Wright in the other, McKinney approached her and asked about the photo.  'How long has your family been dealing with fighting this execution?  Did you ever think that your family would ever have to deal with the issue of the death penalty in such a personal way?'  McKinney listened to Misty Smith explain that they had been fighting to prove Wright's innocence for seven or eight years and that never did she think she and her mother would be going through this injustice."   Meanwhile Laura Carlsen (CounterPunch) reports that "Latin American leaders still aren't running to the mountaintop to proclaim the dawn of a new era in U.S. relations.  The response can be characterized more as hope seen through the ever-leery eye the contintent keeps on its northern neighbor.  The U.S. government has a long way to go to undo the damage done to its relations and its repuations through decades of both Republican and Democratic presidencies.  Latin American leaders placed conditions and qualifications on their congratulations.  Lula in Brazil and Evo Morales in Bolivia called for an end to the 'unjustifiable' embargo against Cuba.  Morales added a demand for withdrawal of U.S. troops from the region.  Mexico's Felipe Calderon sent a brief congratulatory note, calling for strengthening bilateral relations and emphasizing the role of Mexican-Americans in the elections and the U.S. economy.  This was his way of insisting on action toward legalizing the status of Mexican immigrants and creating legal frameworks for future immigration flows."   Dr. Elias Akleh (Information Clearing House) evaluates the realities of the upcoming Obama presidency:   Obama is no different. He will soon be exposed the person he really is; just another wolf in sheep clothing. Obama's promises to protect the middle class are just empty promises. This was obvious after he approved the $700 billion (plus interest) bailout to give more tax money to corrupt bankers, who will use that money to buy weaker banks. The money should have been used to pay portions of the mortgages the middle class owe to the banks, so they could keep their homes. His acclaimed tax cut promise to the middle class means nothing to its unemployed members. The official unemployment rate is 6.5% not counting those, who are not receiving unemployment benefits and are thus not counted. In 2008 alone Americans have lost 1.2 million jobs to outsourcing. Obama's solution to outsourcing is offering corporations tax cuts as incentives to keep the jobs in the US. Such incentive is nothing compared to the huge savings, in the forms of benefits and retirement funds the corporations are saving by employing very cheap labor force unprotected by any labor laws in third world countries lacking any environmental laws. Obama never talked about the poor Americans. For him they don't exist. Obama's real position concerning the unfair NAFTA agreement, that he aggressively criticized and called for its revocation, was exposed later, when it was leaked that his advisor Astan Goolsbee had called Canadian officials asking them not to take Obama's anti-NAFTA rhetoric seriously, but "... should be viewed as more about political positioning than a clear articulation of policy plan".   Herb the Verb (Corrente) takes on bigot Jasmyne A. Canick who made an ass out of herself on NPR's Talk of the Nation spewing homophobia, "She has a point, after all, since human rights are a limited resource, the more human rights your group gets, the less my group gets.  She didn't say whether that also translates to brown people, women, etc., but it isn't a stretch to assume that it does."  (Herb the Verb is using sarcasm.)  And we'll close out on this topic with Media Matters (which misses the boat in their criticism):   During the November 7 edition of ABC's The View, while discussing the passage of Proposition 8, the California ballot initiative amending the state constitution to ban same-sex marriage and effectively overturning the California Supreme Court's May 15 ruling that affirmed the constitutional right of same-sex couples to marry, co-host Elisabeth Hasselbeck asserted that a "priest" in Sweden was "put in jail for not wanting to perform a marriage to a gay couple, so then they put him in jail because the law stated that you could not discriminate based on sexual preference." Later in the discussion, co-host Sherri Shepherd said: "I don't want to know that my pastor -- because, you know, the church is preaching against homosexuality, and I don't want to know that my pastor could be jailed." However, contrary to Hasselbeck and Shepherd's suggestion that as a result of the California Supreme Court's ruling -- or without the passage of Proposition 8 -- members of the clergy "could be jailed" for refusing to perform gay marriages, neither the decision by the California Supreme Court, nor Proposition 8 had anything to do with members of the clergy. The California Supreme Court's ruling applied only to state officials. The ruling directed "state officials [] [to] take all necessary and appropriate steps so that local officials may begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples" [emphasis added]. The court itself noted the irrelevance of its decision to clergy, saying in the majority opinion that "no religion will be required to change its policies or practices with regard to same-sex couples, and no religious officiant will be required to solemnize a marriage in contravention of his or her religious beliefs."   A) Barbara Walters brought it up.  (Media Matters has the transcript.)  It's her show.  Hold her accountable.  There was no reason for her to bring up things that weren't accurate (which was the reason Whoopi's visibly ticked off, video is posted as well).  Walters brought it up.  B) In the US, churches do not handle marriages or divorces, the government does.  You can be married in a church -- it can be a location.  You can pick someone of the clergy to preside over the ceremony; but the church itself has nothing to do with marriage or divorce in the US other than locale and ceremony.  States issue marriage licenses, states grant divorces.  That's how it works.  C) Elizabeth's tale of Sweden doesn't need to be addressed because who knows if it's true (it probably isn't) and who gives a damn?  This is the United States of America.  You don't need to fret over what Sweden did or didn't do.  In the US can someone be sued for refusing to marry a couple?  No. NO NO NO.  If they could, couples would be suing the Catholic Church which is very clear that you have a Catholic annullment (not a civil one) or a dead spouse if you plan to remarry in the Church.   And for pro-Barack talk, you can check out the Peace Resister Katrina vanden Heuvel who will be Mike Schneider's guest tonight on Bloomber TV's Night Talk.  Watch Mike try to keep a straight face as alleged lefty Katty-van-van declares, "I could see sending Colin Powell to the middle east or to Iraq to help faciliate an exit out of Iraq or to really move on a Middle East peace process."  Yes, Katty-van-van is that silly of a prat-prat. Katty-van-van will go on to hiss, "I'm not ecstatic that there are so many Clinton administration people" but Colin Powell -- the man who lied to the UN and created his own "blot" -- she wants to bring as someone to do 'good' work in the Mid East?  Cover-up Collie, covering up for War Crimes since Vietnam?  In fairness, if Katty's saying it either her husband or her father told her to.  Since it's so outrageous, the talking points came from her father.   Laugh with Katty-van-van tonight at 10:00 PM in Europe, Asia or the US on Bloomberg TV or catch the artifical coo in stereo on Bloomberg Radio (1130 AM in NYC also on XM and Sirius) at the same time.  You can also catch Night Talk online at Bloomberg.com and click here for the podcast (or check iTunes Business News).   iraq anwar j. ali the new york times katherine zoepf leila fadel mcclatchy newspapers hussein kadhim the washington post mary beth sheridan qais mizher elias akleh roger snyder ed johnson bill varner

Q: How many families are you helping now?

