Friday, March 07, 2008

Sammy go bye-bye

Friday! Yea! :D Tony and I did our presentation to the group early (Iraq study group) and I'm taking a break -- not to be rude but Elaine said, "Let's get our posts done before midnight." I hear ya! :D

C.I.'s enjoying a moment of relative quiet -- because all three cell phones are dead! They're all charging. C.I. was juggling phones all day today when not speaking to groups about the illegal war. Because of the destruction of Sammy Power. :D

Only this time, instead of destroying something else, Sammy Power destroyed herself!

I cut class to go with Ava, Kat and C.I. this afternoon and speak about the illegal war. C.I. goes, "Mike, you can edit the snapshot but unless I hear from two people that Samantha resigned on her own, I will be including a compliment for" Bambi. I go, "Whatever." I wouldn't have edited it out. But C.I. heard from three that Sammy resigned. Took one for the team. Bambi didn't even have the brains to fire her. He's no leader. Too bad, because C.I. had three lines written on a scrap of paper that were going to be kind to Bambi and note that he showed he could take a difficult action. But Sammy resigned. Bambi didn't have the guts to fire her.

He's no leader. (Two people were with the campaign, the third was a friend of Sammy's -- all called back and told C.I. "She resigned.") By the way, you don't want to miss Third on Sunday. Ava and C.I. will have a must read TV commentary. We were at a high school and C.I. gave the fax number out so a friend at PBS could fax the transcript of a show (that doesn't post their transcripts but instead charges for them). As soon as we got done speaking, C.I. and Ava grabbed the fax and that sucker (I think it's 19 pages) is already all marked up with various things the program didn't do but should have. They really were planning to do an entertainment show when the week started. They'd narrowed it down to two and were leaning towards one because it's cancelled. But instead, they're tackling at least two news shows.

I got to hear the snapshot dictated and there was one killer joke that was edited out. It should have stayed in! It was edited because C.I. thought, "That may be too harsh." In addition, another thing got pulled that will be tossed to Third (they will grab it) because the snapshot was too long. And there was a paragraph pulled entirely when it was still too long. It's a strong snapshot and one thing C.I. was holding was the report on life for women in Iraq. (Holding for Friday's snapshot because tomorrow's International Women's Day.)

Steve Rosnefeld really hates Hillary, doesn't he? You'd almost think she's the one who got his tired ass fired from Air America Radio? (It was Katrina vanden Heuvel who wanted to take over lousy Laura Flanders' show.) Here's what the dumb ass had to say Tuesday night, with 66% of Texas precincts reporting: "Overall, I think Clinton looks set to win Ohio, while Obama looks set to win Texas. " Rosnefeld's supposed to be an 'expert' -- really tells you about the quality of his work, doesn't it? Get a real job, Loser. Speaking of losers, and then there's Maude: David Corn. Samantha Power calls Hillary Clinton a "monster" and David Corn (at Mother Jones) wants to defend poor little Sammy. This is Andrew Romano writing at Newsweek:

As many observers have noted, gaffes like these are a natural result--and risk--of running a "movement campaign." Obama has surrounded himself with bright, energetic political neophytes--many of whom clearly haven’t mastered the art of shutting up. In some ways, the "honesty" of Obama's surrogates is refreshing. But it's also bad politics, and after two slips, he simply couldn't afford to give Power a pass. Nor should he have. While Goolsbee and Rice made fundamentally accurate--if politically inconvenient--remarks about policy, Power simply called Clinton a nasty name.

He has another point in his column and he's missing the point (not about Power). Most people are. I'll pitch that to Third for us to do Sunday because it goes to a conversation C.I. and I were having today.

Tony read me C.I.'s "The Problem From Hell: Samantha Power" this morning. I was headed to work and Tony called me and starts reading it. Tony loved it but wondered if C.I. was right to call for Power to be fired because he didn't think there was a chance of that happening? Then a few hours later, he's calling me and saying, "The press is really talking about this and the Clinton campaign is calling it out too." Then he calls me again and says Sammy's out. At that point, he wanted me to find out if C.I. knew the Clinton campaign was going to make something out of this? No. I asked and Ava filled me in (C.I. was dictating the snapshot). A friend at ____ (daily paper) called early this morning and said, "I understand ___ at ___" daily paper "spoke to Samantha Power and she insulted Hillary then too. Can you check that out?" C.I. did and got ___ to talk to ___ of the record. And was doing that with other reporters as well. A major daily would have run Saturday (front page) a story on how Sammy had done this repeatedly with the press if she hadn't stepped down. Now it's filed away for good unless she tries to come back with, "I made one mistake! One!" She made plenty. She was trashing Hillary every chance she got to the press. And doing it off the record.

So she's gone, Our Modern Day Carrie Nations is gone! Yea! Maria L. La Ganga has a funny thing at the Los Angeles Times about Bambi lecturing the press this week.

Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Friday, March 7, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, War Hawk Sammy Power Down and taking the Obama campaign with her, International Women's Day, Bambi's not so 'anti-war' and more.

Starting with war resistance. Julie Muhlstein (HeraldNet) reports that Catherine Ryan and Gary Weimber's documentary Soldiers of Conscience will be shown at 10:30 Saturday morning in the Historic Everett Theatre as part of the Everett Women's Film Festival. "Their country asked them to kill, their hearts told them to stop" is the tagline in some promotional materials for the film that won Best Documentary at both the Rhode Island International Film Festival and Ireland's Foyle Film Festival. Ryan (co-director and co-producer) will be present Saturday as part of the filmmaker forum. Among those featured in the documentary is war resister Aidan Delgado who told his story of serving in Iraq and rejecting the illegal war in The Sutras Of Abu Ghraib: Notes From A Conscientious Objector In Iraq. In the book, Delgado explains how he knew the whispers of abuse at Abu Ghraib weren't false speculation -- they're all called in for a speech by a commander:

There's no doubt now that everything we've heard about is true, and it must be even worse than we thought, for the commander himself to get on our backs about it. All a family? I laugh. We're only a family when the captain wants us to do his bidding or conceal some wrongdoing. The Army has tried that rhetoric before, talking about family and Army pride and everything else to try to get you to buy into what they do. When the Army talks about "handling something internally," it's only because they've done something so obviously wrong, they can't allow the rest of the country to see it. This doesn't surprise me. After all, if Americans back home saw Iraqi prisoners shot dead for throwing stones, saw the wretched conditions inside Abu, or saw the way the MPs dealt with the prisoners, what would they think of our glorious and righteous invasion? The truth about Abu Ghraib has to be concealed, has to be "kept in the family," because if the average citizen saw what we're doing to the people here, they would know in their guts that it's un-American.

Delgado's journey doesn't begin in the excerpt (read the book) and every war resister has a moment where they realize they can't take part in the illegal war. For some, it may be after they serve in Iraq and see it with their own eyes, for others it may come as they begin exploring the 'reasons' given for the Iraq War, some have a religous awakening . . . Every individual has their own story and these are the stories that are not being told.

