Tuesday! What a great day!!!!! :D I've been on the phone with C.I., Kat, Ava, Wally, Cedric and Jim doing prep on an article we're doing Sunday.
On what?
Hmm.
The losers.
See.
Yes,
Jon Corzine is not New Jersey's choice for governor. We are aware that
Bob Somerby spent today trying to do damage control insisting that the
governors races in Virginia and New Jersey didn't count. Didn't count?
Barack campaigned non-stop for Corzine. Corzine was the incumbent. He
couldn't hold on to his seat.
Even with Barry O and Caroline Kennedy.
Or maybe because of them.
Hillary voters will not forget and Jon Corzine learned that lesson tonight. Poor washed up politician.
And
most importantly, both races send a message to House and Senate Dems
afraid to buck the Great . . . Unwashed. They better start bucking
Barack. It's their asses that are on the line if they're up for
re-election in 2010, not Barack's.
America's love affair with
Barack is over. He currently polls worse than Bush in his first term.
It's over and those who chose to be Barry's buds will learn that, yes,
WE DO judge you by the company you keep. In fact, let's start a new
game: Six Degrees of Barry Soreto.
I can connect Robert Byrd to
domestic terrorist Bill Ayers. Watch! Robert Byrd knows Barack and
Barack was neighbor and friends with Bill Ayers and with Weather
Underground leader Bernardine Dohrn.
It's a fun game to play: Six Degrees of Barry Soreto. Patent pending. All rights assigned to Mike McKinnon. :D
Corzine
was a US Senator. He left the Senate to run for governor. He won that
race too. Then he ran for re-election and the voters said, "Piss off."
Poor
Jon Corzine. He stood by Barry O and thought that would be enough. In
fact, it helped defeat him. If I were Barbara Boxer -- who disgraced
herself in 2008 as she played catty in the most stereotypical manner --
I wouldn't plan on running for re-election because she's really hated
right now. And the polls show that. These whores like Corzine and Boxer
who thought they could lie and attack Hillary are finding out that
Hillary is a hell of a lot more popular with voters than they are.
So Boxer prepare to do what Jon Corzine's doing right now: Eat s**t.
Jonathan Martin (Politico) reports,
" Chris Christie has defeated New Jersey Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine,
becoming the first Republican to win statewide in more than a decade. With
79 percent of the vote in, Christie was winning, 49 to 45, with
independent candidate Chris Daggett pulling just 5 percent. " That's
got audio if you'd prefer to listen to it instead of reading.
Now
they kept saying the Republican Party was dead. Apparently idiots on my
side brought it back to life. How did they do that? By lying, by using
hypocrisy and by being the smuggest asses in the world.
Most of
all by putting the Not Ready For Prime Time Barry O on the world's
stage. We could have had a real president, we could have had Hillary
who would have done a great job. But we let Republicans, Communists and
Socialists infiltrate our Democratic Party primary and give the
nomination to Barack The Unprepared. And he has single handedly made
Evil Doer George W. Bush look better just by comparison. (That's what
happens when you continue ALL of Bush's policies.)
My party better wise up real quick or expect to be eating s**t the way Corzine is tonight.
Tuesday,
Novemer 3, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, IOM releases a study on
internal refugees in Iraq who have returned to their former homes,
still no election law in Iraq (and the pretense that Kirkuk is the big
hold up continues), a man goes to town on a NYT reporter online so we
know the reporter must be a woman, and more.
Today the
International Organization for Migration [IOM] released their latest
report on internal Iraqi refugees [PDF format warning] entitled "Assessment of Return to Iraq:"
The report notes the low rate of return (external refugees coming back
to Iraq) and focuses on the 1.6 million estimated interal refugees and
what the desires of this vulnerable population are. The report notes
that IOM spoke with "4,061 families (24,366 individuals)" while
assessing needs.
The bulk of the internally displaced hail from Baghdad (nearly 90%). From the report:
*
The majority of identified returnees (33,521 families, or 58%) have
returned to Baghdad governorate, while a significant proportion has
also been identified in Diyala and Anbar.
* 54,451 of the
returnees identified (94%) have returned from internal displacement,
while the remaining 3,659 identified families (6%) have returned from
abroad.
* Almost 90% of IOM-assessed post-Samarra IDPs were
displaced from Baghdad, diyala, and Ninewa, and almost 79% of
identified returns are also located in these three governorates.
The report notes the top six reasons IDPs give for their displacement are:
Direct threats to life (29.1%) Left out of fear (21.7%) Generalized violence (16.5%) Forced displacement from property (7.6%) Ethnic/religious/political discrimination (5.9%) Armed conflict (5.0%)
The
report notes that those who are returning often cite "harsh conditions
in displacement" as one of the reasons they have returned (exampele
include "high rent, lack of employment opportunities, poor shelter and
lack of basic services"). The second and third categories can be
combined: "Improved security in area of origin and very difficult
conditions in displacement" and "Very difficult conditions in
displacement". If you combine the two than 45.46% of those who have
returned are citing "very difficult conditions in displacement"
regions. Those returning to Baghdad cite "former employment,
transporation assistance, repair of damaged homes and property, and
renewed access to basic services" as their reasons. 38% of those who
have returned to their former homes "reported feeling safe only some of
the time." In addition, 42.5% of returnees in Anbar, Baghdad, Diyala
and Kirkuk report that "their homes are partially or completely
destroyed. In addition, 50% of returnees in these governorates no
longer have their movable property, such as cars, due to loss or theft."
Of
those returning to their former homes across Iraq, Arab Shia Muslims
make up the largest percent (49.4%), followed by Arab Sunni Muslim
(31.0%), Turkmen Sunni Muslim (9.7%) and Christians (8.9%). (Kurd Shia
Muslim, Kurd Sunni Muslim and Other each account for less than one
percent.) Of those who remain internally displaced, the highest percent
is (again) Arab Shia (58.4%) followed by Arab Sunni Muslim (29.3%) with
Christians and Kurd Sunni Muslim next (each at 4.4%), followed by Other
(4.0%) and Kurd Shia Muslim (0.7%). IOM's report also provides a gender
breakdown for heads of household of returnees: 12% are female-headed
households and 88% of returnees are male-headed housholds (and 35% of
the 88% cannot find work). The study found, "Among assessed returnee
female-headed households, food is consistently identified as a priority
need (60% across Iraq) along with non-food itmes (NFIs) and fueld. In
Baghdad, health and sanitation are major concerns for interviewed
female-headed households. Access to legal help was also a serious
issue, particularly in Diyala and Ninewa governorates." Breaking down
employment for returnee heads of household; 69.7% of females heading
households are unable to work contrasted with 15.4% of the male heads
of household; 4.7% of female heads of household are employed contrasted
with 50.1% of male heads of household, and 25.7% of female heads of
household are able to work but unable to find employment contrasted
with 34.5% of male heads of household in the same situation.
Returnees
were asked about basic services as well (remember, the bulk live in
Baghdad). How many have electricity each day for "More than 18 hours"?
Only 2%. Most (34%) report they have only one to two hours of
electricity each day. With water, more were able to rely on basic
services: 81.8% state they receive "Municipal water/pipe grid" while
the next most common response (7.9%) was "Rivers, streams or lakes."
Returnees ranked their needs and 61% stated their most pressing need
was food.
The report finds:
While the total number of
returns in Iraq continues to slowly grow since the end of 2007, it
remains a small fraction of the total Iraqi IDP and refugee
populations. In the face of uncertain security improvements, the future
of return is also unsure. Many IDP families continue to say that they
are waiting for security to improve in order to return. IOM
returnee assessments show that 'pull' factors such as improved security
in place of origin are more encouraging of return than 'push' factors
such as difficult conditions in place of displacement. However, as
prolonged displacement makes life difficult for Iraq's internally
displaced and refugees, this could change. Returning home means
facing a new set of challenges for Iraqi families. 34% of IOM-assessed
returnee families report that they are able to work yet unemployed, 34%
returned to partially or completely destroyed property, and 75% have
less than 6 hours of electricity per day. In addition, the majority
were displaced for more than one year, meaning that they return
carrying the stress and financial debilitation of long-term
displacement.
UPI reports
Nouri al-Maliki and Oscar Fernandez-Taranco met in Baghdad today. Who
is Oscar Fernandez-Taranco? The envoy United Nations Secretary-General
Ban Ki-moon sent "to discuss Baghdad's concerns over foreign meddling
following deadly bombings in August and October." Strange that two
bombings (and Nouri stomping his feet) gets UN action when the non-stop
and ongoing assault on Christians doesn't. Deutsche Presse Agentur reports
that Iraqi MP Yonadam Kanna has "petitioned Sunni Muslim parliamentary
speaker Iyad al-Samarrai to formally request [. . .] an international
investigator to determine who was behind the killing of Iraqi
Christians that Iraqi Christians believe are designed to convince them
to leave their homes". Mohammad Alef Jamal (Gulf News) adds:
When
Iraqi Mandaeans are killed, an international committee is formed to
defend their community and when Iraqi Christians are killed or
expelled, the Pope appeals to the US President to provide protection
for them. This is because these groups follow religions that connect
them to other countries. But when Iraqi scientists and
intellectuals are killed, or when border villages are bombed by
neighbouring countries and the bodies of Iraqis are torn apart by
violent explosions, the only reaction seen is condemnation, calls for
immediate investigation, threats and random accusations -- even before
an investigation starts. This is followed by an exchange of
accusations between politicians about whose fault it is, and some
prominent figures are made scapegoats, solely for electoral reasons.
Violence has created the refugee crisis, the world's largest refugee crisis. Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports
a Baghdad roadside bombing which injured two people, a Baquba roadside
bombing which claimed the lives of 2 police officers and left three
more wounded, a Mosul roadside bombing which claimed 1 life and left
two more people injured and a Mosul mortar attack which injured two
people.
Ignore the violence, joy for the greedy. BBC News reports,
"Iraq's oil ministry has signed an initial agreement with a consortium
led by the Italian firm, ENI, to develop the Zubair oilfield in
southern Iraq. The deal, which needs cabinet approval, calls for the
group to extract 200,000 barrels of oil a day, rising to 1.1 million a
day within seven years." Meanwhile AP notes that the consortium of British Petroleum and China National Petroleum Company's successful bid has been finalized. Khalid a-Ansary and Jack Kimball (Reuters) report
that the Iraqi Parliament has informed Hussain al-Shahristani, the
country's Oil Minister, that he will be testifying before them November
11th on the "distribution of the nation's oil wealth" which has led to
Nouri al-Maliki to have another public fit, muttering about "evil
supporters of the past regime" and comparing the summons to "the last
bombings" (he is a drama queen).
Meanwhile the 163-year-old US
daily newspaper the Joplin Globe -- serving the south west sections of
Missouri -- offers the editorial "In our view: Time to get out of Iraq:"
In
our view, American military force no longer plays a role in Iraq other
than "peace-keeping." Someone must contain the violence over time to
allow democratic-like institutions to flourish. That should not be the
role of American military power; it must be done by Iraqi institutions
controlled solely by the Iraqi government. It is now time for a broad
and sustained military withdrawal of American military forces from
Iraq. Whatever American forces of any sort that remain should be paid
for exclusively by the Iraqi government. We can argue forever about the
wisdom of our invasion and presence in Iraq beginning in 2003. For
sure, Iraq cannot be allowed to become another Korea, where today
30,000 American troops are held hostage to a crazy North Korean regime
while "protecting" a rich and prosperous South Korea. Withdraw now the
120,000 military personnel from Iraq, Mr. President and Congress. Do it
as quickly as the safety of those troops will permit.
Why the
Globe and not the New York Times? Because the Globe actually is read by
families of the enlisted, therefore, it is aware that there is an
ongoing war and it is aware that the Iraq War directly effects their
readership.
US President Barack Obama could end the Iraq War
immediately . . . if he wanted to. He's the biggest road block at
present because he is, as Bully Boy Bush once so infamously put it,
"the decider." (Especially true when an apethetic news media has
largely moved away from the issue and a public's been lulled into false
dreams of peace.) Other things that aren't helpful would include (a)
the Iraqi government or 'government' and (b) the Pentagon and KBR.
Starting with the former, Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) interviews US Lt Gen Charles H. Jacoby Jr.:Are
you concerned that the elections on which your withdrawal timetable is
based may be delayed? The Iraqi parliament is deadlocked over an
election law, even though the deadline has long since passed. This
parliamentary election is a decisive point in the history of Iraq's
democracy, and it's also very important to the United States. We have a
stake in their success. Iraq has had increasingly better elections over
time. Of course we look forward to these elections. And so we're very
concerned that we're past the date that the Iraqis wanted to have an
election law, and that every day that goes by eats into the established
date for the election. Iraq has the opportunity to demonstrate that it
has a viable and credible democracy, and can be a model for the region.
There's lots of opportunity here and we don't want to miss these
opportunities by having this election drift. Would an election delay
also delay the plan to withdraw all U.S. combat forces by August 2010?
We do not think we are at the point where we are off our plan, but of
course we are going to watch this very carefully. Any decision to vary
from the plan is a policy decision that won't take place here. It's too
soon to say whether a potential delay in the election is a potential
delay in the withdrawal. Alsumaria notes
rumors that US pressure is expected to lead various parties to accept
the United Nations' recommendations on the legislation:To that, Kurds
decried the US pressure calling them to renounce their rights in the
city and that after announcing that US Vice President Joe Biden called
Kurdistan Governor Massoud Al Barazani in order to talk over the
obstructions hindering approving elections law. MP Mahmoud Othman told
Al Hayat Newspaper that endeavors of Senior US officials are means to
pressure Kurds in order to accept the suggested solutions though they
are unfair. The US behaviors are biased, Othman added.It is no secret
that this kind of pressure is expected considering the importance USA
gives for holding the lections on time. MP Khairallah Al Basri said
that failing to reach an accordance solution regarding elections' law
will urge the USA to interfere in order to impose solutions.Alsumaria
sources had said that the Legal committee suggested a draft law that
proposes to adopt open list and determines the parliament's seats
number. The law also stipulates using multi-divisions system and
appoints the number of seats for each division without mentioning
Kirkuk. However the relevant parties did not agree on this suggestion.Ali Karim (Asia Times) reports
the recents bombings are said, by some, to have an impact on their
votes and quotes MP Mithal al-Alosi stating, "I expect a low turnout in
the elections if matters go on this way. The wounds of Bloody Wednesday
have not healed yet and the Salehiya bombs have deepened those wounds."
Mithal Alusi was noted in yesterday's snapshot, he's the head of the
Iraqi Nation Party and he appeared as a guest on Al Jazeera's latest Inside Iraq which began broadcasting last Friday.AFP reports
that Faraj al-Haidari, head of the country's Independent High Electoral
Commission, declared on Al-Sharquiay TV today, "The electoral
commission held talks with the United Nations on Tuesday to discuss the
timetable. We must receive the law in the next two days, otherwise we
will be unable to hold the election on the scheduled date of January
16. There is material relating to the election, and international
companies need time to print it. Fifteen thousand polling stations have
to be made ready for the election, as do 50,000 personnel." UPI speaks with MP Mohammad Salman who states there are currently three options.
1)
Allow the voting to be based on an open-list (where voters know which
people they are voting for and not just a party).
2) Keep the voting to a closed-list (as was done in the 2005 elections).