A: About 15. The total coming is about 80. They're coming to Turlock and Modesto because there's such a large population of Assyrians here.

Q: How do they get to the San Joaquin Valley?

A: They're originally from Iraq, and because of the war they had to leave. They left either to Jordan or to Syria or Turkey, and they just wait there until the United Nations gets all their papers together. They're coming here as legal immigrants. They all have green cards. They can work. They need jobs. We need trucks to help delivery of these items. All these stores are calling saying we have all this stuff for you but you need to come get it. We need trucks, just people helping.

Q: Aside from things like furniture and cash, you're also providing services, is that right?

A: If they have to go to the doctor, we take them to the doctor. Ninety percent of the time, we have to go in the room with them because the doctor does not understand them and vice versa. Anything you have to do every day, they have to do every day, too, but they don't have the skills, they don't have the language and they don't know the people.

The above is from Adam Ashton's "Iraqi refugees get help in adapting to U.S. life" (The Modesto Bee) which is an interview with Esther Warda of Light From The East and an extended version of the text interview is available in audio form here (click on "Media: Valley Voices: Esther Warda" at the right). Iraqi Christians are a small part of the country's overall population; however, they make up a large number of the five million internal and external refuegees (that's the number the Obama team is now using) with some estimates saying that they make up 44% of the external refugees. Last month saw Iraqi Christians targeted in Mosul and there has still no explanation for who was behind that violence. Jennifer Riley (Christian Post) noted yesterday morning, "Christians worldwide will pray for the persecuted church on Sunday with special emphasis this year on Christians in India and Iraq. . . . Meanwhile in Iraq, more than 13,000 Christians were displaced in the northern city of Mosul within two weeks in the month of October. The massive exodus in a country where Christians make up only two percent of the population was sparked by a series of murders and death threats by unknown Muslim militants."
This is a press release, we'll note it in full:


Persecution of Christians On the Rise Worldwide, ACN Report Reveals

11/10/2008 - 10:11 AM PST

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
MEDIA ADVISORY
Catholic PRWire

Brooklyn, New York (November 10, 2008) -- Offering a glimpse into the lives of millions of victimized Christians, and featuring interviews with leading religious from many of today's war-torn regions, a newly released report from Aid to the Church in Need entitled Persecuted and Forgotten? A Report on Christians Oppressed for their Faith 2007-2008 tells the sad story of the often ignored suffering and persecution of Christians that is ongoing today.

Staggering Statistics Revealed: 550 Million Christians Affected

Today, more than 200 million Christians suffer for their faith, each day threatened with murder and other acts of violence. An additional 350 million Christians are thought to suffer lesser degrees of oppression, including discrimination and restrictions on the practice of their religion. These are just two of the staggering statistics included in Persecuted and Forgotten? A Report on Christians Oppressed for their Faith 2007-2008.

A Catastrophe Virtually Ignored

"The persecution of Christians in our world today amounts to a human rights disaster. It is a catastrophe that has been ignored by the media, almost as if a news black-out has been enforced. This book, Persecuted and Forgotten? which looks at those countries where Christians suffer for their faith, helps to redress the balance, putting on record the trials and tribulations people face for remaining true to their beliefs," says Archbishop George Casmoussa of Mosul, Iraq, just one of many religious interviewed for this book.

The Church's Survival Under Threat

The research, conducted by Aid to the Church in Need (ACN), an international charity which aids the suffering and persecuted Church, shows that, in the past two years, acts of violence and intimidation against Christians have intensified in 17 out of the 30 countries under investigation. The findings presented in the charity's report show that the Church's survival is now under threat in Algeria, Eritrea, Iran, Iraq and Palestine. Based on first-hand reports and interviews with leading clergy, the book highlights the way in which the rise of religious extremism, combined with nationalism, have marginalized Christians, who are often labeled as agents of Western interference. Covering suffering and persecution of Christians in countries such as China, India, Israel/Palestine and Pakistan, Persecuted and Forgotten? offers an overview of the situation for Christians in each country before detailing significant incidents of violence and intimidation as well as key pronouncements by political and religious leaders.

Report Release Information:

This 112-page report is now available in paperback book format for a suggested donation of $15 by contacting ACN at 800-628-6333. Persecuted and Forgotten? is published by Aid to the Church in Need, its publication partly sponsored by a benefactor of the organization.

About ACN:
Aid to the Church in Need was founded in 1947 by Father Werenfried van Straaten after he witnessed firsthand the ravages of war. The young Norbertine priest had a mission -- to shed light on the suffering and persecuted of the world. For his lifelong commitment to the most vulnerable of God’s people, Father Werenfried was named an Outstanding Apostle of Charity by John Paul II. Now, more than 60 years later, ACN's family of faithful continue to fulfill Fr. Werenfried's mission.

Each year, under the guidance of the Holy Father and with the support of ACN's benefactors, Aid to the Church in Need supports more than 5,000 projects in 145 countries across the globe. Our eight key programs are: Support of Formations, Distribution of Spiritual Literature, Construction of Churches, Transportation for Religious, Aid to Refugees, Care for Elderly Religious, Mass Offerings for Poor Priests, and Media Outreach.

Website: www.churchinneed.org

For more information, contact Michael Varenne at 800-628-6333 or via email at Michael@churchinneed.org. Aid to the Church in Need can be reached by mail at:

Aid to the Church in Need
725 Leonard Street
Brooklyn, NY 11222

Contact:	Aid to the Church in Need http://www.churchinneed.org NY, 11222 US Michael Varenne - Production Manager, 718-609-0939
Keywords:	Persecution
Category:	Catholic Publications

Last night we noted Katherine Zoepf and Sam Dagher's "Iraq Gives Religious Minorities Fewer Seats Than the U.N. Suggested" (New York Times) and especially Leila Fadel's "Minorities, the victim of the powers that be?" (Baghdad Observer, McClatchy Newspapers) on how pretty words by Jalal Talabani, Iraq's president, didn't translate to any improvement or restoration in the represenation. Tina Susman's "Iraq approves minority quotas on provincial councils" (Los Angeles Times) notes:

Lawmakers on Monday approved the quota, which gives Christians and three other minorities a total of six reserved seats split among the governing councils in Baghdad, Nineveh and Basra provinces. The United Nations' special representative in Iraq had recommended 12 minority seats, a number Christian legislators had supported.
The three councils have a total of 129 members.
In a statement after Saturday's ratification, the chief of staff for the presidency council, Naseer Ani, said its members had consulted with Vatican representatives and held "extensive discussion" about the bill. They considered the U.N. recommendations but decided to ratify the legislation unchanged, he said.