Among the stories that need to be told due to a window of time are the stories of war resisters who went to Canada. They were dealt a serious set-back when the Canadian Supreme Court refused to hear the appeals of Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey. Today, Canada's Parliament remaining the best hope for safe harbor war resisters have, you can make your voice heard by the Canadian parliament which has the ability to pass legislation to grant war resisters the right to remain in Canada. Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use. That is the sort of thing that should receive attention but instead it's ignored.There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Matt Mishler, Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Justiniano Rodrigues, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).Meanwhile IVAW has a DC action this month:In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & AfghanistanMarch 13th through 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation. Dee Knight (Workers World) notes, "IVAW wants as many people as possible to attend the event. It is planning to provide live broadcasting of the sessions for those who cannot hear the testimony firsthand. 'We have been inspired by the tremendous support the movement has shown us,' IVAW says. 'We believe the success of Winter Soldier will ultimately depend on the support of our allies and the hard work of our members'." IVAW's co-chair Adam Kokesh will, of course, be participating and he explains why at his site, "But out of a strong sense of duty, some of us are trying to put our experiences to use for a good cause. Some of us couldn't live with ourselves if weren't doing everything we could to bring our brothers and sisters home as soon as possible. The environment may be unking, but that is why I will be testifying to shooting at civilians as a result of changing Rules of Engagement, abuse of detainees, and desecration of Iraqi bodies. It won't be easy but it must be done. Some of the stories are things that are difficult to admit that I was a part of, but if one more veteran realizes that they are not alone because of my testimony it will be worth it." The hearings will be broadcast throughout at the Iraq Veterans Against the War home page an on KPFA March 14th and 16th with Aimee Allison (co-host of the station's The Morning Show and co-author with David Solnit of Army Of None) and Aaron Glantz hosting and the KPFA live stream will also be available at Glantz' War Comes Home.

Today, at Foreign Policy in Focus, Aaron Glantz reports more on the upcoming action:

"We have given a blanket invitation to Congress," said Camilo Mejia, the Chair of the Board of Iraq Veterans Against the War. "We hope the Congress will give these hearings the same attention they did during the Vietnam era."
But action from politicians is only one possible outcome. Mejia says IVAW also hopes Winter Soldier will increase the size and strength of GI Resistance against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
"The event is going to empower soldiers to follow their conscience whatever that means for them," said Mejia . . . "The kinds of things we're talking about are non-partisan. They're non-political. They have to do with human being trapped in this atrocity producing situation."

Meanwhile, it was not a good day to be Our Modern Day Carrie Nations or, as Samantha Power prefers to be called, "the humanitarian War Hawk." Last night, The Scotsman was making news with Power's insults of US Senator Hillary Clinton and "the poor" in America and, generally, just flashing that foul mouth everyone knows about but generally ignroes. The morning started with Sammy Power expressing 'sorrow.' She wasn't sorry and we're not going to play around with this story. Here's reality, the press was lining up this morning the stories on this and talking to one another (as they are prone to do) for background examples of other times Sammy Power has personally (and destructively) insulted Hillary Clinton. When it was obvious that those stories would come out if she stayed with the campaign she 'resigned.' At The New Statesman, she was flaunting her War Hawk nature in an interview (as well as that foul mouth). [Personal note: I'm sure I could match Sammy swear word for swear word, but I wasn't planning on becoming Secretary of State.] Lynn Sweet (Chicago Sun-Times) was one of the first out of the gate noting that Sammy Power "resigned as a foreign policy advisor to Sen. Barack Obama" this afternoon. Her calling Hillary a "monster" did matter, it was off sides -- both for a future Secretary of State as well as for a professor at Harvard. It's a shame Obama still lacks the leadership to take control of his campaign -- that would have required firing Power. Instead she resigned indicating that he's unable to run a campaign as well as unable to tell the truth. Power -- who also went to work for Obama in 2005 when he was first elected to the US Senate (November 2004) -- also had to deal with the BBC interview she'd given. Barack Obama has not promised to pull ALL troops out of Iraq in 16 months. He has promised the American people that "combat" troops would be removed. But promises, promises (as Dionne Warwick once sang) . . .

Stephen Sackur: You said that he'll revisit it [the decision to pull troops] when he goes to the White House. So what the American public thinks is a commitment to get combat forces out within sixteen months, isn't a commitment is it?

Samantha Power: You can't make a commitment in whatever month we're in now, in March of 2008 about what circumstances are going to be like in January 2009. We can'te ven tell what Bush is up to in terms of troops pauses and so forth. He will of course not rely upon some plan that he's crafted as a presidential candidate or as a US Senator.

Which would mean Mr. Pretty Speeches has been lying to the American people. (Add the "AGAIN!")

Her rise was swift, her fall even faster. Our Modern Day Carrie Nations took part in the "Bring the troops home and send them to Darfur" nonsense. [For more on that nutso crowd, see Julie Hollar's "The Humanitarian Tempatation" (Extra!).] Despite presenting herself recently as against the Iraq War from the start, the public record has never backed that up. But it is true that she wanted wars in Africa and was selling them under "humanitarian" guise. "Stop the killing!" she cried but if she really wanted to stop the killing, she might have tried to speak out against the ongoing genocie in Iraq (which has also produced the largest refugee crisis in the world). She didn't care about that. Probably because it demonstrates that sending armed forces in is not an answer. Again, if Barack Obama had any leadership abilities, he would have announced today that he fired his longterm advisor. He did not, she resigned. (She foolishly doesn't grasp that this is her Alexander Haig moment and there is no comeback.) Power was not a campaigner, she was a high level, longterm foreign policy advisor being groomed to be the next Secretary of State. As Krissah Williams (Washington Post) notes, Senator Clinton's response to Power's BBC interview was to note Power's agreement that Obama's pledge to have "combat" troops out in 16 months was never more than a "best-case scenario". Hillary Clinton: "Senator Obama has made his speech opposing Iraq in 2002 and the war in Iraq the core of his campaign, which makes these comments especially troubling. While Senator Obama campaigns on his [pledge] to end the war, his top advisers tell people abroad that he will not rely on his own plan should he become president. This is the latest example of promising the American people one thing on the campaign trail and telling people in other countries another. You saw this with NAFTA as well."

Meanwhile Tom Hayden again offers Barack advice from the heart, from love. At Common Dreams, Hayden feels that, "The only policy difference favoring Obama that goes straight to the issue of 'experience' is Iraq. It no longer is enough that Obama opposed the war five years ago, especially if it appears that there are no differences between the candidates now. For whatever reason, Obama has allowed Clinton to appear to take an identical stand on the war. Is that true? Or is it time for Obama to issue a further clarification of his position separating him from both Clinton and McCain? The peace movement and media can play a role here." Tom then asks, "Does Clinton propose a timetable for withdrawing combat troops, like Obama does?" Apparently Tom missed Sammy's interview -- Obama has no proposal. As Sammy notes, things change, who can say? Should we expect Hayden's endorsement of Hillary anytime soon? Or will he again plan to 'represent' the peace movement by covering for the 'anti-war' candidate -- one whose own foreign policy advisor (she was that when she gave the interview) informs is saying words he'd not planning to live up to?

Meanwhile violence continues in Iraq . . .

Bombings?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports two Mosul roadside bombings that wounded fourteen people and claimed the life of 1 police officer and a Mosul car bombing that claimed the lives of 4 police officers and left thirty-three people wounded.

Shootings?

Reuters notes US forces in Samarra "killed eight suspected al Qaeda fighters" (and they note the death toll from yesterday's Baghdad bombings rose to 68).

Corpses?

Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 corpses discovered in Baghdad.