3)
"[P]ostpone the elections for at least one legislative term to give
lawmakers the chance to vet all of their concerns."
Salman
states that "is the most likely route" but that at least 70 MPs from
the Kurdistan Alliance object to the third option. That's an important
point because the US continues to pressure tthe KRG to agree to . . .
well to anything that will get the bill passed. And many in the press
wrongly -- WRONGLY -- continue to state that the issue of oil-rich
Kirkuk (claimed by the KRG and by Baghdad) is the road block. It is a
road block and it is not just bad reporting to leave out the issue of
the lists, it is politically ignorant.
Any legislative body --
true of the US Congress as well as Iraq's Parliament -- makes decisions
based on their own interests -- especially when it comes to
re-election. Closed lists are thought by many MPs to mean they have a
better shot at re-election. Open-lists are feared. (Nouri al-Maliki and
Ayad al-Alawi are two who have spoken out publicly for open-lists.)
When the Parliament is so fearful that open-lists may mean they aren't
re-elected, that is an issue, that is a road block and it's repeatedly
set aside or forgotten in press accounts. There are three options, UPI
is told. Find where the MP (a Sunni) is at all concerned about the
issue of Kirkuk in his statements. What is he concerned about? Open and
closed lists.
So the Iraqi Parliament drags their feet and they aren't the only ones. At yesterday's
public hearing of the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and
Afghanistan, it was learned that the Defense Department had still not
submitted all the plans for the draw-down that's supposed to be on the
verge of taking place. Not only have they not submitted all of their
own plans, they're supervision of KBR is so lax that KBR's been allowed
to skip submitting a plan. As noted in yesterday's snapshot,
Commissioner Robert Henke attempted to get an answer from the
Pentagon's Lee Hamilton to this question: "If the president announces
on February 27, 2009 the draw-down plan and we're on November 2nd, is
it possible that the contractor hasn't provided you any plan to adjust
staff accordingly?" Despite attempting to walk Hamilton through slowly
(after Hamilton rambled on with a non-answer reply) and despite asking,
"How is that possible?", Henke never got anything that would pass for
an answer to his questions.This morning Jen Dimascio (Politico -- link has text and audio) reports:KBR,
the largest contractor in Iraq, is pulling out of that country so
slowly that it could end up costing American taxpayers $193 million
more than expected, according to a new Pentagon audit.Furthermore,
during a hearing Monday by the Commission on Wartime Contracting, a
legislative body set up to study contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan,
Commissioner Charles Tiefer said the company's plodding exit from Iraq
could cost even more -- up to $300 million.As noted in yesterday's
snapshot, that's only one portion of the story. Dimascio notes a quote
from Commissioner Dov Zakheim and you can see yesterday's snapshot for
that full exchange. From last night, Kat's "Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan"
covers the hearing and she shares some impression on Commissioner Chris
Shays hearing performance. But Dimascio covers one aspect of the big
news from yesterday's hearings -- and we did consider skipping it but
fortunately didn't because the Commission actually had their act
together yesterday (we is Kat, Ava, Wally
and myself) -- the other big news was the lack of completed plans.For
the Pentagon, that's especially appalling and it's either an issue of
insubordination or the White House isn't really serious about a
draw-down. For the Pentagon, the refusal to submit their own plans or
demand that KBR draw up their own is appalling. Thompson declared in
the hearing that he visited with KBR most recently on September 25th or
26th and they still had no plans -- and Thompson was neither surprised
nor worried about the lack of planning.
In the US, Noor Faleh Almaleki has died. The 20-year-old Iraqi woman was intentionally run over October 20th (see the October 21st snapshot)
while she and Amal Edan Khalaf were running errands (the latter is the
mother of Noor's boyfriend and she was left injured in the assault).
Police suspected Noor's father, Faleh Hassan Almaleki, of the assault
and stated the probable motive was that he felt Noor had become "too
westernized." As noted in the October 30th snapshot,
Faleh Hassan Almaleki was finally arrested after going on the lamb --
first to Mexico, then flying to London where British authorities
refused him entry and he was sent back to the US and arrested in
Atlanta. Karan Olson and CNN note that the judge has set the man's bail at $5 million. Philippe Naughton (Times of London) adds,
"Noor died yesterday, having failed to recover consciousness after the
attack. The other woman, Amal Khalaf, was also seriously injured but is
expected to survive. "Rachel Stockman and 12 News (link has text and video) supply
this timeline:October 20th -Around 2 p.m. Police say Faleh Almaleki ran
down his daughter, friend. -Around 5 p.m. Nlets Alert with Almaleki's
license plate and vehicle description goes out October 23rd -U.S.
Customs and Border Protection notified. Addressing the timeline, Rachel
Stockman reports, "They allowed the suspect to cross the border into
Mexico so we wanted to know where the communication broke down. What we
found? Nlets, the system Peoria police use to notify other authorities
is not something US Customs always checks." Dustin Gardiner (Arizona Republic) quotes:
prosecutor Stephanie Low stating of the father, "By his own admission,
this was an intentional act and the reason was that his daughter had
brought shame on him and his family. This was an attempt at an honor
killing." Iraqi American Romina Korkes offered her thoughts on the so-called 'honor' killing last week in a column for the Arizona Republic.
Women
are attacked daily around the world. The attacks are dismissed. A large
number of men seem to think it's okay -- and a significant number of
women must agree since we're not in the streets marching -- and that
goes a long way towards explaining Rory O'Connor's post at Media Channel -- a site not known for its 'inclusive' view of humanity (to put it mildly). Noting Alissa J. Rubin's opinion piece from Sunday's New York Times (we noted it in Friday's snapshot),
O'Connor goes on to rip her apart. Now let's be clear, Alissa J. Rubin
being a woman doesn't mean she can't be ripped apart nor are we
concerned about tone. She's never been good with math (we've called her
"teen queen" at this site) and she's been so wack that she's even been
called "crack whore" here. But what have we done that Rory O'Connor
doesn't? We've praised her, yes. She's earned a lot of praise over the
years here. But that's not it. He doesn't have to praise her and,
indeed, he may not find anything worth praising in her writing. That is
his opinion.
But where there's a problem is that Alissa J. Rubin
was never the paper's problem. On her bad days, she jumbled the numbers
and was too quick to believe things she shouldn't have (such as the
"Awakenings" being universally embraced in areas they 'patrolled' or
'terrorized'). Her worst day never found her as bad as John F. Burns or
Dexter Filkins. I'm not seeing their names mentioned by Rory. Those are
the two worst offenders for what he's demanding (truth). But they don't
get called out. It's really strange that so few women have worked in
Baghdad for the New York Times (others include Cara Buckley, Sabrina
Tavernise, Erica Goode and, of course, Judith Miller) but they're
always the ones being ripped apart. Not the males. The issue isn't that
he called Rubin out. He's allowed to. He can loathe her and rip her
apart. The issue is that we haven't seen that same standard applied to
men.
This is the Judith Miller effect, the bash the bitch craze,
we've long documented here. Judith Miller did not start a war. Judith
Miller was not responsible for the entire media landscape. She did not
twist the arms of PBS and NBC and Oprah to get air time. Those people
wanted her on their shows. She did not twist arms at the paper to land
on the front page, the paper wanted her on the front page. Judith
Miller was so WRONG about the Iraq War but she wasn't a liar -- at
least not on the big issue. She honestly believed their were WMD in
Iraq, that's why she commandeered a squadron while stationed in Iraq.
She's a lousy reporter, her 'facts' do not hold up. She needs to be
held accountable. But she often had co-writers -- such as Michael R.
Gordon who remains at the paper and who spent the second Bush term
advocating for war on Iran. Judith Miller was a reporter for one of the
top three papers in the country (at that time). If you saw her on TV,
she was invited on. If you heard her on radio, she was invited on. If
you read her in another paper, a decision was made to print her
article. It took a lot of people echoing the government (not all of
whom believed the lies the way Miller did) to start the war on Iraq, to
lie to the people. Miller was one person. Hold her accountable, no
question, but what about all the others?
The pleasing lie
(pleasing to a lot of members of the press corps) is that Judith
Miller, all by herself, lied the nation into war. Judith Miller and
others like her helped the US get into Iraq but grasp that Dexter Filkins and John F. Burns
kept the US in Iraq. There are some who will kiss Dexy's butt because
of those bad, BAD, college campus appearances where he talks about (and
has done this for several years now) about how the Iraq War is lost and
how they knew it then and blah, blah, blah. That might have mattered.
If he'd done it in real time. But in real time, he was lying. In real
time, he was taking orders from the military -- as Molly Bingham
long ago explained, Dexy even cancelled a meeting with the Iraqi
resistance when US military brass frowned. In real time, Dexy let the
US military vet his copy. That's reality. His award winning 'reporting'?
Vetted by the US military. Vetted and delayed while it was vetted which
is why the paper ran it so many days after it was written.
I
have no problem with Judith Miller being called out -- and I've called
her out myself. But, look through the archvies, we've called out women
and we've called out men. We haven't worried about tone but we've made
damn sure that people were treated fairly -- even if that just meant
that abuse was heaped on equally.
I'm glad that someone at Media Channel remembered there is a war in Iraq and I'm glad that Rory O'Connor wrote with fire.
But I'm also aware that Alissa J. Rubin, graded on any scale, qualifies
as one of the better reporters the paper's had in Iraq. And I'm also
aware that MediaChannel is more than happy to go after Katie Couric or
any other woman but I find very little in efforts to praise women or to
link to them. (Until O'Connor's column, which I heard about from a
friend at the Times, I haven't visited MediaChannel since the efforts
to distort Marcia's
writing.) And if Alissa J. Rubin was Alan J. Rubin, I have to wonder
whether or not MediaChannel would even be weighing in? Again, it's been
a long, long time since they've made it known that they're aware of the
Iraq War.
This isn't a minor issue -- not the silence on Iraq or
the attacks on women. And, repeating, it's not about tone. It's about
fairness. We've ridiculed many women here and will do so again and
again and again. But we don't go to town on a woman and refuse to on
men. Todd S. Purdum is a better writer at Vanity Fair than he was at
the Times -- that has to do with the differing role, the fact that he
can write longer at Van Fair and the differences between the outlets.
But we went to town on Todd (who I know offline) and did so because his
work was as appalling as Elisabeth Bumiller's columns (run in the news
section but they were columns) at that time. (Bumiller's done some
strong reporting in the last few years.) We went to town on her, we
went to town on Todd. And the fact that I knew him didn't prevent that
nor did the fact that he was a man make me think, "I shouldn't
criticize." But there's a real locker room mentality among the online
critics where a man gets a pass and another one and another one and,
okay, let's make it about the work. But a woman gets ripped apart. The
ripping apart doesn't bother me . . . if it's applied to both.
We've linked to Rory before and we'll link to his post today one more time.
But it's really past time that a lot of online critics took a look what
they were doing. I'm not suggesting anyone change their style or tone
or make nice. I am suggesting that they make sure they treat people the
same -- regardless of gender. I do not believe Alissa J. Rubin was
treated the same as a male reporter would have been. I could be wrong,
I often am. But I'm saying my call on that goes to pattern:
MediaChannel's emphasis and the climate online.
Finally, independent reporter David Bacon remains one of the few remaining labor reporters in the country. (And he can be heard on KPFA's The Morning Show each Wednesday morning -- the program begins airing at 7:00 a.m. PST and streams online.) His latest report is "San Diego -- Land of Day Laborers, Farm Workers and Guest Workers"
(21st Century Manifesto):In Oceanside, Carlsbad, Del Mar and north San
Diego County, immigrant day laborers wait by the side of the road,
hoping a contractor will stop and offer them work. Alberto Juarez
Martinez slings his jacket over his shoulder while he waits. His hands
show the effect of a lifetime of manual work, plus arthritis suffered
as a child in Zapata, Zacatecas. The hands of Beto, a migrant from
Uruachi, Chihuahua, also show the effect of a lifetime of manual work.
Juan Castillo, a migrant from Tehuacan, Puebla, waits with his friends
in the parking lot of a market they've nicknamed La Gallinita, because
of the rooster on the roof of the building. Police in north county
towns have now started cruising by day labor sites in plainclothes,
pretending to be contractors offering workers jobs, and then citing
them and turning them over to immigration agents, even those with green
cards Many community organizations are protesting this
practice.Francisco Villa operates a lunch truck that visits the areas
where migrant day laborers live on hillsides and under trees. Villa
hands out leaflets advising workers of their rights and letting them
know that they can find help from California Rural Legal Assistance.
Across the street from Villa's truck, Zaragosa Brito and Andres Roman
Diaz, two migrants from Arcelia, Guerrero, sit next to a fence where
workers look for day labor, or get rides to the fields for farm work.
The men sleep out in the open in the field behind the fence, and have
worked on a local strawberry ranch, Rancho Diablo, for many years.
Tuesday,
Novemer 3, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, IOM releases a study on
internal refugees in Iraq who have returned to their former homes,
still no election law in Iraq (and the pretense that Kirkuk is the big
hold up continues), a man goes to town on a NYT reporter online so we know the reporter must be a woman, and more.
Today
the International Organization for Migration [IOM] released their
latest report on internal Iraqi refugees [PDF format warning] entitled "Assessment of Return to Iraq:"
The report note the low rate of return (external refugees coming back
to Iraq) and focuses on the 1.6 million estimated interal refugees and
what the desires of this vulnerable population are. The report notes
that IOM spoke with "4,061 families (24,366 individuals)" while
assessing needs.
The bulk of the internally displaced hail from Baghdad (nearly 90%). From the report:
*
The majority of identified returnees (33,521 families, or 58%) have
returned to Baghdad governorate, while a significant proportion has
also been identified in Diyala and Anbar.
*
54,451 of the returnees identified (94%) have returned from internal
displacement, while the remaining 3,659 identified families (6%) have
returned from abroad.
*
Almost 90% of IOM-assessed post-Samarra IDPs were displaced from
Baghdad, diyala, and Ninewa, and almost 79% of identified returns are
also located in these three governorates.
The report notes the top six reasons IDPs give for their displacement are:
Direct threats to life (29.1%)
Left out of fear (21.7%)
Generalized violence (16.5%)
Forced displacement from property (7.6%)
Ethnic/religious/political discrimination (5.9%)
Armed conflict (5.0%)
The
report notes that those who are returning often cite "harsh conditions
in displacement" as one of the reasons they have returned (exampele
include "high rent, lack of employment opportunities, poor shelter and
lack of basic services"). The second and third categories can be
combined: "Improved security in area of origin and very difficult
conditions in displacement" and "Very difficult conditions in
displacement". If you combine the two than 45.46% of those who have
returned are citing "very difficult conditions in displacement"
regions. Those returning to Baghdad cite "former employment,
transporation assistance, repair of damaged homes and property, and
renewed access to basic services" as their reasons. 38% of those who
have returned to their former homes "reported feeling safe only some of
the time." In addition, 42.5% of returnees in Anbar, Baghdad, Diyala
and Kirkuk report that "their homes are partially or completely
destroyed. In addition, 50% of returnees in these governorates no
longer have their movable property, such as cars, due to loss or
theft."