They consulted minimally with the Vatican and blew it off. Susman notes MP Younadam Kanna who is a Christian and states that they will boycott the provincial elections.

Ned Parker's "In Iraq, Muqtada Sadr's followers struggle for relevance" (Los Angeles Times) argues that Moqtada al-Sadr's influence is declining -- a point that's been argued many times before and proven false. Parker notes the US military credits al-Sadr's cease-fire for the (small) decline in violence but Iraqi soldiers now patrol Sadr City and they've taken over a "dirt lot where people once prayed on Friday afternoons" while some al-Sadr fighters are thought to be splintering off and ignoring the cease-fire ("others in Sadr City whisper about Mahdi Army loyalists who have started to set off explosives or shoot Iraqi soldiers at close range"). Parker notes:

Sadr's troubles are rooted in the fighting between his militia and Iraqi security forces that erupted in March after Prime Minister Nouri Maliki ordered the army to clear the militia's strongholds in the southern city of Basra. The clashes there ended only when Sadr commanded his militia to stand down, and then did the same in Sadr City six weeks later.

Lynda notes Alexander Cockburn's interview with independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader, "Hail To The Chief of Staff" (CounterPunch):

AC: How many votes did you get? This year and in the last two campaigns?

[Nader]: Probably 700,000. In 2000 it was 2.8 million. In 2004, 450,000. But those figures don’t tell the story. In New York this time for example it was almost impossible to find me on the ballot.

AC What about you calling him an Uncle Tom on Fox?

Nader: On Fox I said that as the first African American president we wish him well. The question is, will he be Uncle Sam for the people or Uncle Tom for the giant corporations which are driving America into the ground. Fox cut it off after "corporations". He is less vulnerable to criticism and harder to criticize because of his race. When I said he was talking White Man's talk, the PC people got really upset. It doesn't matter that he sides with destruction of the Palestinians, and sides with the embargo. It doesn't matter that he turns his back on 100 million people and won’t even campaign in minority areas. It doesn't matter than he wants a bigger military budget, and an imperial foreign policy supporting various adventures of the Bush administration. It doesn't matter that he's for the death penalty ,which is targeted at minorities. But if you say one thing that isn't PC, you get their attention. I tell college audiences, a gender, racial or ethnic slur gets you upset, reality doesn't get you upset. Can Obama speak truth to the white power structure? There's every indication he doesn't want to. For example, in February he stiffed the State of the Black Union annual meeting in New Orleans. He's a very accommodating personality.

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


iraq
adam ashton
the new york times
sam dagher
katherine zoepf
leila fadel
mcclatchy newspapers
the los angeles times
tina susman
ned parker
jennifer riley
alexander cockburn

In this morning's New York Times, Sam Dagher's "Spate of Attacks Leaves 12 Dead Across Iraq" covers some of yesterday's violence

The attack in Khalis on Sunday took place in a part of town where security had been relaxed after a major Iraqi-led security operation across Diyala in July.
A roadside bomb killed one person in Baquba, the provincial security official said.
Saja Qadouri, a member of the Diyala provincial council, blamed laxity and infiltration in the ranks of local security forces for the attack. She said there was little effort to follow through and consolidate the security gains made over the summer.
A similar dynamic appears to be at play in Nineveh Province, according to several Iraqi and American officials interviewed last month. In the provincial capital, Mosul, on Monday, three Iraqi soldiers were killed and four were wounded when their convoy hit a roadside bomb, according to an Iraqi Army official.

The Washington Post's Ernesto Londono covers yesterday's violence in "Suicide Blast in Emergency Room Near Fallujah Kills 3:"


The woman apparently targeted armed guards who were being treated for wounds suffered Sunday during another bombing, said Capt. Mohammed al-Dulaimy, a spokesman for the Fallujah police department. Two physicians, Harith al-Ani and his wife, Salwa al-Dulaimy, were among three people killed in the attack at Amriyah Hospital, south of Fallujah, Capt. Dulaimy said.
A day earlier, a suicide bomber killed five people and wounded nine at a checkpoint near Ramadi manned by police officers and female guards hired to search women, an official at Ramadi Hospital said.
Both attacks took place in Anbar province. The U.S. military turned over primary responsibility for security in Anbar to provincial officials two months ago. Security in the province, once among the most volatile in Iraq, has improved markedly in recent months, prompting U.S. Marines to downscale their presence there.

That's yesterday. AP reports two Baghdad bombings today have claimed at least 22 lives with forty-two more wounded: "The bombs struck during morning rush hour in the northern part of the city. The first struck a passenger bus. The other blast occurred about 50 yards away as people rushed to help the wounded, authorities said." Reuters explains it was not a double bombing but a triple bombing and lists the death toll at 28 with the number wounded at sixty-eight.

Jonah e-mails that he reads Paul Krugman "these days with an airsick bag" and asks that we note John Pilger again. (Krugman's embarrassing himself playing Groupie-In-Chief.) This is from John Pilger's "The Diplomacy Of Lying" (Information Clearing House) written before election day last week (and noted here before):

When you bear this in mind, the US presidential race becomes surreal. The beatification of President Barack Obama is already under way; for it is he who "challenges America to rise up [and] summon 'the better angels of our nature'", says Rolling Stone magazine, reminiscent of the mating calls of Guardian writers to the "mystical" Blair. As ever, the Orwell Inversion Test is necessary. Obama claims that his vast campaign wealth comes from small individual donors, yet he has also received funds from some of the most notorious looters on Wall Street. Moreover, the "dove" and "candidate of change" has voted repeatedly to fund George W Bush's rapacious wars, and now demands more war in Afghanistan while he threatens to bomb Pakistan.
Dismissing the popular democracies in Latin America as a "vacuum" to be filled by the United States, he has endorsed Colombia's "right to strike terrorists who seek safe havens across its borders". Translated, this means the "right" of the criminal regime in that country to invade its neighbours, notably uppity Venezuela, on Washington's behalf. The British human rights group Justice for Colombia has just published a study concerning Anglo-American backing for the Colombian regime of Álvaro Uribe, which is responsible for more than 90 per cent of all cases of torture. The principal torturers, the "security forces", are trained by the Americans and the British. The Foreign Office replies that it is "improving the human rights record of the military and combating drug trafficking". The study finds not a shred of evidence to support this. Colombian officers with barbaric records, such as those implicated in the murder of a trade union leader, are welcomed to Britain for "seminars".
As in many parts of the world, the British role is that of subcontractor to Washington. The bloody "Plan Colombia" was the design of Bill Clinton, the last Democratic president and inspiration for Blair's and Brown's new Labour. Clinton's administration was at least as violent as Bush's – see Unicef's report that 500,000 Iraqi children died as a result of the Anglo-American blockade in the 1990s.
The lesson learned is that no presidential candidate, least of all a Democrat awash with money from America's "banksters", as Franklin Roosevelt called them, can or will challenge a militarised system that controls and rewards him. Obama's job is to present a benign, even progressive face that will revive America's democratic pretensions, internationally and domestically, while ensuring nothing of substance changes.