Iraqi president Jalal Talabani is in Turkey for day one of a two-day visit. Zerin Elci (Reuters) reports that he has "pledged Iraq's backing for Turkey in its fight against Kurdish PKK rebels on Friday, just one week after Ankara ended a major army ground offensive against the guerrillas in northern Iraq." That's where Talabani is, where's Moqtada al-Sadr? Earlier today, Khaled Farhan (Reuters) reported:Powerful Iraqi Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, who has not been seen in public for months, issued an unusual statement on Friday explaining his absence to his followers and admitting splits in his movement."I swear that I live with you and among you. I am a part of you. I will not change this unless death separates us," he said in a two-page statement bearing his personal stamp.The statement was issued two weeks after Sadr extended a ceasefire by his Mehdi Army for another six months. He first called on the militia, blamed by the U.S. military and Sunni Arabs for fuelling sectarian violence, to halt its activities in August so that he could reorganise it.

BBC notes, "May of his followers had split from him 'for materalistic reasons or because they wanted to be independent,' he said" in the statement. While Sadr City residents feel targeted, al-Sadr's not there. He's renewed a cease-fire/truce that the residents didn't favor and the attitude then (which is only growing) is, "Why should we listen to someone who's not even here standing with us?" (He's rumored to be in Najaf, working as a hotel clerk.) A "leader" has to be seen as standing with (and suffering with) the people. al-Sadr is not seen as such currently and his little 'gift' of a message won't have much impact. Already the rumbles have moved on to wonder if he is collaborating with the US and every day he is out of Sadr City, he is futher weakened. That isn't at all surprising and any student of history could have seen it coming. In his absence, the rumors circulate and issuing 'press releases' to the residents of Sadr City will not raise his standing.

And we'll close with one topic. Saturday is International Women's Day. Feminist Wire Daily explains, "International Women's Day (IWD) will be celebrated this Saturday across the world. According to the IWD website, this year marks the 97th annual celebration. Counties including Armenia, Russia, and Vietnam recognize IWD as an official holiday, but hundreds of celebrations happen all over the world on March 8th." and arrives as Women for Women International has released a new study on Iraqi women. Zainab Salbi writes in the introduction to [PDF format warning] "Stronger Women, Stronger Nations: 2008 Iraq Report:"

In Iraq, violence against women increased within months of March 2003 U.S. invasion. There were assassinations and abductions of Iraqi professional women, in the country and abroad. Hair salons were bombed, and there were threats to women who drove or didn't cover their hair. Soon every politician, businessperson, professional Iraqi and foreigner became vulnerable to kidnapping and attack and remains so today. This issue has become menacing enough to impede development efforts in the country. But the increasingly precarious status of women was and continues to be seen as a secondary issue, a distraction from the bigger political debates.
Since 2003, the discussion of women's role in Iraqi society and their earnest participation in reconstruction has shrunk from one of legitimate substance to obligatory quantity. In 2004, as plans for Iraq's new constitution were underway and "women's issues" were designated as a priority, the initial request of setting aside 40 percent of the seats in parliament for women was negotiated down to 25 percent.
[. . .]
Once the fighting ends, it is women who pick up the pieces of their families and mend the social fabric of their communities. Yet this crucial role is rarely acknowledged. Sustainable peace, democracy and economic development depend on women's social, political and economic participation. Unless there is a clear understanding of the obstacles and avenues to women's access to development resources and the political will to enact gender equitable policies, any blueprint for sustainable peace risks being place perilously out of reach. Thus, the incorporation of women's views into traditionally male-dominated political processes is vital to achieving sustainable peace, democracy, and prosperity.

Of course, to believe that, you'd have to believe that women matter, you'd have to accept the realities of the gender barriers worldwide and you'd have to grasp how under attack all women are, every day, around the globe. If you're a woman, you'd also have to have at least a little self-respect. As evidenced by the non-stop attacks on Hillary Clinton coming from so many and the refusal of women in the United States who do not support Hillary to call these attacks out, women still don't matter in the United States and Bash the Bitch remains the national pasttime.

The report informs that in 2004, 90.6 percent of Iraqi women surveyed were "optimistic about the future" and that, in 2007, the number stating they were optimistic fell to 26.9 percent. 88 percent of respondents "expressed a great deal of concern that they or someone living in their households would become a victim of violence." In addition, the number stating that the presence of US forces and British forces were making things worse was 65.3 percent and 67.9 percent "stated that their ability to walk down the street as they please has gotten worse since the U.S. invasion." As the illegal war hits the fifth year mark this year, things are not improving, they are only getting worse. The report details the hazards of just conducting the survey with details such as "For security reasons, women in Al-Sadr City, Al-Kamalyah, and Al-Ubadi gathered in groups of five in a woman's home and met with a staff member to complete the questionnaire." The respondents repeatedly cited the following as "the biggest problems facing Iraq as a whole":

* High/rising prices
* Housing availability/prices
* Lack of security
* US occupation/presence

On basic issues of mobility, the illegal war has had a huge impace: "86.0% of respondents said they are not able to walk down the street as they please; 67.9% of respondents stated that their ability to walkd won the street as they please has gotten worse since the U.S. invasion; 68.3% of women are not able to drive a car; 53.7% of respondents say that their ability to drive a car has gotten worse since the U.S. invasion; 48.6% of respondents said that they are not able to work outside the home; and 56.7% of respondents said that their ability to work outside the home has gotten worse since the U.S. invasion." As a result, 74.5 percent of Iraqi women now avoid leaving the home, 63.2 percent are not allowing their children to go to school ("most commonly in parts of Baghdad"), 38.5 percent say rape is increasing, 30.4 percent see an increase in the trafficking of women, 29.6 percent see an increase in prostitution. Why is that? The three most repeated answers were:

* There is less respect for women's rights than before
* Women are thought of as possessions
* The economy has gotten worse

Asked to rank "the biggest threat to national security," the women chose US and British soldiers (43.9 percent) followed closely by the Iraqi militias (32.6 percent). From the report:

A group of women in Karbala was asked what they would do if they were in charge of the country. They said, "We would first ask the Americans to leave immediately. Second, we will address the poverty situation in Iraq which is impacting us the most." One woman added, "If I was the president of the country, I would make filling the stomach of the old people as my utmost priority." When asked what was neeeded, 70.0% of respondents said that rebuilding infrastructure such as roads, wells, drains and public buildings was necessary for the welfare of their communities. Other priorities included programs designed to help communities take care of their own needs and emergency relief such as food, shelter and emergency medical services.

The report concludes with "Action Agenda for Women" which argues for proving "that freedom is not inconsistent with safety"; restoring infrastructure throughout the country, addressing the economic needs of women, supporting "women's organizations and umbrella groups" and strengthening "democracy through education." Again the thirty-four page report is in PDF format and entitled "Stronger Women, Stronger Nations: 2008 Iraq Report." In non-PDF form, an overview is provided here. The founder of Women for Women, Zainab Salbi, remembers (at Womens Media Center) her own last visit to Iraq (in 2004), "My colleague who picked me up turned to me in the car and said: 'Zainab, remember the basketball hoop your family put in the cul-de-sac in front your home? Al-Mahdi militia has been using the basketball pole to execute Sunnis.' I couldn't believe what he was telling me. 'Zainab,' he continued, 'every day I saw tens of bodies lying in front of your house after being executed. Every day there was a body hanging from the basketball pole. Your home has turned into an execution center'." She remembers traveling Iraq that year and encountering many women including Shatha who told her, "If I was the president of the country, the first thing I would do is ask the Americans to leave. I then would make filling the stomachs of the people my utmost priority, by ending poverty and creating jobs. And thirdly I will focus on education. We can't have a real democracy if we don't have educated people pushing for a real democracy." Zainab Salbi asks that everyone "remember the women who struggle in Iraq and around the world to create peace." AFP notes the report and speaks with two Iraqi women: Asma Kadhim and Eman Ahmad. The latter states, "Before the war in 2003, I used to work in complete freedom. I had my shop and my own car. I was threatened a year back and since then I have stopped working and stopped driving." She had operated a clothing store while Asma Kadhim had operated a hair salon but one day, "There was a stranger at the door. He gave me an envelope which had two bullets and a letter that said 'if you do not close your beauty parlour, we will kill you. Your work is haram (forbidden)'."