Of those returning to
their former homes across Iraq, Arab Shia Muslims make up the largest
percent (49.4%), followed by Arab Sunni Muslim (31.0%), Turkmen Sunni
Muslim (9.7%) and Christians (8.9%). (Kurd Shia Muslim, Kurd Sunni
Muslim and Other each account for less than one percent.) Of those who
remain internally displaced, the highest percent is (again) Arab Shia
(58.4%) followed by Arab Sunni Muslim (29.3%) with Christians and Kurd
Sunni Muslim next (each at 4.4%), followed by Other (4.0%) and Kurd
Shia Muslim (0.7%). IOM's report also provides a gender breakdown for
heads of household of returnees: 12% are female-headed households and
88% of returnees are male-headed housholds (and 35% of the 88% cannot
find work). The study found, "Among assessed returnee female-headed
households, food is consistently identified as a priority need (60%
across Iraq) along with non-food itmes (NFIs) and fueld. In Baghdad,
health and sanitation are major concerns for interviewed female-headed
households. Access to legal help was also a serious issue, particularly
in Diyala and Ninewa governorates." Breaking down employment for
returnee heads of household; 69.7% of females heading households are
unable to work contrasted with 15.4% of the male heads of household;
4.7% of female heads of household are employed contrasted with 50.1% of
male heads of household, and 25.7% of female heads of household are
able to work but unable to find employment contrasted with 34.5% of
male heads of household in the same situation.
Returnees
were asked about basic services as well (remember, the bulk live in
Baghdad). How many have electricity each day for "More than 18
hours"? Only 2%. Most (34%) report they have only one to two hours of
electricity each day. With water, more were able to rely on basic
services: 81.8% state they receive "Municipal water/pipe grid" while
the next most common response (7.9%) was "Rivers, streams or lakes."
Returnees ranked their needs and 61% stated their most pressing need
was food.
The report finds:
While
the total number of returns in Iraq continues to slowly grow since the
end of 2007, it remains a small fraction of the total Iraqi IDP and
refugee populations. In the face of uncertain security improvements,
the future of return is also unsure. Many IDP families continue to say
that they are waiting for security to improve in order to return.
IOM
returnee assessments show that 'pull' factors such as improved security
in place of origin are more encouraging of return than 'push' factors
such as difficult conditions in place of displacement. However, as
prolonged displacement makes life difficult for Iraq's internally
displaced and refugees, this could change.
Returning
home means facing a new set of challenges for Iraqi families. 34% of
IOM-assessed returnee families report that they are able to work yet
unemployed, 34% returned to partially or completely destroyed property,
and 75% have less than 6 hours of electricity per day. In addition, the
majority were displaced for more than one year, meaning that they
return carrying the stress and financial debilitation of long-term
displacement.
UPI reports
Nouri al-Maliki and Oscar Fernandez-Taranco met in Baghdad today. Who
is Oscar Fernandez-Taranco? The envoy United Nations Secretary-General
Ban Ki-moon sent "to discuss Baghdad's concerns over foreign meddling
following deadly bombings in August and October." Strange that two
bombings (and Nouri stomping his feet) gets UN action when the non-stop
and ongoing assault on Christians doesn't. Deutsche Presse Agentur reports
that Iraqi MP Yonadam Kanna has "petitioned Sunni Muslim parliamentary
speaker Iyad al-Samarrai to formally request [. . .] an international
investigator to determine who was behind the killing of Iraqi
Christians that Iraqi Christians believe are designed to convince them
to leave their homes". Mohammad Alef Jamal (Gulf News) adds:
When
Iraqi Mandaeans are killed, an international committee is formed to
defend their community and when Iraqi Christians are killed or
expelled, the Pope appeals to the US President to provide protection
for them. This is because these groups follow religions that connect
them to other countries.
But
when Iraqi scientists and intellectuals are killed, or when border
villages are bombed by neighbouring countries and the bodies of Iraqis
are torn apart by violent explosions, the only reaction seen is
condemnation, calls for immediate investigation, threats and random
accusations -- even before an investigation starts.
This
is followed by an exchange of accusations between politicians about
whose fault it is, and some prominent figures are made scapegoats,
solely for electoral reasons.
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a
Baghdad roadside bombing which injured two people, a Baquba roadside
bombing which claimed the lives of 2 police officers and left three
more wounded, a Mosul roadside bombing which claimed 1 life and left
two more people injured and a Mosul mortar attack which injured two
people.
Ignore the violence, joy for the greedy. BBC News reports,
"Iraq's oil ministry has signed an initial agreement with a consortium
led by the Italian firm, ENI, to develop the Zubair oilfield in
southern Iraq. The deal, which needs cabinet approval, calls for the
group to extract 200,000 barrels of oil a day, rising to 1.1 million a
day within seven years." Meanwhile AP notes that the consortium of British Petroleum and China National Petroleum Company's successful bid has been finalized. Khalid a-Ansary and Jack Kimball (Reuters) report
that the Iraqi Parliament has informed Hussain al-Shahristani, the
country's Oil Minister, that he will be testifying before them November
11th on the "distribution of the nation's oil wealth" which has led to
Nouri al-Maliki to have another public fit, muttering about "evil
supporters of the past regime" and comparing the summons to "the last
bombings" (he is a drama queen).
Meanwhile the 163-year-old US daily newspaper the Joplin Globe -- serving the south west sections of Missouri -- offers the editorial "In our view: Time to get out of Iraq:"
In
our view, American military force no longer plays a role in Iraq other
than "peace-keeping." Someone must contain the violence over time to
allow democratic-like institutions to flourish. That should not be the
role of American military power; it must be done by Iraqi institutions
controlled solely by the Iraqi
government. It
is now time for a broad and sustained military withdrawal of American
military forces from Iraq. Whatever American forces of any sort that
remain should be paid for exclusively by the Iraqi
government. We
can argue forever about the wisdom of our invasion and presence in Iraq
beginning in 2003. For sure, Iraq cannot be allowed to become another
Korea, where today 30,000 American troops are held hostage to a crazy
North Korean regime while "protecting" a rich and prosperous South
Korea. Withdraw
now the 120,000 military personnel from Iraq, Mr. President and
Congress. Do it as quickly as the safety of those troops will
permit.
Why the Globe and not the New York Times?
Because the Globe actually is read by families of the enlisted,
therefore, it is aware that there is an ongoing war and it is aware
that the Iraq War directly effects their readership.
US
President Barack Obama could end the Iraq War immediately . . . if he
wanted to. He's the biggest road block at present because he is, as
Bully Boy Bush once so infamously put it, "the decider." (Especially
true when an apethetic news media has largely moved away from the issue
and a public's been lulled into false dreams of peace.) Other things
that aren't helpful would include (a) the Iraqi government or
'government' and (b) the Pentagon and KBR. Starting with the former, Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) interviews US Lt Gen Charles H. Jacoby Jr.:
Are
you concerned that the elections on which your withdrawal timetable is
based may be delayed? The Iraqi parliament is deadlocked over an
election law, even though the deadline has long since
passed.
This
parliamentary election is a decisive point in the history of Iraq's
democracy, and it's also very important to the United States. We have a
stake in their success. Iraq has had increasingly better elections over
time. Of course we look forward to these elections. And so we're very
concerned that we're past the date that the Iraqis wanted to have an
election law, and that every day that goes by eats into the established
date for the election. Iraq has the opportunity to demonstrate that it
has a viable and credible democracy, and can be a model for the region.
There's lots of opportunity here and we don't want to miss these
opportunities by having this election drift.
Would an election delay also delay the plan to withdraw all U.S. combat forces by August 2010?
We
do not think we are at the point where we are off our plan, but of
course we are going to watch this very carefully. Any decision to vary
from the plan is a policy decision that won't take place here. It's too
soon to say whether a potential delay in the election is a potential
delay in the withdrawal.
Alsumaria notes rumors that US pressure is expected to lead various parties to accept the United Nations' recommendations on the legislation:
To
that, Kurds decried the US pressure calling them to renounce their
rights in the city and that after announcing that US Vice President Joe
Biden called Kurdistan Governor Massoud Al Barazani in order to talk
over the obstructions hindering approving elections law. MP Mahmoud
Othman told Al Hayat Newspaper that endeavors of Senior US officials
are means to pressure Kurds in order to accept the suggested solutions
though they are unfair. The US behaviors are biased, Othman added. It
is no secret that this kind of pressure is expected considering the
importance USA gives for holding the lections on time. MP Khairallah Al
Basri said that failing to reach an accordance solution regarding
elections' law will urge the USA to interfere in order to impose
solutions. Alsumaria sources
had said that the Legal committee suggested a draft law that proposes
to adopt open list and determines the parliament's seats number. The
law also stipulates using multi-divisions system and appoints the
number of seats for each division without mentioning Kirkuk. However
the relevant parties did not agree on this suggestion.
Ali Karim (Asia Times) reports
the recents bombings are said, by some, to have an impact on their
votes and quotes MP Mithal al-Alosi stating, "I expect a low turnout in
the elections if matters go on this way. The wounds of Bloody Wednesday
have not healed yet and the Salehiya bombs have deepened those wounds."
Mithal Alusi was noted in yesterday's snapshot, he's the head of the
Iraqi Nation Party and he appeared as a guest on Al Jazeera's latest Inside Iraq which began broadcasting last Friday.
AFP reports
that Faraj al-Haidari, head of the country's Independent High Electoral
Commission, declared on Al-Sharquiay TV today, "The electoral
commission held talks with the United Nations on Tuesday to discuss the
timetable. We must receive the law in the next two days, otherwise we
will be unable to hold the election on the scheduled date of January
16. There is material relating to the election, and international
companies need time to print it. Fifteen thousand polling stations have
to be made ready for the election, as do 50,000 personnel." UPI speaks with MP Mohammad Salman who states there are currently three options.
1) Allow the voting to be based on an open-list (where voters know which people they are voting for and not just a party).
2) Keep the voting to a closed-list (as was done in the 2005 elections).
3) "[P]ostpone the elections for at least one legislative term to give lawmakers the chance to vet all of their concerns."
Salman
states that "is the most likely route" but that at least 70 MPs from
the Kurdistan Alliance object to the third option. That's an important
point because the US continues to pressure tthe KRG to agree to . . .
well to anything that will get the bill passed. And many in the press
wrongly -- WRONGLY -- continue to state that the issue of oil-rich
Kirkuk (claimed by the KRG and by Baghdad) is the road block. It is a
road block and it is not just bad reporting to leave out the issue of
the lists, it is politically ignorant.
Any
legislative body -- true of the US Congress as well as Iraq's
Parliament -- makes decisions based on their own interests --
especially when it comes to re-election. Closed lists are thought by
many MPs to mean they have a better shot at re-election. Open-lists
are feared. (Nouri al-Maliki and Ayad al-Alawi are two who have spoken
out publicly for open-lists.) When the Parliament is so fearful that
open-lists may mean they aren't re-elected, that is an issue, that is a
road block and it's repeatedly set aside or forgotten in press
accounts. There are three options, UPI is told. Find where
the MP (a Sunni) is at all concerned about the issue of Kirkuk in his
statements. What is he concerned about? Open and closed lists.
So the Iraqi Parliament drags their feet and they aren't the only ones. At yesterday's
public hearing of the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and
Afghanistan, it was learned that the Defense Department had still not
submitted all the plans for the draw-down that's supposed to be on the
verge of taking place. Not only have they not submitted all of their
own plans, they're supervision of KBR is so lax that KBR's been allowed
to skip submitting a plan. As noted in yesterday's snapshot,
Commissioner Robert Henke attempted to get an answer from the
Pentagon's Lee Hamilton to this question: "If the president announces
on February 27, 2009 the draw-down plan and we're on November 2nd, is
it possible that the contractor hasn't provided you any plan to adjust
staff accordingly?" Despite attempting to walk Hamilton through slowly
(after Hamilton rambled on with a non-answer reply) and despite asking,
"How is that possible?", Henke never got anything that would pass for
an answer to his questions.
KBR,
the largest contractor in Iraq, is pulling out of that country so
slowly that it could end up costing American taxpayers $193 million
more than expected, according to a new Pentagon audit. Furthermore,
during a hearing Monday by the Commission on Wartime Contracting, a
legislative body set up to study contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan,
Commissioner Charles Tiefer said the company's plodding exit from Iraq
could cost even more -- up to $300 million.
As noted in
yesterday's snapshot, that's only one portion of the story. Dimascio
notes a quote from Commissioner Dov Zakheim and you can see yesterday's
snapshot for that full exchange. From last night, Kat's "Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan"
covers the hearing and she shares some impression on Commissioner Chris
Shays hearing performance. But Dimascio covers one aspect of the big
news from yesterday's hearings -- and we did consider skipping it but
fortunately didn't because the Commission actually had their act
together yesterday (we is Kat, Ava, Wally and myself) -- the other big news was the lack of completed plans.
For
the Pentagon, that's especially appalling and it's either an issue of
insubordination or the White House isn't really serious about a
draw-down. For the Pentagon, the refusal to submit their own plans or
demand that KBR draw up their own is appalling. Thompson declared in
the hearing that he visited with KBR most recently on September 25th or
26th and they still had no plans -- and Thompson was neither surprised
nor worried about the lack of planning.
In the US, Noor Faleh Almaleki has died. The 20-year-old Iraqi woman was intentionally run over October 20th (see the October 21st snapshot)
while she and Amal Edan Khalaf were running errands (the latter is the
mother of Noor's boyfriend and she was left injured in the assault).
Police suspected Noor's father, Faleh Hassan Almaleki, of the assault
and stated the probable motive was that he felt Noor had become "too
westernized." As noted in the October 30th snapshot,
Faleh Hassan Almaleki was finally arrested after going on the lamb --
first to Mexico, then flying to London where British authorities
refused him entry and he was sent back to the US and arrested in
Atlanta. Karan Olson and CNN note that the judge has set the man's bail at $5 million. Philippe Naughton (Times of London) adds,
"Noor died yesterday, having failed to recover consciousness after the
attack. The other woman, Amal Khalaf, was also seriously injured but is
expected to survive. " Rachel Stockman and 12 News (link has text and video) supply this timeline:
October 20th -Around 2 p.m. Police say Faleh Almaleki ran down his daughter, friend. -Around 5 p.m. Nlets Alert with Almaleki's license plate and vehicle description goes out October 23rd -U.S. Customs and Border Protection notified.
Addressing
the timeline, Rachel Stockman reports, "They allowed the suspect to
cross the border into Mexico so we wanted to know where the
communication broke down. What we found? Nlets, the system Peoria
police use to notify other authorities is not something US Customs
always checks." Dustin Gardiner (Arizona Republic) quotes:
prosecutor Stephanie Low stating of the father, "By his own admission,
this was an intentional act and the reason was that his daughter had
brought shame on him and his family. This was an attempt at an honor
killing." Iraqi American Romina Korkes offered her thoughts on the so-called 'honor' killing last week in a column for the Arizona Republic.
Women
are attacked daily around the world. The attacks are dismissed. A
large number of men seem to think it's okay -- and a significant number
of women must agree since we're not in the streets marching -- and that
goes a long way towards explaining Rory O'Connor's post at Media Channel -- a site not known for its 'inclusive' view of humanity (to put it mildly). Noting Alissa J. Rubin's opinion piece from Sunday's New York Times (we noted it in Friday's snapshot),
O'Connor goes on to rip her apart. Now let's be clear, Alissa J. Rubin
being a woman doesn't mean she can't be ripped apart nor are we
concerned about tone. She's never been good with math (we've called
her "teen queen" at this site) and she's been so wack that she's even
been called "crack whore" here. But what have we done that Rory
O'Connor doesn't? We've praised her, yes. She's earned a lot of
praise over the years here. But that's not it. He doesn't have to
praise her and, indeed, he may not find anything worth praising in her
writing. That is his opinion.