Bonnie reminds that Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Bitchy Tina Fey" went up yesterday. The e-mail address for this site is common_ills@yahoo.com.


iraq
the new york times
sam dagher
the washington post
ernesto londono
john pilger
the world today just nuts

Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Bitchy Tina Fey." Tina Fey explains, "I'm bitchy Tina Fey. Two weeks ago my show '30 Rock' came in third and the Water Cooler set called me a 'hit.' Then last week my 'hit' show lost a half-million viewers. I was cool back when Rudy G was 'Ameriac's mayor.' Now I'm just old and tired. But NBC hasn't caught on."


the world today just nuts
comic
bitchy tina fey
tina fey
the common ills

In today's New York Times, Katherine Zoepf and Sam Dagher's "Iraq Gives Religious Minorities Fewer Seats Than the U.N. Suggested" addresses what the presidency council approved yesterday. The reporters inform that the council -- made up of Iraq's president and two vice presidents -- signed off on the measure Parliament passed (after Parliament stripped Article 50 out of the provincial elctions bill) and they quote MP Younadim Kanna declaring, "Their sweet speeches to us turned out to be useless. We thought that they would compensate for what was done to us by other major political entitites." What's Kanna referring to? How about the song and dance that Iraq's religious minorities have gotten for weeks? From Friday's snapshot:


The Journal of Turkish Weekly reports that Chaldean-Assryian Council chair Jamil Zito declaring, "Iraq's Christians were hoping that various political factions would accept the UN Mission in Iraq proposal". Iraq may hold provincial elections in January (or not). Article 50 provided for religious minority representation. Article 50 was stripped out of the bill before Parliament passed it. A compromise was proposed this week which Iraqi Christians find insulting. Earlier this week, Sam Dagher and Mohammed al-Obaidi (New York Times) explained that Christians would get one seat each on Baghdad, Basra and Nineveh council
while Yazidis would get one seat on Nineveh for a total of 4 seats combined while Article 50 guaranteed the religious minorities 13 seats and the UN proposed 12 (the United Nations proposal came after Article 50 was deleted). Today Waleed Ibrahim, Tim Cocks and Philippa Fletcher (Reuters) report that the office of Iraqi President Jalal Talabani issued a statement yesterday about his meet up with Christians, "They expressed worries about the negative impact of the law passed in parliament, which they said gives them a small number of seats and does not protect their rights. They asked the [presidency] council to reject this law. The president showed full support to Christian and other minorities (and) . . . promised he will not sign any law that could deprive any Iraqi group of their rights." If you thought that or the treaty might have resulted in questions at the White House today you missed Tony Fratto's and the press' embarrassing performances.

So Talabani gives a bunch of pretty speeches and then goes ahead and votes for the measure which gives Iraq's religious community six seats -- when Article 50 guaranteed them 13 and the UN (after Article 50 was struck) proposed 12. Just a bunch of pretty words from Talabani. All it takes is one veto vote from any of the three members of the presidency council to tank a measure. Since this one passed, Talabani obviously voted for it despite his repeated assurances to the religious communities. Leila Fadel's "Minorities, the victim of the powers that be?" (Baghdad Observer, McClatchy Newspapers) explains:

The news was received by Christian leaders as an "insult." The original provincial elections law was passed after a section guaranteeing minorities a quota of representation was struck from the legislation. After nationwide protests from minority communities the parliament chose to pass a version of the law that gave minorities the least amount of representation. A United Nations proposal gave minorities double the number of seats.
Minorities drafted a letter to the presidency council asking them to reject the amendment. But they ratified the amendment today despite objections.
"The most important point is that after all these deliberations the right of the minorities to fix their seats has become a standing right," the council's spokesman Nasir al Ani said.
Screwing the minorities seems to be the order of the day so that the powerful become more powerful. Arab and Islamic parties banned together to pass the law because they worried that giving minorities would help Kurdish expansion. Arab nationalists fear the expansion of the Kurdish region and the ultimate secession of the Kurdish north. Currently the Kurds control the local government in the mostly northern Sunni Arab province of Nineveh.

BBC reports that January 31st is now the day scheduled for provincial elections and that "[t]he vote will be held in 14 of Iraq's 18 provinces - excluding Kirkuk and three autonomous Kurdish provinces." The elections were supposed to take place this year and never did. In other non-progress news, Iraq saw at least 26 reported deaths over the weekend as well as the death of 1 US soldier as noted yesterday.

They're just there to try and make the people free,
But the way that they're doing it, it don't seem like that to me.
Just more blood-letting and misery and tears
That this poor country's known for the last twenty years,
And the war drags on.
-- words and lyrics by Mick Softly (available on Donovan's Fairytale)

Last Sunday, ICCC's number of US troops killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war was 4,189. And tonight? 4193 is ICCC's count. Just Foreign Policy's counter estimates the number of Iraqis killed since the start of the illegal war to be 1,284,105 the same as last Sunday.

In some of the reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that left six people wounded, "a female suicide bomber" in Falluja who took her own life as well as 1 woman outside an emergency room with five more people left wounded, a Baquba bombing claimed 1 life and wounded five more, a Khalis roadside bombing that claimed 5 lives with eight more wounded, a Mosul roadside bombing that wounded two people, a Mosul "suicide car bomber" that wounded eleven people and a Mosul roadside bombing that claimed the lives of 3 Iraqi soldiers with seven people wounded. Dropping back to Saturday, McClatchy's Sahar Issa reported a Baghdad roadside bombing that claimed 1 life and left seven people wounded, another Baghdad roadside bombing that wounded three people, an Al Anbar Province "suicide bomber" who took his or her own life and seven members of the Iraqi police force wounded which was followed by a "sucide car" bombing that claimed the life of the driver and the lives of 8 civilians and a Mosul roadside bombing that claimed the life of 1 Iraqi soldier and left another wounded.