January 29th, Deborah Amos (NPR's Day to Day) reported how 'democracy' played out for Iraqi women:

Deborah Amos: Rima, a 48-year-old mother of four, escaped to Syria a year ago. She doesn't want her family name broadcast because of relatives back home. In the kitchen, Rima seems a traditional Iraqi mother preparing food for her son and three daughters but when it came to education, her daughters have advanced college degrees just like her son. In Baghdad, Rima worked for a western aid organization helping improve the lives of poor Iraqi women until militants threatened to kill her.

Rima: So many times I went to places that poor women are living. They knew me. They knew my face.

Deborah Amos: Rima acknowledges that from a distance Baghdad seems safer now but she says she needs guarantees that go beyond safety to take her daughters back there.

Rima: There is no freedom. Can any girl, woman, dressing as she likes, going to jobs, going to colleges as before?

Deborah Amos: There are women in college, there are some.

Rima: But all of them are frightened.

Deborah Amos: Historically Iraqi women had more rights and freedom than many in the Middle East. That status declined in the last years of Saddam's rule, deteriorated further still after the US invastion. Religious conservatives swept to office in Iraq's elections, the new constitution reduced women's rights and religious radicals directly threatened women -- a story told be refugees across the Middle East. In Lebanon, 53-year-old Bosaf and her brother Feraz, live in a low rent neighborhood outside the capital. They fled Iraq's northern city of Mosul in June. Bosaf -- the head librarian at Mosul University -- was threatened she says because of her head scarf. Her university i.d. shows her blond hair covered by a flowered scarf -- a hijab. But that wasn't good enough for Islamist militants in Mosul. Basama -- a dignified, middle-aged woman -- displays a wicked sense of humor when it comes to the young men who dictated her head gear. She drapes a long, black garmet over her head, rolls her eyes in a can-you-believe-they-made-me-wear-this expression and twirls across the living room.

Unidentified woman: They killed many Christians, that's why she had to wear it.

Deborah Amos: But even a proper headscarf was no protection in Basra. Just ask 35-year-old Ala, the name she agrees to use for her family's safety. She worked as a translator for a western aid organization delivering food and school supplies -- a job she knew came with risks. But Ala says the bigger danger is the well armed and powerful in Basra imposing an extreme form of Islam.

Ala: What's happened, the whole change, attract every wrong value -- this is the religion: "God say that!"

Deborah Amos: Do you think it's more dangerous because you're a woman or because you were a translator?

Ala: Woman. Woman, yeah.

Deborah Amos: Ala now expresses her opinions in the relative saftey of exile. She fled to neighboring Jordan last year. But as a refugee there are other dangers for women. Many have been trapped into prostitution, she says.

Ala: Let me show you something.

Deborah Amos: Ala takes a folded piece of paper from her wallet. She says a Jordanian man -- old enough to be her father -- handed it to her when she first arrived.

Ala: Okay. And then he said, just in case my dear daughter -- you need anything, anybody bother you in this country call me any time. And you'll never believe what he gave me. Oh my God.

Deborah Amos: She smooths out the paper, points to a phone number and one Arabic word underlined. A code she understood.

Ala: Marriage. (Ala laughs.)

Deborah Amos: So he was actually proposing marriage to you?

Ala: If that was his proposal. This is what they're using women here unfortunately. Marriage is the gate or the knock for the door.

Deborah Amos: This is how the prostituion happens? You get a note like this?

Ala: How many women actually show the note to the police?

Deborah Amos: Ala has finally left Jordan accepted for resettlement in the United States. Basama in Lebanon and Rima in Syria hope for resettlement too because they believe they have no future in Iraq.

And it's not just Iraqi women who are targeted in Iraq. Jamie Leigh Jones went to Iraq to work for Halliburton's KBR and was drugged, gang-raped and imprisoned . . . by her co-workers. As the Associated Press notes, she currently engaged in a battle to have her case heard in a court while KBR claims an employment contract should cover 'grievances.'












aaron glantz




mcclatchy newspapers
Posted by at

Thursday, March 06, 2008

Sammy Power blows a gasket!

Thursday! One day until the weekend. If there's one person -- can we call her a "person" -- who probably pops up more than anyone else at my site, it's Our Modern Day Carrie Nations. And Sammy Power blew a gasket. This is from Larry Johnson's "Obama Amateur Hour:"

Another member of Obama's stellar foreign policy crew popped a gasket today. Last week we learned that his senior economic advisor, Austan Goolsbee, was dishing dirt to the Canadians, never thinking for a minute that the Canadians would report what he said. Today it is Samanta Powers. Powers is in Europe (I hope she takes photos to show her boss) and was being interviewed by The Scotsman. Ms. Power:
told The Scotsman Mrs Clinton was stopping at nothing to try to seize the lead from Mr Obama.
"We f***** up in Ohio," she admitted. "In Ohio, they are obsessed and Hillary is going to town on it, because she knows Ohio's the only place they can win.
"She is a monster, too -- that is off the record -- she is stooping to anything," Ms Power said, hastily trying to withdraw her remark.
Isn't that precious. Calls Senator Clinton and monster and then belatedly realizes that she is commenting on the record. Was she hammering some single malts? And she wants a do over. How cute! And to think that Barack Obama sought her out to be his top foreign policy advisor? Man, what other hidden gems are lurking out there waiting to show their true selves?

She is Our Modern Day Carrie Nations -- calling for the US military to be sent into Darfur. Part of that front-group that spent millions in advertising (12 million in 2006) while claiming to be 'helping' the people in Darfur. Yeah, Sammy, I'm sure that full page ad in the paper made them happy in Darfur. :D What an idiot, what a moron, what a War Hawk. That's all she is. And Our Modern Day Carrie Nations is showing her ugly ass where everyone can see it right now. No more lying with Eric Reeves (they love to take the actual number from a conflict and double it and then triple it and before you know it they're screaming "INTERNATIONAL CRISIS!"). Tom Hayden, when he still had a little guts and wasn't a schill for Bambi, called the center of Sammy Power's 'power' out. These days, he's just a-sipping the Kool Aid. Sammy, get the axe! Someone tell crazy Sammy Power "Ohio is the only place she can win" that Hillary also won Tuesday in Texas and Rhode Island. Poor, crazy, maniacal Sammy Power.

Okay, let's go over to Iraq for a sec. This is from Farah Stockman's "Top Iraq contractor skirts US taxes offshore:"

Kellogg Brown & Root, the nation's top Iraq war contractor and until last year a subsidiary of Halliburton Corp., has avoided paying hundreds of millions of dollars in federal Medicare and Social Security taxes by hiring workers through shell companies based in this tropical tax haven.
More than 21,000 people working for KBR in Iraq - including about 10,500 Americans - are listed as employees of two companies that exist in a computer file on the fourth floor of a building on a palm-studded boulevard here in the Caribbean. Neither company has an office or phone number in the Cayman Islands.
The Defense Department has known since at least 2004 that KBR was avoiding taxes by declaring its American workers as employees of Cayman Islands shell companies, and officials said the move allowed KBR to perform the work more cheaply, saving Defense dollars.