But where
there's a problem is that Alissa J. Rubin was never the paper's
problem. On her bad days, she jumbled the numbers and was too quick to
believe things she shouldn't have (such as the "Awakenings" being
universally embraced in areas they 'patrolled' or 'terrorized'). Her
worst day never found her as bad as John F. Burns or Dexter Filkins.
I'm not seeing their names mentioned by Rory. Those are the two worst
offenders for what he's demanding (truth). But they don't get called
out. It's really strange that so few women have worked in Baghdad for
the New York Times (others include Cara Buckley, Sabrina
Tavernise, Erica Goode and, of course, Judith Miller) but they're
always the ones being ripped apart. Not the males. The issue isn't
that he called Rubin out. He's allowed to. He can loathe her and rip
her apart. The issue is that we haven't seen that same standard
applied to men.
This is the Judith Miller
effect, the bash the bitch craze, we've long documented here. Judith
Miller did not start a war. Judith Miller was not responsible for the
entire media landscape. She did not twist the arms of PBS and NBC and
Oprah to get air time. Those people wanted her on their shows. She
did not twist arms at the paper to land on the front page, the paper
wanted her on the front page. Judith Miller was so WRONG about the
Iraq War but she wasn't a liar -- at least not on the big issue. She
honestly believed their were WMD in Iraq, that's why she commandeered a
squadron while stationed in Iraq. She's a lousy reporter, her 'facts'
do not hold up. She needs to be held accountable. But she often had
co-writers -- such as Michael R. Gordon who remains at the paper and
who spent the second Bush term advocating for war on Iran. Judith
Miller was a reporter for one of the top three papers in the country
(at that time). If you saw her on TV, she was invited on. If you
heard her on radio, she was invited on. If you read her in another
paper, a decision was made to print her article. It took a lot of
people echoing the government (not all of whom believed the lies the
way Miller did) to start the war on Iraq, to lie to the people. Miller
was one person. Hold her accountable, no question, but what about all
the others?
The pleasing lie (pleasing to a
lot of members of the press corps) is that Judith Miller, all by
herself, lied the nation into war. Judith Miller and others like her
helped the US get into Iraq but grasp that Dexter Filkins and John F. Burns
kept the US in Iraq. There are some who will kiss Dexy's butt because
of those bad, BAD, college campus appearances where he talks about (and
has done this for several years now) about how the Iraq War is lost and
how they knew it then and blah, blah, blah. That might have mattered.
If he'd done it in real time. But in real time, he was lying. In real
time, he was taking orders from the military -- as Molly Bingham
long ago explained, Dexy even cancelled a meeting with the Iraqi
resistance when US military brass frowned. In real time, Dexy let the
US military vet his copy. That's reality. His award winning 'reporting'?
Vetted by the US military. Vetted and delayed while it was vetted which
is why the paper ran it so many days after it was written.
I
have no problem with Judith Miller being called out -- and I've called
her out myself. But, look through the archvies, we've called out women
and we've called out men. We haven't worried about tone but we've made
damn sure that people were treated fairly -- even if that just meant
that abuse was heaped on equally.
I'm glad that someone at Media Channel remembered there is a war in Iraq and I'm glad that Rory O'Connor wrote with fire.
But I'm also aware that Alissa J. Rubin, graded on any scale, qualifies
as one of the better reporters the paper's had in Iraq. And I'm also
aware that MediaChannel is more than happy to go after Katie Couric or
any other woman but I find very little in efforts to praise women or to
link to them. (Until O'Connor's column, which I heard about from a
friend at the Times, I haven't visited MediaChannel since the efforts to distort Marcia's
writing.) And if Alissa J. Rubin was Alan J. Rubin, I have to wonder
whether or not MediaChannel would even be weighing in? Again, it's
been a long, long time since they've made it known that they're aware
of the Iraq War.
This isn't a minor issue --
not the silence on Iraq or the attacks on women. And, repeating, it's
not about tone. It's about fairness. We've ridiculed many women here
and will do so again and again and again. But we don't go to town on a
woman and refuse to on men. Todd S. Purdum is a better writer at Vanity Fair than he was at the Times -- that has to do with the differing role, the fact that he can write longer at Van Fair
and the differences between the outlets. But we went to town on Todd
(who I know offline) and did so because his work was as appalling as
Elisabeth Bumiller's columns (run in the news section but they were
columns) at that time. (Bumiller's done some strong reporting in the
last few years.) We went to town on her, we went to town on Todd. And
the fact that I knew him didn't prevent that nor did the fact that he
was a man make me think, "I shouldn't criticize." But there's a real
locker room mentality among the online critics where a man gets a pass
and another one and another one and, okay, let's make it about the
work. But a woman gets ripped apart. The ripping apart doesn't bother
me . . . if it's applied to both.
We've linked to Rory before and we'll link to his post today one more time.
But it's really past time that a lot of online critics took a look what
they were doing. I'm not suggesting anyone change their style or tone
or make nice. I am suggesting that they make sure they treat people the
same -- regardless of gender. I do not believe Alissa J. Rubin was
treated the same as a male reporter would have been. I could be wrong,
I often am. But I'm saying my call on that goes to pattern:
MediaChannel's emphasis and the climate online.
In
Oceanside, Carlsbad, Del Mar and north San Diego County, immigrant day
laborers wait by the side of the road, hoping a contractor will stop
and offer them work. Alberto Juarez Martinez slings his jacket over his
shoulder while he waits. His hands show the effect of a lifetime of
manual work, plus arthritis suffered as a child in Zapata, Zacatecas.
The hands of Beto, a migrant from Uruachi, Chihuahua, also show the
effect of a lifetime of manual work. Juan Castillo, a migrant from
Tehuacan, Puebla, waits with his friends in the parking lot of a market
they've nicknamed La Gallinita, because of the rooster on the roof of
the building. Police in
north county towns have now started cruising by day labor sites in
plainclothes, pretending to be contractors offering workers jobs, and
then citing them and turning them over to immigration agents, even
those with green cards Many community organizations are protesting this
practice. Francisco Villa
operates a lunch truck that visits the areas where migrant day laborers
live on hillsides and under trees. Villa hands out leaflets advising
workers of their rights and letting them know that they can find help
from California Rural Legal Assistance. Across the street from Villa's
truck, Zaragosa Brito and Andres Roman Diaz, two migrants from Arcelia,
Guerrero, sit next to a fence where workers look for day labor, or get
rides to the fields for farm work. The men sleep out in the open in the
field behind the fence, and have worked on a local strawberry ranch,
Rancho Diablo, for many years.
In
our view, American military force no longer plays a role in Iraq other
than "peace-keeping." Someone must contain the violence over time to
allow democratic-like institutions to flourish. That should not be the
role of American military power; it must be done by Iraqi institutions
controlled solely by the Iraqi government. It
is now time for a broad and sustained military withdrawal of American
military forces from Iraq. Whatever American forces of any sort that
remain should be paid for exclusively by the Iraqi government. We
can argue forever about the wisdom of our invasion and presence in Iraq
beginning in 2003. For sure, Iraq cannot be allowed to become another
Korea, where today 30,000 American troops are held hostage to a crazy
North Korean regime while "protecting" a rich and prosperous South
Korea. Withdraw now the
120,000 military personnel from Iraq, Mr. President and Congress. Do it
as quickly as the safety of those troops will permit.
The above is from the Joplin Globe's editorial "In our view: Time to get out of Iraq" -- the Joplin Globe
is the 163-year-old daily paper serving the south west sections of
Missouri. And US forces do need to be withdrawn from Iraq. What's
stopping it? Well, first off the president of the United States. Barack
Obama could order the withdrawal this morning if he wanted to.
Other
things that aren't helpful would include (a) the Iraqi government or
'government' and (b) the Pentagon and KBR. Starting with the former,
Liz Sly's "U.S. concerned about Iraq election law delay" (Los Angeles Times) is an interview with US Lt Gen Charles H. Jacoby Jr.:
Are
you concerned that the elections on which your withdrawal timetable is
based may be delayed? The Iraqi parliament is deadlocked over an
election law, even though the deadline has long since passed.
This
parliamentary election is a decisive point in the history of Iraq's
democracy, and it's also very important to the United States. We have a
stake in their success. Iraq has had increasingly better elections over
time. Of course we look forward to these elections. And so we're very
concerned that we're past the date that the Iraqis wanted to have an
election law, and that every day that goes by eats into the established
date for the election. Iraq has the opportunity to demonstrate that it
has a viable and credible democracy, and can be a model for the region.
There's lots of opportunity here and we don't want to miss these
opportunities by having this election drift.
Would an election delay also delay the plan to withdraw all U.S. combat forces by August 2010?
We
do not think we are at the point where we are off our plan, but of
course we are going to watch this very carefully. Any decision to vary
from the plan is a policy decision that won't take place here. It's too
soon to say whether a potential delay in the election is a potential
delay in the withdrawal.
Alsumaria notes rumors that US pressure is expected to lead various parties to accept the United Nations' recommendations on the legislation:
To
that, Kurds decried the US pressure calling them to renounce their
rights in the city and that after announcing that US Vice President Joe
Biden called Kurdistan Governor Massoud Al Barazani in order to talk
over the obstructions hindering approving elections law. MP Mahmoud
Othman told Al Hayat Newspaper that endeavors of Senior US officials
are means to pressure Kurds in order to accept the suggested solutions
though they are unfair. The US behaviors are biased, Othman added. It
is no secret that this kind of pressure is expected considering the
importance USA gives for holding the lections on time. MP Khairallah Al
Basri said that failing to reach an accordance solution regarding
elections' law will urge the USA to interfere in order to impose
solutions. Alsumaria sources
had said that the Legal committee suggested a draft law that proposes
to adopt open list and determines the parliament's seats number. The
law also stipulates using multi-divisions system and appoints the
number of seats for each division without mentioning Kirkuk. However
the relevant parties did not agree on this suggestion.
"I
expect a low turnout in the elections if matters go on this way," said
Mithal al-Alosi, an independent member of parliament and the deputy
head of the foreign relations parliamentary committee. "The wounds of
Bloody Wednesday have not healed yet and the Salehiya bombs have
deepened those wounds," he added. Alosi
called on the government to press ahead with demands for a probe of
Syria’s alleged involvement in the attacks. "This time the government
should act on its demand for an international tribunal," he said. "We
must not ask the citizens of Iraq to be patient each time."
Whether
the latest 'we're about to move' rumors are true or not remains to be
seen. What is known is that the Iraqi government or 'government' in
Baghdad has repeatedly dragged their feet.
They aren't the only ones. At yesterday's
public hearing of the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and
Afghanistan, it was learned that the Defense Department had still not
submitted all the plans for the draw-down that's supposed to be on the
verge of taking place. Not only have they not submitted all of their
own plans, they're supervision of KBR is so lax that KBR's been allowed
to skip submitting a plan. As noted in yesterday's snapshot,
Commissioner Robert Henke attempted to get an answer from the
Pentagon's Lee Hamilton to this question: "If the president announces
on February 27, 2009 the draw-down plan and we're on November 2nd, is
it possible that the contractor hasn't provided you any plan to adjust
staff accordingly?" Despite attempting to walk Hamilton through slowly
(after Hamilton rambled on with a non-answer reply) and despite asking,
"How is that possible?", Henke never got anything that would pass for
an answer to his questions.
KBR,
the largest contractor in Iraq, is pulling out of that country so
slowly that it could end up costing American taxpayers $193 million
more than expected, according to a new Pentagon audit. Furthermore,
during a hearing Monday by the Commission on Wartime Contracting, a
legislative body set up to study contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan,
Commissioner Charles Tiefer said the company’s plodding exit from Iraq
could cost even more -- up to $300 million.
As noted in
yesterday's snapshot, that's only one portion of the story. Dimascio
notes a quote from Commissioner Dov Zakheim and you can see yesterday's
snapshot for that full exchange. From last night, Kat's "Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan"
covers the hearing and she shares some impression on Commissioner Chris
Shays hearing performance. But Dimascio covers one aspect of the big
news from yesterday's hearings -- and we did consider skipping it but
fortunately didn't because the Commission actually had their act
together yesterday (we is Kat, Ava, Wally and myself) -- the other big news was the lack of completed plans.
For
the Pentagon, that's especially appalling and it's either an issue of
insubordination or the White House isn't really serious about a
draw-down. For the Pentagon, the refusal to submit their own plans or
demand that KBR draw up their own is appalling. Thompson declared in
the hearing that he visited with KBR most recently on September 25th or
26th and they still had no plans -- and Thompson was neither surprised
nor worried about the lack of planning.
Meanwhile cue up the moment in Three Days of the Condor when Robert Redford's character says it was all about the oil. BBC News reports,
"Iraq's oil ministry has signed an initial agreement with a consortium
led by the Italian firm, ENI, to develop the Zubair oilfield in
southern Iraq. The deal, which needs cabinet approval, calls for the
group to extract 200,000 barrels of oil a day, rising to 1.1 million a
day within seven years." Meanwhile AP notes that the consortium of British Petroleum and China National Petroleum Company's successful bid has been finalized.
While the oil delights the greedy, the death toll is at issue. ICCC says the death toll is 4357
which means M-NF did not announce all the passings (DoD provided a name
of one of the fallen whom M-NF never announced as fallen).
Iraq
- IOM's latest report on the needs of returned displaced Iraqis says
that going back home is presenting returnees with a new set of
challenges that are almost as daunting as those when they were
displaced.
Of the more
than 58,000 returnee families (348,660 people) identified by IOM, the
Organization has so far carried out in-depth assessments of just over
4,000 (nearly 25,000 people).
The
assessment report found that food, non-food items and fuel are the
priority needs, with the latter increasingly important as winter hits.
Employment
too is a major concern with 34 per cent of the IOM-assessed families
reporting that although they are able to work, they are unable to find
it. Female-headed households, representing 12 per cent of assessed
families, are among the most vulnerable groups, with 70 per cent of
them unable to work and 26 per cent able to work but again, unable to
find employment.
Basic
needs such as shelter, water, electricity and health care also pose
serious concerns with 34 per cent of returnee families going back to
homes that were partially or completely destroyed. Without employment
or a reliable source of income, these families are in dire need of
assistance to help them rebuild their homes.
Those
that have shelter or homes, also face problems in access to potable
water, fuel, electricity and health care. Seventy-five per cent of
returnees have less than six hours of electricity a day while more than
half of all returnees in Baghdad and 86 per cent in Kirkuk report not
having access to health care.
Nearly
60 per cent of the identified 58,000 returns have been to Baghdad
governorate, though significant numbers of returnees have also been
located in Diyala and Anbar governorates. The vast majority, 94 per
cent, of all returnees were internally displaced, with only 6 per cent
identified as Iraqi refugees coming back from abroad.