Shootings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports three Iraqi soldiers wounded in a Tuz Khurmatu attack and 1 police officer shot dead in Mosul. McClatchy's Sahar Issa reported Saturday 1 'suspect' and 1 Iraqi soldier wounded in a Kirkuk armed clash. Reuters notes a Sunday drive-by shooting in Tuz Khurmato that left three Iraqi police officers wounded.

Kidnappings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 police officer kidnapped in Kirkuk Saturday night.

Corpses?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reported Saturday 1 corpse was discovered in Baghdad.
Mosul. Reuters notes 2 corpses discovered Sunday in Iskandariya.

Al Bawaba reports that Bashar Assad, Syrian president, declared today that the treaty the White House wants with the puppet government because "American troops contribute to regional instability and should withdraw from Iraq. Assad told the audience that a recent American raid inside Syria near its border with Iraq is confirmation that the U.S. will use Iraq as a base to attack its neighbors." Staying with the treaty but moving to speculation, Iran's Press TV references al-Sabah (Iraq daily newspaper) to state that the White House refused Iraq's "request to change a SOFA provision which would grant US citiziens immunity from legal prosecution in Iraq. . . . The daily added, under the deal, Iraq would supervise US postal services inside the country but would not be permitted to inspect parcels distained for US institutions."


New content at Third:

Truest statement of the week
Truest statement of the week II
A note to our readers
Greens Gone Wild
TV: The journalists deliver the belly laughs
Roundtable
Barack revisions, hot off the presses!
We're not buying it
Ty's Corner
Rating the presidential campaign offices
The 2008 presidential election is over
TV with honesty
Highlights

Isaiah's latest goes up after this and he intends to make this a series of comics (at least three).

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


iraq
and the war drags on
donovan
the new york times
sam dagher
katherine zoepf
leila fadel
mcclatchy newspapers
the world today just nuts
the third estate sunday review

Today the US military announced:

A Multi-National Division -- Baghdad Soldier died of wounds and two Soldiers were wounded in a blast in northern Baghdad Nov. 8. The Soldiers were wounded when the vehicle they were traveling in was struck by an improvised explosive device at approximately noon. The Soldiers were quickly transported to the medical facility; however, one Soldier later succumbed to the wounds. The Soldiers' names are being withheld pending notification of next of kin. The names of the service members are announced through the U.S. Department of Defense Official Website at http://www.defenselink.mil/ . The announcements are made on the Website no earlier than 24 hours after notification of the service member's primary next of kin.

The announcement brings the total number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 4193 and to three for the month of November thus far.

And that's the full announcement -- included for the factually challenged who e-mail whenever DoD makes a death announcement (and names the dead) despite M-NF never announcing the death. As outlined above, DoD is supposed to announce the name. The death is supposed to be announced via M-NF.

The treaty masquerading as a Status Of Forces Agreement remains in the news. Liz Sly's "U.S. ultimatum spooks Iraq" (Chicago Tribune) explains:

The Iraqi government is coming around to the view that it would be better to sign a security deal with the Bush administration than to wait to strike a deal with President-elect Barack Obama, spurred in part by fresh U.S. concessions as well as threats by the U.S. to suspend all operations in Iraq if there is no deal by the end of the year, according to Iraqi officials.
The political mood began to shift more than a week ago, before Obama's election victory, after the U.S. delivered a stiff warning that if there is no deal by the end of the year, the U.S. military will be forced to suspend all its operations in Iraq, including the provision of many services such as air-traffic control as well as campaigns against the insurgency.
That appears to have given government officials pause, said Mahmoud Othman, a Kurdish legislator. "The Iraqi government realizes they still need the Americans," he said. "They still cannot survive on their own."

Ken Fireman and Daniel Williams (Bloomberg News) file a report maintaining that Iraq may decide to wait (until after Barack Obama is sworn in?) because al-Maliki's spokesperson Ali al-Dabbagh stated on Iraqi television Friday more meet ups between the US and Iraq were required on the treaty. It is unlikely (though not impossible) that Iraq will wait until after December 31st to enter into some form of agreement.

In the New York Times, Katherine Zoepf's "Followers of Shiite Cleric Reject Iraq Security Pact" also covers the treaty and includes:

In his Friday sermon in Sadr City, Mr. Battat mocked offers by Massoud Barzani, president of the Kurdistan Regional Government, to accept more American troops in Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq if the pact was not signed.
"This isn't constitutional, Mr. Barzani," Mr. Battat said. "You can take the Americans any time if you want them."



The following community sites have updated since Friday morning:

Rebecca's Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude;
Betty's Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man;
Cedric's Cedric's Big Mix;
Kat's Kat's Korner;
Mike's Mikey Likes It!;
Elaine's Like Maria Said Paz;
Wally's The Daily Jot;
Trina's Trina's Kitchen;
Ruth's Ruth's Report;
Marcia's SICKOFITRADLZ;
and Stan's Oh Boy It Never Ends

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

iraq
liz sly
the new york times
katherine zoepf
bloomberg news
daniel williams
like maria said paz
kats korner
sex and politics and screeds and attitude
thomas friedman is a great man
trinas kitchen
the daily jot
cedrics big mix
mikey likes it
ruths report
sickofitradlz
oh boy it never ends