Saving Defense dollars? More like short changing the People's Pension. Social Security got screwed. KBR should be fined as well as forced to pay back every dollar they owe into the system. If a business did that in this country -- a little business, they'd be shut down. I know a business that got shut down awhile back for not paying sales tax. One day it was just gone and we were all, "What happened?" They weren't paying sales tax.

This is from the Hillary campaign:

MEMO: No Answers, Just Attacks
To: Interested Parties
From: The Clinton Campaign
Date: Thursday, March 06, 2008
RE: No Answers, Just Attacks
Senator Obama lost Ohio and Texas because voters had doubts about his ability to serve as Commander-in-Chief and steward of the economy. But instead of addressing those concerns, how is Senator Obama responding? By attacking Senator Clinton.
With one of his top foreign policy advisers acknowledging yesterday that he is not ready to take the 3am call and one of his principal supporters in Texas unable to name a single legislative accomplishment, Senator Obama’s time would be better spent making the case for why he can do the most important job in the world just three years out of the state senate.
Sen. Obama's decision to go explicitly negative suggests that he is unable to make an affirmative case for his candidacy beyond ad hominem attacks. Why isn't he discussing the hearings that he held on the Foreign Affairs subcommittee that he chairs? Why isn't he talking about his travel through Latin America? Why isn't he briefing the public on his comprehensive plan to address the foreclosure crisis now? Why isn't he stumping on his universal plan health care plan? Because he can't and so he is advancing a campaign strategy premised on process and personal attacks.
The Obama campaign's negative strategy builds on one it already had in place. In Ohio and Texas, Senator Obama outspent us by a 2 to 1 margin and engaged in a negative campaign for weeks in advance on the March 4 elections. He sent negative mail that was declared misleading and false by top news organizations and ran radio ads that attacked Sen. Clinton on national security. At the same time, Senator Obama and his surrogates unleashed a barrage of negative and misleading attacks on Sen. Clinton focusing on a variety of issues.
Apparently, the Obama campaign's idea of new politics is to recycle the same old Republican attacks on Senator Clinton that have failed for years. Imitating Ken Starr is not the way to win the Democratic nomination.
The reality is that after spending $16.6 million on television and radio in the four states that voted on Tuesday and $47 million overall, Senator Obama has still not passed the commander in chief and steward of the economy tests. And no amount of false attacks on Senator Clinton is going to change that fact.

My kid sister made an interesting point about Bambi and Hillary today. She said, "They call him Obama. As much as they hate people messing his name up, they use that name and I guess they're embarrassed of Barack. Presidents you like usually have a first name, right? 'Bill,' 'Jimmy,' 'John,' and on and on." :D Good point.

Now how about today's snapshot. C.I.'s discussing two Congressional hearings today and if you didn't catch them (I didn't), you probably didn't hear about them elsewhere today. They are important. Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Thursday, March 6, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, two bombings in Baghdad result in mass deaths, in the US Gary Ackerman attempts to tutor the adminstration on the Constitution and why it matters while Barbara Lee focuses on the issue of permanent bases, and more.

Starting with war resistance. IVAW chair Camilo Mejia told his story in Road from Ar Ramadi: The Private Rebellion of Staff Sergeant Mejia. He is the first Iraq War veteran to refuse to continue serving in the illegal war. Frank Houston (Miami New Times) notes that Querido Camilo (Dear Camilo) plays tonight (9:15 pm at Bill Cosford Cinema, University of Miami) and tomorrow (9:15 pm at Regal Cinemas South Beach) as part of the Miami International Film Festival and notes, "Querido Camilo tells Mejia's story from the perspective of friends and family members, sketching in his background with snapshots, interviews, and narrated letters that begin in 1995, when Mejia arrived in the United States from Nicaragua. 'I thought it would be more fun, more beautiful. But it's really very different,' Mejia says of the United States in an interview with filmmakers Julio Molina and Daniel Ross Mix. They explore military enlistment as a last resort for the working class, especially immigrants."

Agustin Aguayo is another war resister who served in Iraq and today Aguayo and his wife Helga Aguayo will be speaking at UCLA Riverside, in the Interdisciplinary Building at 6:00 pm while yesterday he took part in a debate on the illegal war at Paso Robles High School. Amber Lee (KSBY -- link has text and video) reports that it is "the second year in a row" that the school has "decided to hold a war debate forum to give students the opportunity to decide about the military." Aguayo explains, "You know you can't really tell anyone what to do but you can share some knowledge with them."

Meanwhile Americans Against the War-France announces their support for the US war resisters in Canada. War resisters who went to Canada need the coverage right now. They were dealt a serious set-back when the Canadian Supreme Court refused to hear the appeals of Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey. Today, Canada's Parliament remaining the best hope for safe harbor war resisters have, you can make your voice heard by the Canadian parliament which has the ability to pass legislation to grant war resisters the right to remain in Canada. Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use. That is the sort of thing that should receive attention but instead it's ignored.There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Matt Mishler, Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Justiniano Rodrigues, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).Meanwhile IVAW has a DC action this month:In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & AfghanistanMarch 13th through 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation. Dee Knight (Workers World) notes, "IVAW wants as many people as possible to attend the event. It is planning to provide live broadcasting of the sessions for those who cannot hear the testimony firsthand. 'We have been inspired by the tremendous support the movement has shown us,' IVAW says. 'We believe the success of Winter Soldier will ultimately depend on the support of our allies and the hard work of our members'." IVAW's co-chair Adam Kokesh will, of course, be participating and he explains why at his site, "But out of a strong sense of duty, some of us are trying to put our experiences to use for a good cause. Some of us couldn't live with ourselves if weren't doing everything we could to bring our brothers and sisters home as soon as possible. The environment may be unking, but that is why I will be testifying to shooting at civilians as a result of changing Rules of Engagement, abuse of detainees, and desecration of Iraqi bodies. It won't be easy but it must be done. Some of the stories are things that are difficult to admit that I was a part of, but if one more veteran realizes that they are not alone because of my testimony it will be worth it." The hearings will be broadcast throughout at the Iraq Veterans Against the War home page an on KPFA March 14th and 16th with Aimee Allison (co-host of the station's The Morning Show and co-author with David Solnit of Army Of None) and Aaron Glantz hosting and the KPFA live stream will also be available at Glantz' War Comes Home.

Congress held several hearings today and we're noting two. Background for the first, Reuters reported this morning, "The U.S. military has authority to conduct combat operations in Iraq beyond the end of this year, even though a United Nations mandate for force ends then, a State Department official said on Wednesday. David Satterfield, the State Department's coordinator for Iraq, said Congress had authorized U.S. combat in Iraq back in 2002, and the Bush administration did not believe it needed to seek 'explicit additional authorization' from Congress for U.S. combat beyond the end of this year." Karen DeYoung (Washington Post) reported that "[t]he Bush administration yesterday adavanced a new argument for why it does not require congressional approval to strike a long-term security agreement with Iraq, stating that Congress had already endorsed such an initiative through its 2002 resolution . . . Rep. Gary L. Ackerman (D-N.Y.), whose questions at a House hearing Tuesday elicted the administration statement, described it as an 'open-ended, never-ending authority for the administration to be at war in Iraq forever with no limitations.' The conditions of 2002 no longer exist, he said." This afternoon the US House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on Middle East and South Asia held a hearing that David Satterfield again showed up for (but couldn't really answer anymore than on Tuesday) as did Mary Beth Long the Asst. Secretary of Defense for International Affairs.