Government
efforts to encourage and support returns through the provision of a
one-time grant of USD 840 have only been partly successful. Of the
IOM-assessed returnee families, only 44 per cent had applied for the
grant with only 39 per cent actually receiving it. The vast majority of
all the assessed families said they had received no other individual
assistance.
Although the
numbers of people returning home have been slowly increasing, they
represent just a fraction of those that continue to be displaced,
nearly four years since the bombing of the Samarra mosque.
Nevertheless, IOM has found that of the nearly 230,000 displaced
families assessed by IOM in Iraq, more than half have stated their
intention to return to their former homes if return conditions,
particularly security, continue to improve.
In
a bid to help improve the lot of returning displaced families and to
find long-term solutions for them, IOM has this year provided in-kind
grants to 500 families to help them start their own businesses and to
re-establish employment and income for them. Over the next 12 months,
the Organization will target an additional 6,500 returnee families
across the country for similar assistance. IOM is seeking further
funding to assist more unemployed returnees to build a new business or
to find a new job in an effort to find durable solutions to the
displacement crisis in the country.
The
Iraqi government has also established a Return Committee to help
returnees rebuild effectively by intensifying coordination of UN
agencies working in the country, each with their own specific expertise.
A
huge media campaign was unleashed in 2007 to try to encourage refugees
to return home to Iraq, viewed by many as a publicity stunt by Iraq’s
Nuri al-Maliki government to foster international favor, but few have
taken him up on the offer. For its part, the UNHCR in Damascus stated
it does not encourage the return of refugees to Iraq and only an
estimated 273 families have taken part in its Voluntary Repatriation
Program over the past 12 months (more than half of the figure applied
for the scheme in the first two months). It seems that for most, Iraq
represents a former life. "Iraq
is now a thing of the past for us. We can never return, nor at this
point do we desire to," Leila says, without showing any emotion. With
some family and friends in Europe and Canada, Leila and her family are
looking to move to the West. But with European countries slow to ease
visa and refugee laws, her future is as uncertain as her recent past.
Neither she nor her children speak English and without third-level
education, Leila and her husband are sure to face problems.
Nevertheless, some states such as Germany (set to take in 2,500 Iraqis
from Syria and Jordan) are offering language and cultural orientation
courses for newly arriving refugees so for some there is hope.
In
Oceanside, Carlsbad, Del Mar and north San Diego County, immigrant day
laborers wait by the side of the road, hoping a contractor will stop
and offer them work. Alberto Juarez Martinez slings his jacket over his
shoulder while he waits. His hands show the effect of a lifetime of
manual work, plus arthritis suffered as a child in Zapata, Zacatecas.
The hands of Beto, a migrant from Uruachi, Chihuahua, also show the
effect of a lifetime of manual work. Juan Castillo, a migrant from
Tehuacan, Puebla, waits with his friends in the parking lot of a market
they've nicknamed La Gallinita, because of the rooster on the roof of
the building. Police in
north county towns have now started cruising by day labor sites in
plainclothes, pretending to be contractors offering workers jobs, and
then citing them and turning them over to immigration agents, even
those with green cards Many community organizations are protesting this
practice. Francisco Villa
operates a lunch truck that visits the areas where migrant day laborers
live on hillsides and under trees. Villa hands out leaflets advising
workers of their rights and letting them know that they can find help
from California Rural Legal Assistance. Across the street from Villa's
truck, Zaragosa Brito and Andres Roman Diaz, two migrants from Arcelia,
Guerrero, sit next to a fence where workers look for day labor, or get
rides to the fields for farm work. The men sleep out in the open in the
field behind the fence, and have worked on a local strawberry ranch,
Rancho Diablo, for many years.
Noor Faleh Almaleki has died. The 20-year-old Iraqi woman was intentionally run over October 20th (see the October 21st snapshot)
while she and Amal Edan Khalaf were running errands (the latter is the
mother of Noor's boyfriend and she was left injured in the assault).
Police suspected Noor's father, Faleh Hassan Almaleki, of the assault
and stated the probable motive was that he felt Noor had become "too
westernized." As noted in the October 30th snapshot,
Faleh Hassan Almaleki was finally arrested after going on the lamb --
first to Mexico, then flying to London where British authorities
refused him entry and he was sent back to the US and arrested in
Atlanta. Karan Olson and CNN note that the judge has set the man's bail at $5 million. Philippe Naughton (Times of London) adds,
"Noor died yesterday, having failed to recover consciousness after the
attack. The other woman, Amal Khalaf, was also seriously injured but is
expected to survive. " Rachel Stockman and 12 News (link has text and video) supply this timeline:
October 20th -Around 2 p.m. Police say Faleh Almaleki ran down his daughter, friend. -Around 5 p.m. Nlets Alert with Almaleki’s license plate and vehicle description goes out October 23rd -U.S. Customs and Border Protection notified.
Addressing the timeline, Rachel Stockman reports:
That
allowed the suspect to cross the border into Mexico so we wanted to
know where the communication broke down. What we found? Nlets, the
system Peoria police use to notify other authorities is not something
US Customs always checks.
Family
members said Almaleki was outraged after his daughter married a man in
Iraq but returned to the Valley to live with a boyfriend and his mother
in Surprise. The other victim, 43-year-old Amal Edan Khalaf, is
apparently the boyfriend's mother. Police
said Almaleki fled the country after the attack, driving to Mexico and
later taking a plane to London. He was detained by British authorities
and extradited to Atlanta last week. Speaking
before a Maricopa County judge over the weekend, county prosecutor
Stephanie Low said Almaleki has admitted purposefully running down his
daughter. "By his own
admission, this was an intentional act and the reason was that his
daughter had brought shame on him and his family," Low said. "This was
an attempt at an honor killing."
Today the US military announced
another death: "FORWARD OPERATING BASE KALSU, Iraq -- A Multi-National
Corps -- Iraq Soldier died Nov. 2 of non-combat related injuries.
Release of the Soldier's identity is being with held pending
notification of the next of kin. The name of the deceased service
member will be announced through the U.S. Department of Defense Official Web site
[. . .] The announcements are made on the web site no earlier than 24
hours after notification of the service member's primary next of kin.
The incident is currently under investigation." Maloy Moore (Los Angeles Times) reports
that the fallen was 20-year-old Lukas C. Hopper of Merced, California
who "is survived by his mother and father, Robin and Yancy Hopper, both
of Merced." The announcement brings to 4356 the number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war.
In
interviews Monday, Hopper's friends and relatives recalled him as an
impetuous thrill-seeker and a protective big brother from an especially
close-knit family. They said he joined the Army at age 18 in hopes of
seeing the world and that he recently volunteered for a tour in
Afghanistan. He loved hiking, going to the beach and pulling pranks. "He's
always been an adventurer -- always the one who wanted to be right in
the middle of the action," said his mother, Robin Hopper. "He knew he
wanted to be infantry, and he knew he wanted to jump out of airplanes."
"Maria
and I extend our deepest sympathies to the loved ones of Private First
Class Lukas Hopper. He will be remembered for his courage and
dedication as he put his life on the line to protect the freedoms of
our country. His sacrifice will not be forgotten and we join all
Californians in mourning this terrible loss." Hopper,
20, died October 30 of injuries sustained during a vehicle roll-over
southeast of Karadah, Iraq. Hopper was assigned to the 1st Battalion,
505th Parachute Infantry Regiment, 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 82nd
Airborne Division, U.S. Army, Fort Bragg, N.C. In honor of Pfc. Hopper, Capitol flags will be flown at half-staff.
Meanwhile Bill Reed (Colorado Springs-Gazette) reports Fort Carson's 60th Ordnance Company is headed to Iraq. Mike Francis (The Oregonian) is embedded in Iraq and he reports on the 2,500 members of the Oregon Army National Guard's 41st Infantry Brigade Combat Team:
"Are 'The Sounds of the'70s' OK?" he asks his two-man crew over the headset. Nobody
objects, so Smith spins the wheel on his iPod. A song by the forgotten
band Ace, "How Long Has This Been Going On?" tinkles faintly through
the headphones. "Hatley, can you turn it up?" Smith asks. Spec.
Sherman Hatley of Southeast Portland -- 10 years from being born when
the song was popular -- scrambles down from his half-exposed seat in
the gun turret to turn a dial on a box in the rear compartment, where
Gatorade, rucksacks and one civilian passenger come along for the ride. This
is the next-to-last of 10 armored vehicles in a convoy that stretches
for miles from Al Asad Airbase west to Camp Korean Village. They escort
a collection of more than 50 commercial haulers driven by Jordanians
and possibly other third-country nationals. The empty container trucks,
flatbeds, fuel haulers and cattle carriers are bound for Jordan, where
they will be filled with supplies that help sustain the U.S. military
in Iraq.
Ecological Wisdom * Social Justice Grassroots Democracy * Non-Violence
Green Party of Michigan ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ www.MiGreens.org
** News Release ** ** ------------ ** November 2, 2009
For More Information, Contact: -----------------------------
Fred Vitale, state chairperson chair@migreens.org 313-580-4905
Aimee Smith, Media Cmte/GPMI alsmith@hvgreens.org 734-761-9901
Greens Condemns FBI Raid and Murder of Imam Abdullah
The Green Party of Michigan (GPMI) offers its condolences to the family of respected community and religious leader, Imam Luqman A. Abdullah.
The Green Party of Michigan is joining the call from Imam Abdullah's family and others for an independent investigation into an FBI raid in Dearborn, MI on Oct. 28 that resulted in Imam Abdullah being shot 18 times and left to die.
“We condemn this FBI raid and murder of an innocent man," Green Party of Michigan Chair Fred Vitale said. "The FBI fails even today to bring charges of terrorism against the other people arrested. Rather it and the corporate media make wild accusations; their only witnesses unreliable former criminal informants, dependent on the FBI for food and freedom. It appears that the only charges are those associated with petty crime, and even these were instigated by government agents and grinding poverty.”
"We are having a hard time believing the FBI claims that this was simply an arrest gone wrong. We are deeply concerned by reports that Imam Abdulluh was left to die from his wounds while an injured police dog was airlifted for medical treatment. Such behavior demonstrates an intent to kill rather than enforce the law," said Derek Grigsby, Detroit Green Party Co-chair. "Given the historical and current antipathy of the FBI towards people of African descent and Muslims, we are left to wonder if the death of Imam Abdullah was not exactly what was intended for that day."
"It is the FBI agents and police officers that were engaging in terrorism last Wednesday." said Linda Najar of the Huron Valley Greens. "Why the focus in the FBI complaint on Imam Adbullah's religion when it was not in any way connected to the alleged crimes? I believe this is driven by a need to demonize muslims at home in orderto build support for the unpopular wars against muslim countries abroad, the so-called war on terror."
Najar adds, "If Imam Abdulluh was angry, I wonder can't we ask why? Or is it the answer to that question that the authorities are really afraid of."
# # #
created/distributed using donated labor
Green Party of Michigan 548 South Main Street Ann Arbor, MI 48104 http://www.migreens.org 734-663-3555
GPMI was formed in 1987 to address environmental issues in Michigan politics. Greens are organized in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Each state Green Party sets its own goals and creates its own structure, but US Greens agree on Ten Key Values:
Ecological Wisdom Grassroots Democracy Social Justice Non-Violence Community Economics Decentralization Feminism Respect for Diversity Personal/Global Responsibility Future Focus/Sustainability
Monday,
November 2, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the US military
announces another death, no movement on passing an election law in
Iraq, KBR is costing US tax payer $193 as a result of their inability
to manage their workforce, the Pentagon isn't providing all the plans
for the draw-down to the GAO, and more.
8 US service members were announced dead in Iraq during the month of October. Today the US military announced
another death: "FORWARD OPERATING BASE KALSU, Iraq -- A Multi-National
Corps -- Iraq Soldier died Nov. 2 of non-combat related injuries.
Release of the Soldier's identity is being with held pending
notification of the next of kin. The name of the deceased service
member will be announced through the U.S. Department of Defense Official Web site
[. . .] The announcements are made on the web site no earlier than 24
hours after notification of the service member's primary next of kin.
The incident is currently under investigation." Maloy Moore (Los Angeles Times) reports
that the fallen was 20-year-old Lukas C. Hopper of Merced, California
who "is survived by his mother and father, Robin and Yancy Hopper, both
of Merced." The announcement brings to 4356 the number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war. In other reported violence . . .
Violence
continues, actually increases, and Nouri al-Maliki maintains he is the
new strongman, the new Saddam to be trusted and should continue as
prime minister of Iraq. On Al Jazeera's latest Inside Iraq
(which began broadcasting Friday), the topic was Nouri al-Maliki and
the guests joining host Jasim Azzawi included head of Iraqi Nation
Party Mithal al-Alsui and US Dept Assistant Secretary of State for
Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs Michael Corbin.
Jasim
Azzawi: This murderous double explosion that happened in Iraq is quite
sophisticated. It has all the marks, perhaps, of foreign power and yet
it is domestically carried out. Today the Iraqi government arrested 60
security officers -- perhaps they were either in cahoot or negligent in
their duty how do you look at this double bombings?
Mithal
al-Alsui: Well, first of all, I have to say that when we talk about
total sections we talk about so complicated cases. This is one side but
of the other side we didn't feel that the government they do have any
kind of a platform or a vision how to deal with the terrorists or the
security in Iraq. More than that they just react and such news as you
are hearing, the government they are arresting or they are trying to
start an investigation of some officers. My opinion, this is just a
reaction, trying to cover the need of the new election in Iraq.
Jasim
Azzawi: Indeed you are right. Perhaps the arrest or the questioning of
the 60 officers might be a face saving formula. Mr. Corbin, today I was
struck by what the Iraqi Foreign Minister, Hoshyar Zebari, said. He
said, "The US cannot wash its hand of the situation in Iraq. We expect
more engagement from the American forces. What does that mean in light
of the fact that SOFA stipulates American forces should go back to
their barracks by June 30th. Is the Iraqi government speaking with two
voices? al-Maliki says we don't want them and his foreign minister says
we need them back.
Michael
Corbin: First of all, I can't comment on what Hoshyar Zebari, the
Foreign Minister, said, Jasim. But what I can say first is that we
strongly condemn these horrific bombings conducted by people with no
respect for human life. The victims in this latest bombing were
children, were passerby on the street. We see no benefit that anyone
could claim by trying to claim victory by trying to conduct these kind
of attacks. We are in partnership with the government of Iraq. We are
working closely with the security forces, we're working closely with
Prime Minister Maliki to try and prevent this kind of attack. The
Iraqis have control of their cities since June 30. They have made
enormous strides. What you see here is terrorists who have tried every
means to cause havoc and destruction moving from first targeting
mosques and churches and minorities, then targeting innocent people in
market places to now targeting uh government buildings where normal
Iraqis work, where passersby are being targeted. We don't see any
strategy here by the insurgents, we see only bloody killing and we find
it despicable that anyone would seek to rush to claim credit for this
type of attack.
What a load of crap.
First off, if you'd done what Michael Corbin did in Syria, you might
shut your damn mouth and keep your head down real low. That's
(A). (B) He served under George W. Bush and now he wants to develop a
sense of righteous indignation? NOW? The bombings were part of the
ongoing Iraq War. The US government has attempted to label the Iraqis
taking part in this war as "terrorist" which is a bunch of crap, they
are people who feel they are defending their country. Micheal Corbin
-- of all people -- wants to lecture on innocents being killed.