Friday, November 7, 2008.  Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces another death, the pathetic voices of the left continue cooing while stronger voices from the left speak to realities, Talabani makes an announcement, and more.   Tuesday a presidential election was held in the US.  It could have been about something but that would have required actual issues.  Instead it was stroke, fondle and feather-kiss Barack by All Things Media Big and Small while real candidates were shut out of the coverage -- by all outlets and Amy Goodman a crappy once a month nod to Ralph or Cynthia didn't mean s**t when every day you swung that tired ass under the street lamp once more for Barack.  In 2004, we heard "never again."  Never again would we allow the movement to end the illegal war to be derailed by a presidential campaign.   That got tossed aside and ripped to shreds, now didn't it?     Let's move over to Loony Tune Stephen Zune who lied in a 2008 article, never corrected it and, before you knew it, all the simple minded were running with (Dahr Jamail, come on down!).  No, Hillary did not visit Iraq only once.  "Dr." Zunes, correct your lying mouth.  He, of course, refused to.  And he's back to lie some more at ZNet: "Obama's honest and prescient understanding of Iraq prior to the invasion gives hope that as president he will be less inclined to engage in such acts of reckless militarism."  Apparently Zunes is back on the meds that regulate his intense mood swings (sadly, the meds do nothing for his delusions). The 2002 speech was an embarrassment and nothing for the peace movement to praise.  There's been some question about that speech so let's put Zuney to the side for a moment.  The speech did take place.  It is recorded.  On video.  The reaction from the crowd is the only reason Team Barack had to lie and claim that the speech didn't exist.  The crowd wasn't applauding, they weren't cheering.  It was a meek and embarrassing speech (delivered to a sparse crowd, it should be noted).  When Barack finished there wasn't even polite applause.  But Zuney liked it and, if you're off your meds, you may as well.   Loony Tunes Zunes goes on to argue that if the War Hawk Barack isn't a dove, so what, because "he owes his nomination -- and therefore his election -- to those who opposed the invasion of Iraq".  Yeah, try collecting on that, Stephen.  Hey, remember Stephen Zunes' snit-fit at Barack a few months back?  When Barack picked Joe Biden as his running mate?  The Joe Biden who supported the illegal war?  But Loony wants you to believe that Barack's indebted to the 'anti-war' 'movement.'  (That would be the same Barack who punked Iraq Veterans Against the War in Denver -- they were protesting and getting attention, he sent out a Texan known for lying -- one who even lied for W. -- out to trick them and they fell for it and gave the media a lot of statements about how groovy Barack was.  As soon as the protest ended so did Barack's 'promise' to them.)  Zunes uses phrases like "surely Barack is aware of this" and what's really hilarious is that someone who whored his ass for Barack as hard Stephen did has to guess as to what Barack is and isn't aware of. But a debt is owed, Zunes maintains, and pressure will be applied!  In the real world, Mickey Z points out:     While the savvy strategist/activists of the Left harbor their delusions of grandeur about their ability to sway the Prince of Hope, here's a tiny bit what they--and all of us--have allowed to happen without exerting our "influence": epidemics of preventable diseases; the poisoning of our air, water, and food (including mother's breast milk); global warming, climate change, animal and plant extinctions, disappearing honeybees, destruction of the rain forest, topsoil depletion, etc.; one-third of Americans either uninsured or underinsured in terms of health care; 61% of corporations do not even pay taxes; presidential lies, electoral fraud, limited debates, etc.; the largest prison population on the planet; corporate control of public land, airwaves, and pensions; overt infringement of our civil liberties; bloated defense budget, unilateral military interventions, war crimes committed in our name, legalization of torture, blah, blah, blah...   Before you know it, the US government will start spying on American citizens and detaining prisoners without charges while allowing corporations to ravage the earth in pursuit of profit, wiping out entire eco-systems in the process.  Oops . . . sorry: they're already doing all that and the mighty Left is fighting back by supporting Obama?    Everywhere I went on Election Day, I was asked by friend and stranger alike: "Did you vote?" Once the polling booths closed, I could be 100% certain I'd not be asked another politically motivated question by such people for another four years. No one would be rushing up to me and demanding to know if I was planning to do anything about, say, FISA, the death penalty, the PATRIOT Act, homelessness, or factory farming. The election is over. Obama has won. For 99% of the Left, that means their work is done until 2012. It's time to gloat and reap all the rewards, right?    My prediction: The only pressure that will be consistently exerted by those on the Left will be the pressure of their soft butts on their couch cushions as they sit back to smugly watch Jon Stewart, Keith Olbermann, Stephen Colbert, and Bill Maher.   Zunes can never stick to the facts and, having a word count, has to resort frequently to falsehoods.  Which is how you end up with his claim that the likes of Susan Rice (she works herself into a war frenzy at the drop of a hat) and Our Modern Day Carrie Nations Samantha Power (Sammy, get the axe!) are "innovative and enlightened members of the foreign policy establishment".  Keep dreaming and keep lying Zunes.  If you told the truth at this late date, your head might fall out. For reality on the likes of Sammy Power, see John R. MacArthur's "Pro-War Liberals Frozen in the Headlights" (Common Dreams).  Or maybe you want to refer to  Howard Zinn on Power's "myopia": She believes that "there is a moral difference between setting out to destroy as many civilians as possible and killing civilians unintentionally and reluctantly in pursuit of a military objective." Of course, there's a difference, but is there a "moral" difference? That is, can you say one action is more reprehensible than the other?  In countless news briefings, Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney, responding to reporters' questions about civilian deaths in bombing, would say those deaths were "unintentional" or "inadvertent" or "accidental," as if that disposed of the problem. In the Vietnam War, the massive deaths of civilians by bombing were justified in the same way by Lyndon Johnson, Hubert Humphrey, Richard Nixon and various generals.    Or maybe you'd prefer Edward S. Herman (ZNet) explaining Power's belief system? She believes that "there is a moral difference between setting out to destroy as many civilians as possible and killing civilians unintentionally and reluctantly in pursuit of a military objective." Of course, there's a difference, but is there a "moral" difference? That is, can you say one action is more reprehensible than the other? In countless news briefings, Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney, responding to reporters' questions about civilian deaths in bombing, would say those deaths were "unintentional" or "inadvertent" or "accidental," as if that disposed of the problem. In the Vietnam War, the massive deaths of civilians by bombing were justified in the same way by Lyndon Johnson, Hubert Humphrey, Richard Nixon and various generals.   No, it doesn't sound very enlightened but then Stephen Zunes is the Minute Rice 'Scholar' of the campus set.  Here's Noam Chomsky (via ZNet) explaining the basics re: Sammy Power, "I don't think, incidentally, that it would be fair to criticize Power for her extraordinary services to state violence and terror. I am sure she is a decent and honorable person, and sincerely believes that she really is condemning the US leadership and political culture. From a desk at the Carr Center for Human Rights at the Kennedy School at Harvard, that's doubtless how it looks."     