Satterfield attempted repeatedly to claim everything was a hypothetical and refuse to answer. A lively exchange took place between Gary Ackerman and Satterield. Asked specific questions, Satterfield declared, "I will respond more formally to that question subsequent to this hearing" leading Ackerman to ask, "When will we hold that hearing?" At another point Satterfield attempted to hide by declaring, "I'm not a constitutional expert" leading Ackerman to respond, "Neither is anyone else" in the administration "apparently."

The basic principles here (outlined many times before) is whether or not Bully Boy and Nouri al-Maliki can enter into a treaty without Congressional/Parliamentary approval. The constitutions for both the United States and Iraq say "NO!" But that hasn't stopped the White House from attempting to circumvent the US Constitution. As Ackerman noted when Satterfield repeatedly declared questions "hypotheticals," "The Constitution is a document. It is not a hypothetical." Her futher noted, "The problem with the administration is that it thinks the Constituion is optional." Ackerman noted that everything was undefined -- now and in the lead-up to the illegal war. He noted that now Iraq was apparently a 'threat' to the US in some of the vague responses from Satterfield and that "threat" seems to change from moment to moment leading Satterfield to snap "No, Mister Chairman," the administration has clearly defined threats. Ackerman asked, "Is it this adminstration's belief that you have ongoing authorization in perpetuity?" and "Is Iraq about to attack the United States?" Ackerman noted that it appeared the White House had redefined the mission in Iraq so that "as long as there is trouble in Iraq" the US must remain in "a never ending process".

As the committee told Sattefield, it appeared he arrived with an attitude of he would talk about what he wanted to and not answer the questions posed. In a milder but still comical moment, Mary Beth Long attempted to compare the agreement Bully Boy and al-Maliki are trying to impose with agreements the US has with Belize. Bill Delahunt noted that nothing with Belize talks "about search and destroy actions" such as what takes place in Iraq and Long had to admit that they didn't. US House Rep Rosa DeLauro was brought into the meeting with the approval of other committee members (she's not a member of the subcommitte) and she noted that this wasn't a "typical" SOFA agreement and that "we should not rush to approve" it, that it is in the best interests of both countries not to rush. As Satterfield continued to obsfucate, DeLauro noted that, "We're not going to get any straight answers on this." While Rep Bill Delahunt had noted earlier -- when Satterfield again attempted to propose a closed door briefing -- "The American people deserve to hear what you have to say." The hearing ended with Ackerman having extracted the promise that Satterfield would have answers to the questions asked no later than three p.m. Friday.

This morning the Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations of the House Committee on Appropriations met. Early on Nita M. Lowery, the chair, noted the ongoing "attacks on doctors, engineers and technocrats" in Iraq and how these were "the very people needed to run the country." They were hearing the testimony of John Negroponte, the Deputy Secretary of State. Or what passed for it. He had no answers. But he did agree with Lowrey that Jordan was an ally of the US. He had no answer to her question about what happens "when the force levels" in Iraq "drop to pre-surge levels? Can the areas be held?" He referred that to David Petraeus April dog & pony show. "What percent" of areas "are led by the Iraqi forces and not US troops" was another answer Lowrey wanted. He hedged, she repeated the question. "I don't know the answer to that question," Negroponte said. "But what I would say about this is that Iraqi forces are becoming more capable whether or not they can lead operations. I think it is important that they have an increased capacity." He thinks that's important? They're "becoming more capable"? Five years into the illegal war? After training seriously started in 2004? Lowrey noted that it was "a major disappointment that we're not seeing a transfer from US forces to the Iraqis". As for reducing US forces in Iraq, Negroponte stated "That is the intent."

We are short on time so we're jumping to when Rep Barbara Lee joined the hearing and questioned Negroponte. She noted the nearly 4,000 US forces dead in the illegal war, the wounded and "the countless Iraqi civilians" as well as the fact that the Iraq War has "created a generation of future enemies" and "the $500 billion the American taxpayers have already spent on this occupation" when money is needed at home. Then she noted Bully Boy's signing statements and how "on six occassions now, the president has signed legislation that prevents permanent military bases in Iraq" but then come the signing statements. "How successful," Lee wondered, "is your department's diplomatic process" with that going on and "How can you communicate then that the US has no interest in permanent bases?"

Negroponte: We don't seek permanent bases and I think we've been clear about that all along.

Lee: Then why would the president issue a signing statement taking that out of the defense authorization.

Negroponte maintained "I know" that permanent bases are not sought. Lee brought up the treaty that Bully Boy is trying to force through and bypass Congress and that there are details in the proposed SOFA, "I believe there are plans to exempt civilian contractors from prosecution under Iraqi law so there's more to it than standard SOFA presence."

Negroponte agreed: "You're right. There will be included in these discussions that certain types of immunities and legal exemptions be granted for contractors who provide security." Lee returned to the issue of premanent bases to get him on record again that there were no plans for them.

Lee: So you can say that you do not believe that the adminstration, that their intent is to build permanent bases in Iraq.

Negroponte: We do not seek permanent military bases in Iraq.

Lee: Well I'll be sure to let the president know that.

Turning to some of today's violence . . .

Bombings?

Michael Holden (Reuters) reports that 55 people are dead from two Baghdad bombings "within a few minutes of each other in a crowded Baghdad shopping area". CBS and AP estimate 130 people were wounded and explains "Many of the victims were teens or young adults, and four were women, police and officials at three hospitals said." Borzou Daragahi (Los Angeles Times) quotes eye witness Kareem Abdullah, "I ran outside to see what was going on, only to have the second blast going off. I could see fire and smoke. I saw people thrown to the ground. I couldn't tell if they were unconscious or dead." CNN states it was a bombing and then "a sucide bomber" exploding immediately after. Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that as well (a bombing followed by "suicide bomber" and adds a Baghdad bombing this morning that "hit a civilian Kia minibus" resulted in 1 death and five people wounded, a Diyala Province roadside bombing that claimed the life of 1 police officer and left four Iraqi soldiers wounded and a Mosul car bombing that wounded four people. Reuters notes a Hilla minibus bombing that left two people wounded.

Shootings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a police officer was shot dead "in downtown old Basra city".
Corpses?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 corpses discovered in Baghdad, 1 corpse was discovered in Arbil and a woman's corpse was discovered outside Basra. Reuters notes that yesterday 3 corpses were discovered in Mosul.