The
US military killed innocents and the US government knew it was going to
happen because (a) they ordered it and (b) the whole damn world knew it
was going to happen. Which is how we get Elizabeth Piper (Reuters) reporting (March 2005)
on Jawdat Abd al-Kadhum whose 'crime' was driving and for that 'crime'
"he lost his leg to an American bullet." The US military likes to call
it "collateral damage." In March 2007, they were even bragging about new ammo which, they stated, would be helpful in "reducing collateral damage" in Iraq. There's the Palestine Hotel in Baghdad was attacked April 8, 2003 by . . . the US military
claiming the lives of journalists Taras Protsyuk and Jose Couso and
wounding three other journalists. On the same day -- on the same day
-- that the US military attacked the Baghdad bureau of Al Jazeera
killing journalist Tareq Ayyoub. Now we can go on and on -- as the
illegal war has -- but the point should have been made: Michael Corbin
needs to check that righteous indignation that he has oh-so recently
sprouted.
But spewing mock outrage allowed
him to avoid answering a direct question, didn't it? And wasn't that
the point? "I can't comment on what Hoshyar Zebari, the Foreign
Minister, said." Then why the hell are you on the show? For your
beauty? Don't make me laugh.
Jasim
Azzawi: But then again, Mr. Corbin, they are a symbol of the Iraqi
government and those terrorist attacks are meant to strike at the very
heart of the Iraqi symbol. We'll get to that point later on, but let me
get to Mithal. There are two theories, Mithal Alusi, the reasons behind
these suicide bombings. One is: To create chaos and embarrass the
Iraqi government. The other one is, which I would like you to comment
on, is that: It is meant to embarrass al-Maliki himself for abandoning
his erstwhile allies -- primarily the Iraqi National Alliance.
Mithal
al-Alsui: Well I must come back to the -- to the main point which I
really believe that even the United States of America with all of the
institutions they got, the terrorists, they succeed to attack America,
they succeed to attack many European states. But in general, what we
need here in Iraq, we need to start to build the Iraqi institution.
What we need here to start, to go out of the propaganda issues, what we
need here is to start to believe in our citizens and our nation and to
serve the people. We still action -- we still reaction in very naive
and simple ways and this is not the way to stop terrorists this is not
the way to stop --
Jasim
Azzawi: Are you saying the Iraqi government is failing to do the proper
things? Are you casting doubt on the -- on the whole structure of the
Iraqi government and its vision for the future?
Mithal
al-Alsui: For sure, Mr. Maliki government, it didn't succeed to provide
service. They didn't succeed to push the economy. They didn't succeed
to help in the oil industry. They didn't succeed to find any platform
or vision for the education, for the health sectors. They didn't
succeed in different ways so the security is part of the result of this
government and we are so sorry to hear it repeatedly from the American
side, "We are helping the Iraqi government and we are supporting the
Iraqi government." We are asking our American friends: You need to
support the Iraqi political process and the democratic process. We need
to support the Iraqi economy --
Jasim
Azzawi: Let me give a chance to Mr. Corbin to answer that. Go ahead,
your aid and your help is going in the wrong direction, that's what
he's saying.
Michael
Corbin: I agree with Mithal that we have to build institutions. I agree
that we have to help with education and health. But what we see is an
Iraqi government that is capable now of making decision. We're in
partnership with the Iraqi government. When the UN mandate ended at the
end of 2008, it was a significant step forward for Iraqi institutions.
Iraq now can deal with its neighbors. Iraq is in a position now where
we have a partnership on economic issues. Oil. We've had one bid round
for international oil companies to come into Iraq. We're preparing for
another. We see many elements where the Iraqi government and Iraqi
institutions such as the very Ministry of Justice which was targeted --
Despite Michael Corbin's inane mutterings, no 'progress' in Iraq. John Leland (New York Times) reported
in this morning's paper, "Meanwhile, Iraqi legislators again failed to
agree on laws governing the January elections, despite warnings that
further delay could prevent the vote from taking place on time.
Discussions in Parliament on Sunday instead focused on other
matters." To recap, prior to Barack Obama being elected US President,
Iraq 'intended' to hold national elections in December 2009. They then
pushed the elections back to January 2010 which Barack used to break
his campaign promise re: troop draw-down in Iraq (he called it
withdrawal and, in his speeches, rarely included "combat" which is a
meaningless qualifier anyway). All this year, they've anticipated the
elections being held in January 2010 and the deadline for passing
legislation was October 15th.
The day before that deadline, they decided to kick decisions back to
October 19th. And so it has gone, over and over. It is now November 2nd
and they have no election law.
Michele
Flournoy: Uh, let me start by saying, you know, the draw-down plan that
we have, is conditions based and it creates multiple decision points
for re-evaluating and, if necessary, changing our plans based on
developments on the ground. Although the government of Iraq's
self-imposed deadline of October 15th for passing the elections law has
passed, we judge that the COR [Council Of Representatives] still has
another week or two to come to some kind of an agreement on the
elections law before it will put the January date -- the early January
date -- in jeopardy in terms of the election commission's ability to
actually physically execute the, uh, the election. If a new law with
open lists is not passed, the fall back solution for them is to return
to the 2005 election law which is based on a closed list system. But
that could be used for upcoming elections, the COR would simply have to
vote on an election date. If that law is not passed in the next two
weeks, they will be looking at slipping the date to later in January
which would still be compliant with the [Iraqi] Constitution but would
be later than originally planned. In that instance, M-NF-I
[Multi-National Forces Iraq] would need to engage with the government
of Iraq to do some contingency planning on how to secure the elections
at a later date and that might well have-have implications.
Though she maintained Iraq could fall back on the 2005 election law, other bodies begged to differ. As Rod Nordland (New York Times) reported,
"Iraq's existing election law was declared unconstitutional by its
highest court, which said it needs to be replaced or amended."
Yesterday Gabriel Gatehouse (BBC News) reported,
"Iraqi MPs have until Sunday to pass controversial legislation or face
postponing parliamentary elections set for 16 January. The poll is seen
as crucial to the stability of the country, and any delay would likely
impact on the US plan for withdrawal." There was no passage and AFP reports
today that KRG President Massud Barzani and US Vice President Joe Biden
"pressed the need for a key election law to be passed". BBC News reports
the United Nations "had warned that it could not guarantee to endorse
the polls if the bill was not approved on Sunday" -- that was yesterday
and the bill was not approved. BBC points out that the 'sticky points'
are Kirkuk and the issue of open or closed lists. The latter will
determine whether voters vote for individual candidates and this is
something that many in Parliament are opposed to. Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) reports
this afternoon that things remain at a standstill and quotes Iraqi MP
Hunain al-Qaddo stating, "If we don't manage to make any progress on
the electoral law, that will have a negative impact on the political
process and it will send a very bad signal to Iraq's enemies that the
political system isn't working. [. . .] I still have hopes but I think
if we don't manage to do something this week or next week, we really
have to look at postponing the election." Meanwhile Mohammed Jamjoom and Jormana Karadsheh (CNN) report
Kurdish MP Mahmoud Othman states that the US is pushing the "highest
levels of the Kurdish leadership" to go along with a plan for January
elections that would yet again set aside the issue of Kirkuk. In an
offensive statement issued last week, Chris Hill (US Ambassador to
Iraq) and Gen Ray Odierno (top US commander in Iraq) insisted that the
election law should be a 'one-time only' type deal and not apply to or
consider Article 140 of Iraq's Constitution. Article 140 is the one
that mandates the Kirkuk issue be resolved (via a referendum). That
was supposed to have taken place 2 years ago. It did not. Now let's
get back to offensive: In 2000, the US election was decided not by the
voters nor by the means outlined in the US Constitution. Instead the
US Supreme Court injected itself into the dispute and issued a
laughable ruling that was so perverted the Court insisted it was a
'one-time only' ruling and couldn't be cited as precedent in future
cases. That's what Hill and Odierno are now proposing. Regardless of
who gets or doesn't get Kirkuk, it's amazing how the US continues to
kick the can down the road over and over. This issue was supposed to
have been addressed no later than 2007. The US is again pushing for it
to be postponed. And the only time the KRG can get people to the table
on this issue is when they have the pressure of an upcoming election
which needs to be addressed.
Today
the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan met in DC
and heard from a number of witnesses including someone on the second
panel who mentioned Flournoy's October 21st testimony, Rear Adm Thomas
Traaen who declared, "As I'm sure you know, the testimony given by
Secretary [Michele] Flournoy, Mr. [Alan] Estevez, Vice Adm [James]
Winnefeld and, my boss, Lt Gen [Kathleen] Gainey on 21 October was well
received by the House Armed Services Committee. My testimony here will
draw heavily from their insightful remarks." Those remarks included
establishing that decisions on draw-down and going back in would be
made by events on the ground in Iraq. Yes, that is a clear
contradiction of the position Barack Obama presented as a candidate
when he was fond of saying the US military did everything they had been
tasked to do and did it well. And, yes, he was stealing from Hillary
Clinton back then and, yes, Hillary was attacked by CODESTINK and
others for those comments but they apparently sounded so much better
out of Barack's mouth thereby explaining the refusal to call him out.
So Barack's plan as outlined in that hearing was the same plan he
outlined to the New York Times, the one that left Michael
Gordon flabbergasted because Barack was saying that he was
'withdrawing' and at the same time saying he was going back in if
anything went wrong and playing definition games regarding the military
("trainers," etc.).
Also appearing on the
second panel was the GAO's William Solis who declared that the Pentagon
hasn't completed the plans for a draw-down. He stated that the Defense
Dept "has not fully defined or identified the contracted services it
will need to successfully complete the draw-down and support the
remaining US forces in Iraq." Solis explained that 128,700 US service
members were in Iraq as of the end of August "spread among 295 bases
throughout the country." Solis' opening, prepared remarks, can be found
[PDF format warning] here.
While the GAO was able to count the number of US service members in
Iraq, there was no count on the number of contractors leading Co-Chair
of the Commission, Michael Thibault to declare, "It is both peculiar
and troubling that eight years after the overthrow of the Taliban
regime in Afghanistan, and more than six years since the overthrow of
the Ba'athist regime in Iraq, we still don't know how many contractor
employees are working in the region. [. . .] How can contractors be
properly managed if we aren't sure how many there are, where they are
and what they are doing?"
Commissioner
Dov Zakheim: Yes, uh, first, Adm Traaen, I noticed on page three of
your testimony, uh, you said that there will be a proportionally larger
contractor presence. Now GAO has said that you haven't -- DoD, rather,
hasn't fully determined its need for contracted services so how are you
planning to oversee this? You're going to have more contractors, you
already have fewer CORs than you need right now, the proportions going
to go up. Could you walk me through your current plans and your
timetables and how you plan to address this issue?
Rear
Adm Thomas Traaen: Yes, sir. First of all, I think the proportionality
is prudent as we close forward operating bases and operating sites and
as the military either resets or re-postures in Afghanistan. The
proportionality issue is not surprising to me. Uh, I think that the
number of contractors -- in terms of measuring that to the plan -- is
moving down significantly faster than CENTCOM had originally planned
and so I think that getting out in front of it is the first part of the
plan. It's to make sure that we're removing capability where we don't
need it. Certainly, I think the CENTCOM plan is to be conditions based
and I think that there is a protocol that we would continue to move
forward in terms of making sure that there are some outliers -- for
example, the elections that are coming up in the January time frame,
counter-insurgency efforts that -- if we draw down too quickly -- we
could put that combatant commander in harms way of not being able to
produce his mission. I do believe that there is proper planning in
terms of the MNFI fusion cell that is tasked with fusing, synchronizing
and integrating this effort. And as the third point, I think having
MNFI and that fusion cell also combined with the Joint Logistics
Procurement Support Board that is the JCCIA and an MNFI established
board that will properly prioritize and coordinate those efforts as the
fourth point of light making sure that drawing down in accordance with
those priorities is the proper way to go, sir.
Commissioner
Dov Zakheim: Uhm, let me turn now to Mr. Thompson. Uhm, we know that
the target is a 32% contractor draw-down. I believe that's the number
that Adm Traaen has in his testimony. But looking at that
chart, I guess I'm thrown a little bit. Contractors have already
declined by seven -- nearly eighteen percent but not KBR. In fact, KBR
has declined by roughly half of that 18% number. In the previous
panel, and you may have been here when we discussed this, I noted that
if a service wasn't completely closed down, then any contractor --
well, not any -- some contractors, and I guess I should emphazise that,
not all would act this way. But some contractors would drag their feet
because service hasn't closed down, you don't pull the people out, you
keep charging. Could you explain to me why it is that KBR which has
been under so much scrutiny from GAO, from the IG, even from this
commission, is pulling it's people back at half the rate -- half the
rate -- of all other contractors.
Lee
Thompson: Number one, when we talk about consolidation, draw-down,
consolidation of bases, drawdown, those services that we provide under
LOGCAP [Logistics Civilian Augmentation Program] are still being
performed. There's a common mistake of rolling up all bases as a
single base. There's different sizes of bases. So you had the small
contingency operation locations and that which is a lower brigade size
which would be a contingency operation site. They move into our
services, the services we contracted for are still being provided.
There has been a reduction as that [chart] says, from when we started.
In fact, the number's around 50,000 today. So we've put a freeze on
them. They -- KBR -- cannot hire above a certain limit based on the
basis of the estimate that was negotiated this past August and
September. As we get the guidance from CI MNFI on what bases will
close, we'll descope and we'll start moving out contractors. We are
in fact doing those, we're looking at those critical skills. But
remember the major draw-down starts after the [Iraqi] elections. So we
are watching that and I'm depending upon our DCA[A -- Defense Contract
Audit Agency] folks that are doing the floor checks for us.
Commissioner
Dov Zakheim: So can you state with absolute certainty that KBR has
moved expiditiously and, for instance, has not moved people from one
location to another? Are you certain of that? Do you have that degree
of oversight and visibility? Given some of the things we heard earlier
from one of our Co-Chairman, Co-Chariman [Michael] Thibault about
issues arising with dining halls and certain things, are you absolutely
certain that KBR's getting people out as they should?
Lee
Thompson: I'm not going to sit here and say I'm absolutely certain but
I will tell you that we'll provide the oversight and look at those
places where we are closing to make sure that there's not excess
personnel there. And we will -- they have to get a blessing from us as
we move and we descope, we descope the property, if we close a base, we
look at the personnel where they're reallocating or realinging them to
so we're looking and we're scrutinizing that. And I depend on my folks
forward, the same two officers -- if you will -- that said they're
against or-or whatever Chairman Thibault had to say about what they
said overseas.
Commissioner
Dov Zakheim: Mr. Solis, could you comment on both of these points? One,
the adequacy of planning and, second, the degree of oversight of KBR
and the seeming discrephancy between KBR LOGCAP 3 and other draw-downs.