Let's spread the joy and turn to the Pathetic Dave Lindorff who writes (at CounterPunch), "And don't tell me 'Good, we should have all voted for Ralph Nader.'  The political left in the US is a pathetic joke."  Some parts of it are.  Such as Dave Lindorff.  Dave Lindorff is a PATHETIC JOKE.  He will die one because he made himself one.  In February, Third noted a Barack supporter and his IDIOTIC reasons for supporting Barack:   I think it is ridiculous not to acknowledge that a black candidate at this level is fundamentally different from all white candidates who have come before or who are now competing. the more so a black candidate who has risked jail by doing drugs, and who has relatives TODAY living in the Third World (Kenya).   The person making a PATHETIC FOOL of himself?  That's Dave Lindorff.   Yes, Dave Lindorff supported Barack because he was "a black candidate who has risked jail by doing drugs".  It doesn't get anymore pathetic than that.  Davey-Boy thought Barack was fighting the brave fight, just, no doubt, as Amy Winehouse does on the streets of London today.  The same 'civil rights' battle that River Phoenix gave his life for, Dave?   Dave Lindorff is an idiot, he is pathetic and he has proven that In These Times had good reason to end their relationship with him over his 'curious' assertions.  We stood by Crazy Ass back then.  We walked away after he made a frothy-mouthed fool of himself in February.  You can't go home again, Crazy Ass.  This is the world and bed you made, live with it.  Pablo Ouziel (Dissident Voice) tracks the continued disengration of left 'voices':     The new era of voting for the lesser of the two evils has penetrated the core of America's critical intellectual community, and some of the biggest voices for change have endorsed Obama. In effect, what has taken place is the union between those opposed to imperial ideology and those endorsing it. Although this serious event has gone largely unnoticed, American intellectuals will need to reflect on its consequences seriously if they are to contribute to the building of a stable future for humanity as a whole, and in particular to mending the tarnished corrupt fabric of American society.   One American intellectual, James Petras, has been able to identify the direct social consequences of such a paradigm shift and prior to the elections has publicly expressed his views in an article titled "The Elections and the Responsibility of the Intellectual to Speak Truth to Power: Twelve Reasons to Reject Obama and Support Nader/McKinney." As the title of the article clearly states, Petras voices the reasons why intellectuals have the responsibility of voting against Obama just like they should vote against McCain. In regards to those intellectuals who have endorsed Obama he says:  They are what C. Wright Mills called 'crackpot realists', abdicating their responsibility as critical intellectuals. In purporting to support the 'lesser evil' they are promoting the 'greater evil': The continuation of four more years of deepening recession, colonial wars and popular alienation.    After listening last night to Obama's first speech after his victory, a victory he said was of the people, what Petras is saying seems disturbingly accurate when looked at through the prism of critical discourse analysis. One can look back now to the presidency of George W. Bush and listen to his rhetoric. What has been his message throughout the last 8 years? When Obama's core messages are compared to Bush's, it becomes apparent that the coming presidential plans are not too different to current presidential policies.   Even more disturbing, is the fact that when Bush spoke throughout his presidency there was always a slight cynical reaction by the majority of the public, as most of the surveys have shown time and time again. However, last night the cynicism seemed to have vanished and the hope of a new American century was reborn with full force, to the clapping thunder and joyous splendour of the reborn American people. With every word uttered by Obama one could see how the empire was not gone, Bush almost killed it, now Obama the symbol of hope, together with all the American people in unity, are going to reconstruct their country and the world, restabilising America's faltering hegemony.   All of the above effects the illegal war.  The defocusing on what mattered, the hijacking of the peace movement result in the illegal war being prolonged.  The decisions Barack will be making (and receiving excuses on from Panhandle Media) will prolong the Iraq War. All of the appointments will say something (usually, "Empire! Empire! Empire!").  We'd planned to be dark after this day so you can see some of the above as raided from what would have been the year-in-review but it's also true that some topics we'll ignore.  Rahm Emanuel is now Barack's Chief of Staff.  I know Rahm.  If he makes a real ass out of himself, we'll call him out here or have a laugh over it, otherwise we'll ignore him.  (You can think back to the way Joe Biden was covered here after he became the v.p. nominee.)  You can go elsewhere community wide for negative criticism of Rahm (Rebecca doesn't like him) and we can highlight that here (or other trusted voices from outside the community) but unless Rahm makes a real ass out of himself on a particular day, I'm not going to be weighing in on him here. (And no compliments or defense unless he's the target of a pile-on.)  Example, Joshua Frank (Dissident Voice) offers, "For starters, Emanuel is a shameless neoliberal with close ties to the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), even co-authoring a strategy book with DLC president Bruce Reed." Tariq Ali (CounterPunch) opines, "The same day that Spain denied the son of Osama Bin Laden political asylum, Obama appointed the son of an Irgun terrorist as his Chief of Staff.  Osama's son declared that he did not agree with his father's actions or opinions.  Rahm Israel Emmanuel is an Israel-firster, a pro-war DLC hack and bully."   Meanwhile the Whig Standard editorializes today that Barack should use "soft power" and argue Barack "should start by reaffirming his greatness by demonstrating to the world the 'enduring power of our ideals.'  He should start by reaffirming his campaign pledge to stand is in U.S.-occupied Iraq where Assyrians -- an ancient Christian people indigenous to northern Iraq -- are the victims of a jihadist campaign of ethnic cleansing.  The U.S. must accept some blame for this crisis.  By deposing Iraiq dictator Saddam Hussein, the U.S. unwittingly unleashed sectarian forces that are bent on destroying religious pluralism in Iraq."  Meanwhile the National Council of Churches in Australia issues an alert and calls for their country to take in more Iraqi reufgees and to provide more funds for external and internal Iraqi refugees.  They note:   Violence and persecution against minority groups in Iraq continues, including communities of Christians which have been in existence for over 1500 years. The Assyrian Church of the East, as one of the Churches most affected, has mobilised itself worldwide to call attention to the crisis, and seek help where help can be found. Other Churches under extreme duress are the Syrian Orthodox, Coptic Orthodox, Armenian Apostolic, and Chaldean.    Prior to 2003, 4% of Iraq's population was Christian. Yet 40% of Iraq's 2.2 million refugees are Christian, which indicates the seriousness and disproportionate degree of violence and persecution to which Iraqi Christians are being exposed. "No one has been untouched by grief either by personal loss or to see their country torn apart by violence," said Bishop Mar Meelis Zaia, Australian head of the Assyrian Church of the East. According to Church sources this exodus is the result of a campaign of violence, murder, terrorism, threats, and intimidation targeted at the Christian minority.    Attacks have escalated since September, when the electoral law was changed to remove the system of quotas that ensured minority groups representation on provincial councils. The result of government investigations and the arrest of about 12 people in relation to the latest wave of attacks are being awaited.   