Rosa DeLauro was brought on -- with committe approval "Clearly this is much more than the typical staus force agreement and we should not rush to approve" this "it is in both of our nation's interests"

Turning to US presidential elections. Glen Ford (Black Agenda Report and link has text and audio) observes, "There was only a remnant of a movement left in the United States, before Barack Obama's phenomenal rise. Black and white progressives claim they are prepared to resume agitation after Obama's election -- that they will rev up the movement once again if they discover the new president turns out to be what he has repeatedly promised to be: a corporate Democrat committed to imperial policies abroad, who shuns any analysis or demand that does not conform to his own 'race neutral' -- in practice, 'race blind' -- domestic policies. If progressives truly believe they can turn mass, grassroots politics on and off, like a switch, they are delusional. Large groups of human beings don't act that way. Barack Obama's honeymoon will surely last for years, no matter what crises he mishandles or provokes. Blacks and progressives have neutered themselves." Meanwhile Kimberly Wilder (On the Wilder Side) posts the results for the Massachusetts Green primary (held Super Duper Tuesday) and the results are Ralph Nader with 744 votes, Cynthia McKinney with 474 votes, Write-ins with 273, No Preference with 194, Kat Swift with 60 votes, Jared Ball with 42 votes, Kent Mesplay with 39 votes and Elaine Brown with 38 votes. Both Ball and Brown dropped out of the race before the primary last month. On Tuesday, Cynthia McKinney's campaign site notes, Minnesota's Green Party held a straw poll at their caucus and "McKinney led the state's straw polling with 62% of the votes, with 50 out of 67 senate districts reporting." Indybay Independent Media notes that McKinney will take part in an Oakland, California event tonight, Speaking Fierce ("An Evening of Art, Spoken Word, Humor and Music, Celebrate International Women's Day") starting at seven tonight, First Congregational Church (2501 Harrison St at 27th). Meanwhile Alex Domingos (The Retriever Weekly) weighs Barack Obama's campaign and feels it comes up DLC and so concludes:

Cynthia McKinney is the first African American female congresswomen elected . . . [from] Georgia and an ex-Democrat running for the Green Party. As a six-term member of congress she amassed a consistent voting record. She voted against the Iraq War, but more importantly voted against the Gulf War in 1991. It's not enough to just be against the Iraq War, meaningful change is a candidate against all wars of imperialism. She has also voted against funding the war despite the false assertions by other Democrats that somehow that would translate to troops with no armor or weapons in battle. McKinney introduced articles for impeachment against George Bush and passed legislation preventing the sale of weapons to human right abusers. Isn't that change you can believe in?"

As noted Ralph Nader won the Mass Green Party primary. Nader is not campaigning for the national Green Party nomination. [See discussion here.] Whitney Zack writes the Salt Lake Tribune, "As a pro-peace voter, I am delighted that Ralph Nader is running for president as an independent. Sens. Clinton, Obama and McCain all voted to fund the occupation and war in Iraq. Nader has consistently opposed the war and the waste of our tax dollars there. Pro-peace voters should not be fooled by Barack Obama. Since becoming a senator in 2005, he has voted to approve every war appropriation the Republicans have requested." Marissa Babin (The Harvard Independent) observes, "Nader's presidential bids have drawn attention to the problems of third-party candidates in a plurality voting system. Instant runoff voting provides citizens with more choices than plurality voting and is more efficient than two-round elections. Instead of criticizing Nader's decision to run, the American people should take a closer look at how our two-party system restricts voters' options and hinders democracy. American should give instant runoff voting a chance." Ralph Nader announced his choice of a running mate last week: Matt Gonzalez. Luke Thomas (Fog City Journal) reports Gonzalez has left the Green Party due to potential ballot issues across the country and Gonzales states, "I have enormous respect for the Greens but I don't want to create additional hurdles for the campaign by remaining in the party. I expect to work in tandem with future Green campaigns, and remain committed to alternatives to the two-party system." At the Nader 2008 Blog the campaign announces donations of $300,000 in approximately one month and the goal of raising $10 million in 2008 while explaining the campaign is: "To give the American people a choice. For single payer. For cutting the bloated military budget. For solar energy first, not nuclear power. For reversing U.S. policy in the Middle East. For implementing a broad progressive agenda." Still on US presidential politics, the all time embarrasment Paul Rogat Loeb has the nerve to show up (at Common Dreams -- aka No Woman Left Unstoned) today to ask "Did Clinton Win Ohio on a Lie?" Paul's ready to suck up every word he can from War Hawk Stephen Harper because all Ugly Paul has to offer is LIES. As Ruth pointed out Monday, Liar Loeb showed up on Uprising Radio to lie because that's all he has to offer. He claimed he was a supporter of John Edwards. That was the 'trick' (try "deciet") he used to pimp Barack. He was, in fact, a Barack Obama supporter from the start as well as a John Edwards supporter. He lied. He always lies. Meanwhile Walter Shapiro (Salon) and Ken Silverstein (Harper's magazine) both explain why the Democratic primaries should continue and the party and the country is not on the verge of collapse simply because the race continues. All the Nervous Nells out there need to take a deep breath and grasp that (a) the race continues and (b) efforts to stop the race from continuing are no different than efforts to stop the count in Florida 2000. Since winning Texas, Ohio and Rhode Island on Tuesday night, Hillary Clinton's campaign has raised four million dollars. Today the Clinton campaign issued a press release noting: "Senator Obama lost Ohio and Texas because voters had doubts about his ability to serve as Commander-in-chief and steward of the economy. But instead of addressing those concerns, how is Senator Obama responding? By attacking Senator Clinton. With one of his top foreign policy advisers acknowledging yesterday that he is not ready to take the 3 am call and one of his principal supporters in Texas unable to name a single legislative accomplishment, Senator Obama's time would be better spent making the case for why he can do the most important job in the world just three years out of the stae senate. Sen. Obama's decision to go explicitly negative suggests that he is unable to make an affirmative case for his candidacy beyond ad hominem attacks. Why isn't he discussing the hearings that he held on the Foreign Affairs subcommittee that he chairs? Why isn't he talking about his travel through Latin America? Why isn't he briefing the public on his comprehensive plan to address the foreclosure crisis now? Why isn't he stumping on his universal plan health care plan? Because he can't and so he is advancing a campaign strategy premised on process and personal attacks."




agustin aguayo





aaron glantz

mcclatchy newspapers
borzou daragahi
the los angeles times
Posted by at

Wednesday, March 05, 2008

Hillary's triumph hard for groupies to take

Wednesday! Hillary in triumph, Bambi left exposed. How does it feel? :D

Ruth Conniff is a joke to me (she writes at The Progressive), but I don't think she's a malicious person. I just think she has trouble grasping reality. "Beware Hillary" she warns today and 'explains' this:

Obama is still so far ahead in the delegate count that it is virtually impossible for Hillary to catch up without persuading some superdelegates to vote for her against the expressed will of the majority of primary voters.

The majority of primary voters isn't on Bambi's side. Forget delegates and you can even toss aside Michigan. But Florida's popular vote (forget delegates) went with Hillary and, in fact, Hillary's ahead in the popular vote among Democrats -- look at the exit polls. Conniff's confusing delegates from states (which are not awarded on the basis of the totals of the popular vote) with a popular vote. In the conversation, a lot of things are getting confused.

But what's obvious is that Hillary's a winner. Democrats are supporting in the primaries. If Bambi couldn't depend upon the Republicans and independents crossing over (with no guarantee that they'll go against Republicans in November), he'd be losing. Hillary's the choice of the Democratic Party, even if the echo chamber of the non-elites of Panhandle Media don't want to admit it.

Here's reality, the Rezko federal trial is going on and Bambi knows Rezko much better than just "five hours" of work as he lied in a debate. Rezko backed everyone of Bambi's campaigns -- over $150,000 has been returned by Bambi in recent months due to their connection. In addition, Rezko took a tour with Bambi. Bambi wanted a mansion, Bambi couldn't afford the mansion. If the strip of land could be broken up as a separate property, Bambi could maybe afford the million dollar plus mansion. So he tours it with Rezko and then Bambi and Rezko's wife go to buy the now two properties. Bambi buys the mansion. Rezko's wife the lot. They let Bambi park his car on the lot. The sell him a sixth of the land at a sixth of what they paid for it. That now makes the tiny lot even smaller and of little use to most who might be interested in purchasing it. Bambi got a mansion because of his friendship with the federally indicted Tony Rezko.