Willaim
Solis: Well I think in terms of the planning, I mentioned before in my
opening statement that there is -- there's a lot of things that are
going on with regards to the retrograde of equipment. One thing that we
haven't seen a whole lot of is planning, as I mentioned, for
determining the requirements, the oversight for the contracts that are
going to be coming onboard. And we still have a concern about that, we
still have seen exact plans. As I mentioned to you the GMASS [Global
Maintenance and Supply Services] contract in Kuwait ,which is a
major maintenance contract, which is necessary to move equipment out,
look at it, and get -- and then repair it and move it out to Kuwait or
whever it's going to go -- back to a unit, over to Afghanistan or
whatever -- they expect a major increase, as I mentioned, doubling the
size of their contract force to about 6,000 people. We have not seen
what kinds of plans are going to be put in place to increase the
contractor oversight there -- and that's not just there, I think it's
other contracts that we have seen as well. I think in terms of the
LOGCAP, we haven't really looked in terms of the numbers so I can't
really contra -- comment on that. But I think that these numbers are
going to flucuate, whether it's LOGCAP or some of these other major
contracts in terms as the draw-down proceeds and that's why
it's important to really understand what you're contract requirements
are going to be during this period.
The
first panel included April Stephenson who stated KBR's ineffective
managing of their workforce is costing tax payers "at least $193
million". Stevenson was testifying on behalf of the Defense Contract
Audit Agency. She explained KBR had not done the staff reductions and,
as a result and barring no major action on KBR's part, there staff
ratio in Iraq would, by August 2010, be 1 KBR employee for every 3.6 US
service members. That will probably be a detail noted by any who note
the hearing. But another detail -- the reason for the excerpt above --
is equally important: No plans.
The GAO -- like
the House Armed Services Committee -- is not seeing plans. Do they
exist? What's being discussed isn't 2011 or post-2011. What's being
discussed above is the draw-down that's supposedly going to begin
taking place as soon as Iraq holds national elections. Where are the
plans?
The inability to move foward on the
election bill (passing legislation) by the Iraqi government or
'government' is rightly being noted. What about the inability of the
Pentagon to provide plans for events that are supposed to be right
around the corner?
And what's up with
allowing KBR to drag it's feet there? Commission Charles Tiefer asked
if KBR had a written, detailed plan for their part in the
draw-down. Thompson declared, "I was over there a few weeks ago, a
month ago, and they provided me with a briefing. I think it was 25th,
26th of September." He continued, "Was there a written plan? We have
a normal, operational, 'how do I close a base' kind of plan that they
have signed up to early on." Who is providing oversight and how will
there be a draw-down starting supposedly in a few months if there are
no plans in writing? (No, a general "how do I close a base" is not a
written plan.) Commissioner Robert Henke attempted to get a "short,
succinct answer" on the KBR issue: "If the president announces on
February 27, 2009 the draw-down plan and we're on November 2nd, is it
possible that the contractor hasn't provided you any plan to adjust
staff accordingly?" What he received was a babble from Thompson that
contradicted and spun. Henke then attempted to get answers by going
bit by bit through a timeline and asking "How is that posssible?" In
Thompson's most honest response in the entire hearing he included "I
don't know" as part of his long-winded, run-the-clock-down response.
Friday's snapshot
had an error -- thank you to a Congressional staffer who informed me of
it. Duncan Hunter cited a project which was Task Force Odin not "Odum"
-- ODIN stands for Observe, Detect, Identify and Neutralize. It is not
and was not named after General William Odum as I wrongly stated. My
error and my apologies.
The
US military has finished erecting an advanced radar system in Iraq to
monitor the border with Iran, Syria and Turkey, a report
says. The radar
system will monitor aircraft and anti-air targets approaching from the
borders, several Arabic language news websites reported on Monday,
citing comments by unnamed Isareli sources. The
report posted on the Palestinian Maannews website said that the system
would transmit information to the Iraqi air force and some of its radar
would be connected to the control tower at the Baghdad International
Airport.
Which gives us a chance to relive
one of those 'great moments' in illegal war history. For those who've
forgotten or never knew about the US spying (the governments of England
and Australia joined in the spying as well) on the UN, refer to Martin
Bright, Ed Vulliamy and Peter Beaumont's "Revealed: US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war" (Observer, March 2, 2003):
The
United States is conducting a secret 'dirty tricks' campaign against UN
Security Council delegations in New York as part of its battle to win
votes in favour of war against Iraq. Details
of the aggressive surveillance operation, which involves interception
of the home and office telephones and the emails of UN delegates in New
York, are revealed in a document leaked to The Observer. The
disclosures were made in a memorandum written by a top official at the
National Security Agency - the US body which intercepts communications
around the world - and circulated to both senior agents in his
organisation and to a friendly foreign intelligence agency asking for
its input. The
memo describes orders to staff at the agency, whose work is clouded in
secrecy, to step up its surveillance operations 'particularly directed
at... UN Security Council Members (minus US and GBR, of course)' to
provide up-to-the-minute intelligence for Bush officials on the voting
intentions of UN members regarding the issue of Iraq.
Meanwhile,
Iraqi legislators again failed to agree on laws governing the January
elections, despite warnings that further delay could prevent the vote
from taking place on time. Discussions in Parliament on Sunday instead
focused on other matters.
The above is from John Leland's "Scattering of Attacks in Iraq" in this morning's New York Times.
Let's recap. Prior to Barack Obama being elected US President, Iraq
'intended' to hold national elections in December 2009. They then
pushed the elections back to January 2010 which Barack used to break
his campaign promise re: troop draw-down in Iraq (he called it
withdrawal and, in his speeches, rarley included "combat" which is a
meaningless qualifier anyway). All this year, they've anticipated the
elections being held in January 2010 and the deadline for passing
legislation was October 15th.
The day before that deadline, they decided to kick decisions back to
October 19th. And so it has gone, over and over. It is now November 2nd
and they have no election law.
Michele
Flournoy: Uh, let me start by saying, you know, the draw-down plan that
we have, is conditions based and it creates multiple decision points
for re-evaluating and, if necessary, changing our plans based on
developments on the ground. Although the government of Iraq's
self-imposed deadline of October 15th for passing the elections law has
passed, we judge that the COR [Council Of Representatives] still has
another week or two to come to some kind of an agreement on the
elections law before it will put the January date -- the early January
date -- in jeopardy in terms of the election commission's ability to
actually physically execute the, uh, the election. If a new law with
open lists is not passed, the fall back solution for them is to return
to the 2005 election law which is based on a closed list system. But
that could be used for upcoming elections, the COR would simply have to
vote on an election date. If that law is not passed in the next two
weeks, they will be looking at slipping the date to later in January
which would still be compliant with the [Iraqi] Constitution but would
be later than originally planned. In that instance, M-NF-I
[Multi-National Forces Iraq] would need to engage with the government
of Iraq to do some contingency planning on how to secure the elections
at a later date and that might well have-have implications.
Though she maintained Iraq could fall back on the 2005 election law, other bodies begged to differ. As Rod Nordland (New York Times) reported,
"Iraq's existing election law was declared unconstitutional by its
highest court, which said it needs to be replaced or amended." AFP reports
today that KRG President Massud Barzani and US Vice President Joe Biden
"pressed the need for a keay election law to be passed". BBC News reports
the United Nations "had warned that it could not guarantee to endorse
the polls if the bill was not approved on Sunday" -- that was yesterday
and the bill was not approved. BBC points out that the 'sticky points'
are Kirkuk and the issue of open or closed lists. The latter will
determine whether voters vote for individual candidates and this is
something that many in Parliament are opposed to.
Despite the
fact that many members of Parliament are opposed to open lists, some
continue to present the only road block as being Kirkuk. Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace (no, Virginia, they're not really
about Peace) provides Marina Ottoway tells Rebecca Santana (AP),
"The problem is that we are getting to a crisis. They have been trying
for over a year to reach a compromise on Kirkuk." Over a year. That's a
mild way of pulling it. Kirkuk was supposed to have been resolved by
2007 and hasn't been. The 2005 Iraqi Constitution mandates that the
issue be resolved. Jason Ditz (Antiwar.com) observes,
"The deadlines for Iraq's January elections appear to continue to come
and go with little movement from the nation's parliament."
The
two wars the United States carried out years ago in its so-called
preemptive offensive and its not-so-successful post-war policies have
created a "volatile triangle" on the world map containing Iraq,
Afghanistan and Pakistan, analysts say. Iraq,
Afghanistan and its neighbor Pakistan, which are being bedeviled by
daily bombing attacks and conflicts, now substantially form a "volatile
triangle," Fu Mengzi, director of the Institute of American Studies
under the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations, told
Xinhua. Yang Yi, a professor
and director of the strategic studies institute under the Chinese
People's Liberation Army National Defense University, also agrees to
the "triangle" concept.
Is the US spying on Iraq's
neighbors? You know it. (The US government spied on members of the UN,
remember.) But do they have a new system built for just that purpose?
Iran's Press TV reports:
The
US military has finished erecting an advanced radar system in Iraq to
monitor the border with Iran, Syria and Turkey, a report says. The
radar system will monitor aircraft and anti-air targets approaching
from the borders, several Arabic language news websites reported on
Monday, citing comments by unnamed Isareli sources. The
report posted on the Palestinian Maannews website said that the system
would transmit information to the Iraqi air force and some of its radar
would be connected to the control tower at the Baghdad International
Airport.
For those who've forgotten or never knew about
the US spying (the governments of England and Australia joined in the
spying as well) on the UN, refer to Martin Bright, Ed Vulliamy and
Peter Beaumont's "Revealed: US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war" (Observer, March 2, 2003):
The
United States is conducting a secret 'dirty tricks' campaign against UN
Security Council delegations in New York as part of its battle to win
votes in favour of war against Iraq. Details
of the aggressive surveillance operation, which involves interception
of the home and office telephones and the emails of UN delegates in New
York, are revealed in a document leaked to The Observer. The
disclosures were made in a memorandum written by a top official at the
National Security Agency - the US body which intercepts communications
around the world - and circulated to both senior agents in his
organisation and to a friendly foreign intelligence agency asking for
its input. The memo
describes orders to staff at the agency, whose work is clouded in
secrecy, to step up its surveillance operations 'particularly directed
at... UN Security Council Members (minus US and GBR, of course)' to
provide up-to-the-minute intelligence for Bush officials on the voting
intentions of UN members regarding the issue of Iraq.
Even
though Barack Obama, the candidate, pledged to end "the practice of
shipping away prisoners in the dead of night to be tortured in far-off
countries," his FBI has been rendering kidnap victims to the U.S. The
practice is still kidnapping, however; and it's still illegal. Unlucky
victim No. 1 was Raymond Azar, 45, flown from Afghanistan to
Alexandria, Va., not to a foreign country. The construction manager for
Sima International, a Lebanese outfit that did work for the U.S.
military, Azar said he was tortured by his abductors. He might just as
well have been flow to Egypt under the Bushies. Interestingly,
Azar was never charged as a dangerous terrorist, only with conspiracy
to commit bribery for wiring $106,000 in kickbacks to a U.S. employee’s
bank account in hopes of getting $13 million in unpaid bills okayed. For
this comparatively trivial white collar crime, Azar’s lawyers said when
arrested he was stripped naked, hooded, and subjected to a body cavity
search. What’s more, according to an article by Scott Horton, writing
on "Common Dreams," Azar claims a federal agent showed Azar a photo of
his wife and four children and told him to confess or else he might
"never see them again." Azar confessed, and pled guilty to conspiracy
to commit bribery.
In the small print of the Iraq inquiry's
announcement that its public hearings will start on 24 November is the
news that any pre-election revelations will be decidedly limited.
First, the hearings will last as little as two months before taking a
lengthy break for a possible general election in March. More seriously,
but with little apparent complaint from the inquiry, the government has
backtracked on Gordon Brown's promise of openness. Sir
John Chilcot revealed earlier this month that the inquiry's public
hearings will halt during a general election campaign, presumably to
avoid political sensitivities. The inquiry now says that hearings will
run until 17 December, then from the week beginning 4 January until
"early February". Does Chilcot know something we don't -- or is he just
being very, very careful? The
inquiry has published three protocols for its hearings and the handling
of information, and is keen to stress the expectation that evidence
will be given in public. But it has left it to the Cabinet Office to
publish the protocol that governs the passing of information from the government to the inquiry and the subsequent publication of such information. On
both fronts, the contrast between what Brown promised in June is stark.
Astonishingly, the contradictions are apparent in the protocol itself.
It quotes Brown's letter to Chilcot in June: "As privy counsellors, you
will have unhindered access to government documents." That's a pretty
uncompromising commitment to full disclosure. But the new protocol says
that no information shall be withheld "with the exception of
information HMG holds which is covered by an existing duty of
confidentiality HMG has to a third party ..."
The above is from Chris Ames' "Sparing Tony Blair's blushes over Iraq" (Guardian).
In England, they were lied into war as well and Tony Blair (and Gordon
Brown) are very lucky that Bully Boy Bush was such a blustering
attention seeker or they could be seen as the 'leader' of the illegal
war (instead, Tony Blair is seen by the world as Bush's "poodle"). John
Howard, then-prime minsiter of Australia, was also one of the sellers
of the illegal war and, while still in power, he repeatedly stamped his
feet in public feeling he was not getting his proper due. You can view
that idiot (Howard) spinning for the BBC last week by clicking here.
Chris Ames also runs the Iraq Dossier website and from the hompage of the site:
The dossier was presented to the UK Parliament on 24 September 2002 by the then Prime Minister Tony Blair, who falsely claimed that it represented the disclosure of JIC assessments. Although it has never been admitted, it was always intended to be the centrepiece of an "information campaign" to make the case for war - "to prepare public opinion in the UK that it is necessary to take military action against Saddam Hussein". As the British Ambassador to the US had told the Bush administration earlier that year, the UK "backed regime change but the plan had to be clever". The plan
was to insist on the return of UN Inspectors to look for weapons of
mass destruction (WMD): "A refusal to admit UN inspectors, or their
admission and subsequent likely frustration, which resulted in an
appropriate finding by the Security Council could provide the
justification for military action."
The inspectors were
readmitted and suffered some minor obstruction but failed to find any
chemical, biological or nuclear weapons or any evidence that they were
being produced. In spite of this and even without "an appropriate
finding by the Security Council", the US and UK governments insisted on
invading Iraq to "disarm Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction". It is inconceivable that Britain would have gone to war on the basis that Iraq "probably" had WMD.
But
when evidence of WMD was still not found, questions began to be asked
in the UK about the government's claims that its intelligence had "established beyond doubt" that Iraq possessed them. A BBC reporter quoted
an anonymous government source as revealing that the dossier had been
"sexed-up" by the government's spin doctors and in particular that an
already notorious claim that Iraq could launch WMD "within 45 minutes" had been inserted by them, in spite of the doubts of the intelligence community.
Meanwhile Jia-Rui Chong (Los Angeles Times) reports
on Iraq War veteran Peter Sinclair who returned "from war with a broken
body, suffering from back injuries and painful memories. Doctors,
nurses, psychologists and physical therapists treated him, but few were
able to help." Jia-Rui Chong details Peter Sinclair's efforts to get
help and treatment and concerns on the part of some that the VA was
less concerned with treating him and more concerned with "masking his
problems." From the article:
On
the night of June 11, 2008, after relaxing with Tracy in his Jacuzzi
with a glass of wine, Pete went to bed and never woke up. He was 40.