The international Assyrian Christian community is raising money to help. Local parishes are collecting money to help the Assyrian Church of the East Relief Organisation (ACERO) provide aid for people in the city of Mosul, where the recent escalation of attacks has been most severe. In the long run the hope of those fleeing the country is for a self-governing administrative region within Iraq.     The Journal of Turkish Weekly reports that Chaldean-Assryian Council chair Jamil Zito declaring, "Iraq's Christians were hoping that various political factions would accept the UN Mission in Iraq proposal".  Iraq may hold provincial elections in January (or not).  Article 50 provided for religious minority representation.  Article 50 was stripped out of the bill before Parliament passed it.  A compromise was proposed this week which Iraqi Christians find insulting.  Earlier this week, Sam Dagher and Mohammed al-Obaidi (New York Times) explained that Christians would get one seat each on Baghdad, Basra and Nineveh council while Yazidis would get one seat on Nineveh for a total of 4 seats combined while Article 50 guaranteed the religious minorities 13 seats and the UN proposed 12 (the United Nations proposal came after Article 50 was deleted).  Today Waleed Ibrahim, Tim Cocks and Philippa Fletcher (Reuters) report that the office of Iraqi President Jalal Talabani issued a statement yesterday about his meet up with Christians, "They expressed worries about the negative impact of the law passed in parliament, which they said gives them a small number of seats and does not protect their rights.  They asked the [presidency] council to reject this law.  The president showed full support to Christian and other minorities (and) . . . promised he will not sign any law that could deprive any Iraqi group of their rights."  If you thought that or the treaty might have resulted in questions at the White House today you missed Tony Fratto's and the press' embarrassing performances.    The treaty?  Leila Fadel, Nancy A. Youssef and Warren P. Strobel (McClatchy Newspapers) report, "Many Iraqi officials are now calling the status-of-forces accord, or SOFA, 'the withdrawal agreement,' possibly as a way of marketing it to a wary public."  Ernesto Londono, Mary Beth Sheridan and Karen DeYoung (Washington Post) quote government spokesperson Ali al-Dabbagh, "Iraqis would like to know and see a fixed date" and that the US has to be prepared for more negotiatings while the US Embassy maintains (as does the US State Dept) that what Iraq has been given is the "final text."   Daniel Williams (Bloomberg News) adds that Hoshyar Zebari, the country's foreign minister, has stated that the treaty will be finalized with "the current administration."  AFP reports that al-Sadr follower Sheikh Sattar al-Batat, "Every Iraqi should read this agreement and decide for himself whether he agrees or disagree with it. . . . No one in his right mind can accept this agreement, so how can we?"  NYT's Katherine Zoepf (for the paper's other holding, International Herald Tribune) quotes al-Batat declaring, "We will continue to condemn the Iraqi-American pact because it will legislate the American presence in Iraq. Sadr City has lost 4,300 martyrs since the invasion, so how could we accept this agreement? We say no to the Iraqi government if it wishes to sign anything." And Alissa J. Rubin (New York Times) notes that Sunnis are also nervous over the treaty and Rubin also notes, "The Iraqi government, made up of exiles who were able to rise to power only as a result of the American invasion, has been looking for a way to support the pact without appearing to be kowtowing to Americans."   Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .   Bombings?    Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing killed Haider Hassoon (an Iraqi refugee who'd just reclaimed his home) and left six people wounded, a Baghdad sticky bombing that claimed 2 lives and left seven people injured and a Diyala Province roadside bombing targeting "Awakening" Council members -- two were killed, five more wounded.     Today the US military announced: "A Coalition force Soldier died in a non-combat related incident Nov. 6 in Kirkuk province. The name of the deceased is being withheld pending notification of next of kin and release by the Department of Defense. The incident is still under investigation." The announcement brings the number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war to 4191.   Public radio note, Monday on WBAI (2:00 pm EST), Cat Radio Cafe features: "Writer/performer Danny Hoch on Taking Over, his hip-hop infused play about New York gentrification; and Coney Island documentarian Charles Denson, photographer Claude Samton, and PS 225/ Shell Bank JHS/Abraham Lincoln HS graduate Sheila Samton on The Puffin Room's multi-media celebration of Coney Island Maybe. Hosted by Janet Coleman and David Dozer." And TV note, Sunday on CBS' 60 Minutes Steve Kroft explores president-elect Barack's "brain trust," Scott Pelley explores the final destinations for discarded cell phones, monitors, etc and Morley Safer speaks with pioneer Ted Turner.   Community member Stan started his own site yesterday entitled Oh Boy It Never Ends. He's still playing around with it and has so far offered "Good for Nader" and "Stan 411" and "Robin Morgan". Also posting yesterday, Mike's "Joshua Frank, Murphy, Cocktail Weinie Norman" covers the strong and the pathetic, Marcia's "A lot including my cousin is blogging!" is a grab bag post on a multitude of topics, Ruth's "McKinney results, Doug Ireland" continues Ruth's following of election results, Kat's "Pathetic Green Party" explores the planned uselessness of a political party, Cedric's "And she smells like urine" and Wally's "THIS JUST IN! TINA FEY'S A SKANK!" (joint-post) pulls a Jim and assigns Ava and I an article (joking, it falls under the topic we're already covering) and Rebecca's "gail collins is an idiot" covers the embarrassment of Collins. On the Green Party, Kimberly and Ian Wilder (On The Wilder Side) are advocating for action and not waiting around until Januray 2012 to start figuring out what to do: What next for the national Green Party? Let's send Malik Rahim to Congress The Green Party has a golden opportunity to elect a Congressperson next month. Let's work together, in this lull after the election, to focus on a powerful strategy and a winnable race. It has created such interesting timing, that the election for Congress, District 2, in Louisiana was changed to December 6, 2008. And, we have one of our strongest Green Party candidates running in that race. In the vacuum of the November elections being over, this is a chance for green throughout the country to focus their energy in one place, on one candidate, who has the qualifications, resume and charisma to win. Malik Rahim has credentials. He was a member of the Black Panther Party. He was a founder of Common Ground, an organization dedicated to supporting poor and working class people in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. Malik's story has been in a variety of national media outlets. And, Malik's work after Hurrican Katrina is a story in Amy Goodman's book, "Standing Up To The Madness." Malike gave one of the most compelling and inspiring speeches at the Green Party National Convention in Chicago this summer. (Video of his speech is: here.)   iraq howard zinn noam chomsky edward herman john r. macarthur tariq ali joshua frank mickey z. the new york times sam dagher mohammed al-obaidi leila fadel warren p. strobel mcclatchy newspapers nancy a. youssef the washington post mary beth sheridan ernesto londono karen deyoung bloomberg news daniel williams alissa j. rubin the new york times katherine zoepf wbai cat radio cafe janet coleman david dozer 60 minutes cbs news oh boy it never ends kats korner sex and politics and screeds and attitude the daily jot cedrics big mix mikey likes it ruths report sickofitradlz the third estate sunday review kimberly wilder