Toxicology tests determined the cause of death to be "acute morphine
intoxication," the manner of death accidental. Jen
was furious. She thought he was off morphine. She discovered that weeks
before his death, he had slipped in the shower and wrenched his back
again. The pain became
unmanageable. A VA doctor on June 9 had prescribed 30 milligrams of
morphine to be taken three times a day, and if the pain wasn't
relieved, the dosage could be increased to 60 milligrams. Pete was also
given a prescription for 30 milligrams of codeine to be taken as needed. Jen and Barbara wondered why Pete hadn't told them, but he was expert at hiding his pain. Barbara
remembered the lunch she had with her son on Mother's Day and the
family dinner when he had brought Tracy. He'd seemed jovial, more like
his old self. Tracy played
back the night he died. His heart had been racing when they went to
sleep, and when she asked him about it he said he was fine. After
consulting a toxicologist and medical textbooks, Jen came to the
conclusion that the VA had acted irresponsibly in prescribing the
latest dosage of morphine. She believed that because Pete had been off
the drug for at least a month, he would be especially sensitive to its
effect and should have received a lower dosage. She also knew from
medical records that Pete was frequently confused over how much
medication he was supposed to take. "You might as well have given him a gun," she said.
Violence in Iraq has been on the rise since February (and hadn't disappeared prior to that). Katie Baker (Newsweek) reports
that PFC Energy is predicting/warning that new targets may be
"international oil companies." Wherever the violence is aimed, people
are wounded and killed. Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) reported yesterday on the overworked Baghdad morgue:
The
central Baghdad morgue was built in the 1930s by the British. After the
2003 U.S.-led invasion, it was run, until relatively recently, by
Shiite militias. During 2006 and 2007, the peak years of sectarian
fighting between Sunnis and Shiites, scores of bodies were delivered
there daily. Many had been decapitated. Others were burned or tortured
beyond recognition. The intensity of sectarian hatred at the time made
it nearly impossible for Sunni families to visit the morgue. Thousands
were buried in unmarked graves, and morgue officials could do little
other than photograph corpses and try to keep track of burial places. "In 2006, we received 100, 150 bodies each day," Qasim said as he made his way from the mortuary to the DNA lab. The
crush of cases at the time kept the morgue's refrigerators packed.
Forensic experts were able to perform only perfunctory autopsies. Qasim
developed an ulcer. "We're dealing with people losing loved ones," he said. "You must not deal with these cases in an ordinary way."
Isaiah's latest The World Today Nuts "Photo-Op This!" Barack poses with a big smile while declaring, "Rush says 'photo-op' like it's a bad thing. I photo-op-ed my way into the presidency. Hey, before we bring Jon Corzine in here, can we get hair and makeup for a touch up. Should I take off my shirt again?" Isaiah archives his comics at The World Today Just Nuts.
The
promises were countless: Americans would have universal health care;
the US would take the lead on climate change; Wall Street and the banks
would be regulated with a cap put on salaries and bonuses paid to
executives; Guantanamo would be shut down by January 20010; most US
troops would be out of Iraq within 16 months; the strategy in
Afghanistan would be reviewed; the new administration would provide
transparency and accountability unlike the practice of systematic
secrecy from the Bush-era. The reality and results are quite
different: Americans will be lucky if they get a water-down version of
public option in the health care bill; the climate change bill is
unlikely to have a strong enough carbon tax; Wall Street and the banks
are doing well, getting ready to paid huge bonuses to executive while
Main Street is still in shamble from the recession; Guantanamo will not
be shut down by January 2010; Iraq is still volatile, and US troops are
likely to be there for at least 5 years; the president is still
pondering on workable solutions for the unsolvable puzzle that is
Afghanistan; some progress were made on the secrecy issue, but the
Patriot Act will be renewed and the President blocked the release of
torture documents involving the CIA.
That's from Kool-Aid drinker Gilbert Mercier's "One Year Later, What Is Left Of The Hope For Change?" (News Junkie Post)
who can identify the gulf between what was promised and what was
actually done but refuses to judge Barry O by his actions. I was on the
phone earlier tonight with a friend who was skewering the pathetic Ted
Rall who can't do a damn thing but whore for Barack. After saying
Barry's handsome and intelligent and blah, blah, blah, he finally
offers some wimpy little criticism.
Guess what? Intelligent?
There's never been any proof of that. (An intelligent attorney makes
partner before 40.) What does handsome have to do with anything? Some
of the ugliest and most unattractive people have made great leaders. In
the end, we don't care what your intentions were, we care what you did.
We care how it effected the lives of others in this country and around
the world. The porn blogger (you know the trash I'm talking about) can
take her ugly lined face and neck to CSPAN and yammer on about how she
can see into Barack's "heart" (apparently, she learned that trick while
staring into guy's anuses during her porn days) but at the grown up
table -- where the porn industry does not sit, so sorry -- we don't
play mind reader, we look at what was done and we look at the effects.
And we look at what was promised and what was delivered or not.
Gilbert
and all the other members of the Cult of St. Barack can offer a million
excuses but realitiey is nearly 200 Iraqis were reported dead last week
as were 4 US service members in Iraq. That's reality. And you can snort
lines of Kool-Aid all you want but it won't change that reality.
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 4351. Tonight? 4355.
Bombings?
Mohammed al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports
2 Ramadi suicide car bombings which claimed the lives of 2 drivers and
3 civilians (with seven people left injured), a Karbala sticky bombing
which left 4 people dead and fifteen wounded and a Babil market bombing
which claimed 9 lives and left thirty-eight injured. Reuters notes a Mussayab bicycle bombing which claimed 5 lives and left thirty-seven people wounded. Al Jazeera notes a Baghdad mortar attack which claimed 1 life.
Corpses?
Reuters notes 1 corpse discovered yesterday in Kirkuk.
Oliver August (Times of London) observes,
"Violence in Iraq has been reduced, as Western generals and politicians
are keen to point out, but it has not gone away. If anything, it has
become more deeply ingrained. [. . .] Were terrorists to disappear from
Iraq overnight, the country would still be stuck, possibly for decades,
with the culture of violence they fostered (building on the legacy of
Saddam Hussein, of course). " On Thursday's shooting at the police
station which made waves in yesterday's news cycle, click here for Marc Santora's New York Times report. Meanwhile KUNA reports
CIA asset and fromer Prime Minister of Iraq Iyad Allawi announced
yesterday that he was heading a new bloc/slate of candidates, Iraqi
National Movement (INM) which will have National Dialogue bloc's Saleh
al-Mutlak as General Secretary.
On the topic of the intended January national elections, Gabriel Gatehouse (BBC News) reported
yesterday, "Iraqi MPs have until Sunday to pass controversial
legislation or face postponing parliamentary elections set for 16
January. The poll is seen as crucial to the stability of the country,
and any delay would likely impact on the US plan for withdrawal." That
was yesterday. They had until Sunday? Sunday's come and gone in Iraq
and there was no passage of election legistlation.
There's
actually some Iraq coverage from western outlets and we'll pick up some
of it tomorrow but the point that needs to be underscored tonight is
that there is still no election law. The Parliament has still not
turned a bill into law on this issue. The elections were supposed to
take place in December. Shortly after Barack was elected president in
the United States, the elections in Iraq were pushed back to January
2010. All this time after that, still no law allowing for elections to
be held in January. That's the big news today.
Kat:
Carly Simon's newly released album is
entitled Never Been Gone after a track from 1979's Spy but it
just as easily could be entitled Passages or any other title that
connotes wisdom and maturity. If you're looking for a text equivalent to the
album, think Emily Dickinson's "Because I Could Not Stop For Death."
Over 12 tracks, Carly sings of life, loss and the always
ticking time. "The Right Thing To Do" (which Carly penned for 1973's No
Secrets) kicks off the collection and it's difficult not bring her infamous
ex into it and it's rather obvious Carly's brought him into it with an
arrangement that's a bit more tuneful than his recordings but does approximate
them. "Darling, I hold you in my arms forever, yes I do, And I'll love you more
than just a little bit," she sings as the song winds down. "For the rest of my
life," she adds. It can be read as "I refuse to let the bad of the relationship
destroy the memories of the good" (a theme of the second track) or as "I am the
widow and witness of our love affair."
From 1983's Hello Big
Man, "It Happens Everyday" follows, the break up song whose heart has
always been this passage:
But I don't regret that I loved
you How I loved you I will never
forget And in time I'll look back and
remember The boy that I knew when we first
met
That's true of it's first recording in 1983 and true of the
live version (on 1988's Greatest Hits Live) and true here. But whereas
it used to be an emotional peak, it's now more of matter of fact. There's a
lived in nature to the song. And as much as it's still about her, Carly's also
looking out at "girls getting out of the cabs with their suitcases" to go live
with a friend following a break up. In its latest incarnation, "It Happens Every
Day" resembles the voice in Frank Musker and Dominic King's "You Have To Hurt"
(from 1987's Coming Around Again) -- a song that was so perfect for
Carly it was hard to believe she didn't write it. She certainly lived it and
that's clear on track two.
On NBC's
Today Show last week, Carly declared she could remember where she
wrote every song on the album, where she was, what she was doing, what she wrote
it on. And, over the years, she's described "Never Been Gone" as a song she
wrote (with Jacob Brackman) following an unpleasant
experience."
I'm bound for the island The
tide is with me I think I can make it by
dawn Well, it's night on the ocean And
I'm going home And it feels like I've
never I've never been gone
Carly's voice is
out front on this version but it's a sing-along with multiple voices which gives
a bar room chantey feel and also finds the warmer portions of the song and eases
over the more dramatic parts. The unpleasant incident that was so key to the
song (as well as writing it) is of less importance as the song's recast as a
warm embrace of the known and familiar, of home.
Tori Amos has been known to break out
"Boys In The Trees" when performing live and it's easy to see why when you
listen to the 1978 original (from the Carly album of the same name): the
discovery of the sensual, the discovery of your own power. For this version,
Carly pretty much turns it into a duet with her daughter Sally Taylor and the rhythm supplied adds a
great deal -- starting out like someone sneaking in well after dark with a
tip-toe like quality and quickly moving to the pulsating. "And the silent
understanding passing down, From daughter to daughter" becomes more prominent in
this version and the song becomes more about the sisterhood.
"Let The
River Run" features a more legato arrangement with every note in the chords
being played individually which is a big step away from its rock roots. It also
allows Carly not to be singing from outside the river but from within -- and if
that escapes you, you haven't heard her new version. The songs you know have
been re-imagined, not just re-arranged or re-worked.
And sometimes, that
can be confusing. For example, I found track six -- Carly's most famous song --
a puzzler. I didn't get what was done to "You're So Vain" for the new guitar
figure during the bulk of the verses until C.I. pointed out it was basically the
first two notes from "walked in" ("You walked in, to the party . . .") and that
the musical opening of the original (the strutting bass line heard under her
whispered "son of a gun") was instead now being used for the bridge and the
third verse. I'm missing the alleged point of view change in the song (alleged
by one reviewer). If there's any change I can see, the singing only makes it
more about the vanity of the former lover. It remains a send up of a lover
("You're so vain, I bet you think this song is about you") but the ending with
some cowbell nonsense may get the point across that Carly was toying with the
man and not crucifying him for those who missed that the first go around. Did
someone say suspenders?
No secrets. None.
"You Belong To Me" (from
1978's Boys In The Trees and co-written with Michael McDonald) stands
out primarily for a stronger vocal. There's nothing wrong with the original
vocal, good enough to take the song into the top ten, but what once went was
sung as a couple-threatening event is now something a more robust sounding Carly
seems less shocked by and "you belong to me" becomes less of a plea and more of
a reminder.
Track eight is the first new song on the album, "No Freedom,"
a duet with Peter Calo and passed down wisdom -- with big drums -- as evidenced
by the opening, "Hey now, mama used to say, What's the use of spoiling a perfect
day, Does a flower compromise it's glory, Wondering if it's going to rain?" The
point of the song is in the chorus: "There ain't no freedom when you got a
worryin' mind."
From "daughter to daughter" came to mind during "That's
The Way I've Always Heard It Should Be." This version of the song Carly wrote
with Jacob Brackman (and her first solo hit single) is heavy on the fingered
chords in the mix. What I think of most when I listen to this version is several
recent interviews where Carly's expressed surprise that anyone would have this
played at their wedding. No, it's not a sentimental or sappy look. It remains a
song about grappling with your own identity and the risks of losing you in a
romantic merger. But it was an eyes-wide-open kind of statement, an
I-know-the-risk-but-I'll-take-it which spoke to so many of us back when it was
first released. The flutes on this -- as well as the string -- will be off
putting to some -- and possibly make them think of the scene where Jessica Lange
delivers food to a group of musicians practicing in Men Don't Leave.
I'm sure that wasn't the intention but Lange's character declares in that film,
"Heartbreak is life educating us" -- which could pretty much be the motto of
Carly's songwriting career and certainly of this album and, yes, of this
track.
Which makes it the perfect segue for "Coming Around Again"
(originally on 1988's album of the same title). The acoustic nature of so many
of the songs on the album will probably be most appreciated with this track. A
musical change (along with the lack of synths and drum machines) is that the
eighth note doing an octave leap to a quarter note figure that appears at the
end of some verses in the original runs throughout this version. The new
perspective -- throughout the album -- takes the near whispered verses and
provides them in normal voice while taking the chorus ("I know nothing stays the
same, But if you're willing to play the game, It's coming around again") into
more of a whisper.
What's the point of that? In the original, the daily
events (with their own daily trauma) couldn't be spoken of directly, they had to
be softened. Now they're matter of fact, just what it is. And turning the chorus
into the whisper makes it the secret, the wisdom she's choosing to share. This
song also features a wonderful addition to the original
lyrics:
The heartbeat went out of our
house The rhythm went out of our
romance But in life that happens And you
just have to remember to breathe And it
then It then will return Well if you
just remember to breathe After all I've been through
I waded on through If I can just
remember to breathe
"We can never, we can never know," is how
"Anticipation" now opens. The re-imagined classic may be the easiest for even
the casual listener to grasp the concept of the album: Examination. It's their
on the cover, with Carly holding the magnifying glass. What was a song she wrote
in the early seventies about waiting for Cat Stevens to arrive for their date is
now a song gathering the memories and the loved ones.
And
when the sun returns I will prefer to sing your haunting
melody You'll take the notes that harmonize
me And bring me back To
Hallelujah For the rest of my life.
That's
from the final track, "Songbird." Another new offering. And it continues the
benediction nature of the album. Maybe if a recent best-of hadn't been called
Reflections, this collection could have been? As with Emily Dickinson's poem,
this is reflection on all that comes before. She's gathered a thousand seemingly
unconnected strands for this album and made an incredibly strong and cohesive
artistic statement. This isn't a best-of or a greatest hits, this is an album in
every sense of the word. And the theme is a life lived and lessons learned and
how what we once indicated deepens in age (check out "Anticipation"). And, most
of all, how these moments are fleeting and time never stops for any of us
("these are the good old days").
Carly's released Never Been
Gone on her son Ben Taylor's
Iris Records and you can see Ben's
"Wicked Ways" video at the homepage of Iris Records. Like
Betty, I have tremendous fears that this might be Carly's recorded hug
goodbye. Hopefully, that won't be the case; however, if it should turn out to
be, it was a warm and gentle hug, a memorable one. And she's made the best album
of the year. I won't tease you until January 1st on my pick for the best album
of 2009. One listen to Never Been Gone and it should be
obvious.
I'll close by noting some other community members
thoughts on Carly's songs from last week:
laith hammoudi