Now that Tony's trial is starting (jury selection took place earlier this week), it's really important that Bambi and his groupies say, "THE PARTY MUST DECIDE NOW!" They were counting on blowing Hillary out of the water yesterday and then screaming, "SHE MUST DROP OUT!"

If you're buddy was under federal indictment and you might be called as a witness, you'd want to settle the race for the nomination quickly too. Bambi knows that Rezko presents a political nightmare for him. He appears to think that if he can steal the nomination right now, voters will think in November, "Sure he hangs with crooks but let's vote for him!" Read Lynn Sweet on Rezko. Check out this from ABC News:

Rezko's bleak financial picture raises the question of how the Rezkos were able to buy a vacant lot adjoining the home of Sen. Barack Obama in 2005, at a time Rezko says he was already in deep debt.
Rezko also reveals in the testimony, before Judge Amy St. Eve on Jan. 16, 2007, that he already knew he was under federal investigation at the time of the land purchase and had hired a criminal defense attorney to deal with the "feds."
Obama says he sought Rezko's help because the house he wanted to buy in Chicago's Hyde Park came with an adjoining lot the seller wanted to sell at the same time.
Unable to afford it himself, Obama says Mrs. Rezko bought it for $625,000, and then later sold a strip of the lot back to Obama so he would have a larger yard. Obama says he paid Mrs. Rezko a fair market price.
According to the court transcript, Mrs. Rezko makes $37,500 a year.

Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Wednesday, March 5, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the White House makes a presidential endorsement and then adds a slap, Senator Crazy Goes To Baghdad underwhelmed but it's gearing up for a sequel, the US military acknowledges that 'maybe' there's a ransom involved in the kidnapping of an Archbishop, Hillary Clinton wins primaries in Rhode Island, Ohio and California, and more.

Starting with war resistance. Alexis Alexander tells Rebekah Dillon (Ithica Times), "The peace movement needs to team closely with G.I. war resisters and support them in getting their stories out to the general public." Alexander and several other voices of resistance Dillon speaks with are correct on many points (wrong? whining about a non-existant draft is just wasting everyone's time) but Alexander's point and the others go to the media and no one makes that connection in the article. Alexander rightly states that the peace movement needs to work on getting the stories of war resisters out. But why do they need to work on that?

Because the stories are important, yes. But anyone paying attention in 2007 saw the AP, Reuters and many daily papers (some national, some regional) as well as many TV programs (national like Nightline, as well as regional) cover stories. Where was the coverage not coming from? Take Ehren Watada who is the first officer to publicly refuse to deploy to the Iraq War. Even MTV covered it. (And the coverage did have an effect.) But where was Panhandle Media? CNN covered it, where was Panhandle Media?

It's a question people need to be asking. When CNN covered it on one of their program, they had on three guests. One was a CO, one was Mommy's Pantyhose (spewing his usual hate) and the third? Who was the third guest, brought on to discuss this important issue, does anyone remember? It was Amy Goodman.

CNN was covering it because the court-martial was gearing up and Pacifica's Amy Goodman who has an hour program Monday through Friday entitled Democracy Now! was brought on to CNN as a guest to discuss Watada. (Paula Zahn also featured Watada himself in a separate segment that broadcast.) Wow. That might be a clue that the story is important. Certainly Aaron Glantz was in Tacoma before the court-martial started and reporting. But where was Amy Goodman? Not only did she not go to Washington for the court-martial (which ended in a mistrial over the objection of defense attorneys), she wasn't interested.

Now when Sarah Olson was pimped as the story of the Watada court-martial (by Norman Solomon and everyone else including Phil Donahue -- who did not know the basics about Watada as evidenced by that embarrassing column he wrote where he seemed to think Watada had gone AWOL -- Watada reported for duty every day at the base -- something he continues to do), Goody could gas bag with the best of them. Olson MIGHT have to testify! That was a story. When Olson didn't have to testify, it was the end of the interest in the leadup to the court-martial. After it was over (it ran three days -- Monday through Wednesday), Goody would air a report Truthout did on Thursday. After it was over. Olson was not the story. Olson wasn't even a human interest story. She was a reporter who wouldn't say whether she would testify or not but wanted the whole damn world to be up in arms that she was even asked to testify. She wanted the world to stand up while she refused to take a stand herself (by saying whether or not she'd testify).

Now that was Ehren Watada, one of the best known war resisters. And Democracy Now! wasn't interested in his court-martial. Amy Goodman was more than happy to go on CNN and talk about Watada . . . while not covering his court-martial on her own program. Do you see the problem or are we all going to continue to pretend it didn't happen? James Burmeister self-checked out in 2007 and went to Canada. In June and July he was telling Canadian media about the "kill teams" -- how the US military had teams whose job it was to lay out US property in the open in Iraq for the purpose of shooting Iraqis who picked any of it up. In the fall the Washington Post would report on that story. Panhandle Media could have had the story if they'd bothered to cover war resisters. Burmeister was not covered. Eli Israel, while stationed in Iraq, refused to serve. That's a 2007 story. Where was Panhandle Media's coverage of that? He needed coverage, the military was threatening to come down hard on him. He was refusing while in Iraq. It was news. But not to Panhandle Media. A large number of war resisters stepped out in 2007 and only In These Times covered them. Not The Nation, not The Progressive and certainly not Democracy Now! A viewer or listener of Democracy Now! could easily think that no new war resisters have emerged since the summer and fall of 2006 because that's the last time Goodman elected to interview any.

Alexander is not wrong about the need to get the stories of war resisters out there. But we need to look seriously at why that need exists. The Washington papers, AP, Reuters and AFP were covering the Watada court-martial (others were as well). Where was Panhandle Media during it? It was important enough that CNN invited Amy Goodman on to speak about the topic and she was more than happy to go on CNN. But with the five hours of air time she controls a week, there were other things to do.

The stories do need to be out there. They make a huge difference. But we need to get honest about what has taken place. The Nation no longer uses the term "war resister" in print (though "coward" can and did pop up). The problem is not Real or Big Media which has its faults (to the extreme), the problem goes to Panhandle Media. The Ithica Times notes that it seems like there was more action agains the illegal war and more people against it before it started. Well there was certainly more coverage before it started. But the American public gets obsessed with what's emphasized.

That's how you see a craze for an OJ trial, for example. Our media critics from Little Media have been happy to talk about the tabloid-ization of the news in Big Media. They clearly feels it has an impact. Their argument (a solid one) goes that it steers people away from the stories that matter with distraction. But what has Panhandle Media offered in the last two years? If the Iraq War doesn't seem "important" to some people, take a look at Panhandle Media in the summer of 2006 when they ignored Iraq stories like the gang-rape and murder -- by US soldiers -- of Abeer. They were pushing the elections in Mexico and telling you about the nationwide riots that were going to take place and blah, blah, blah. It never happened. So they moved on to Lebanon. And they ignored Iraq for basically the entire summer. They have not picked their one-time interest back up from the floor. War resisters do matter and their stories do have an impact. But it's not enough to say that the stories need to 'get out.' It also requires looking at who is getting them out.

Agustin Aguayo (who will be speaking this Thursday (March 6th), he and his wife Helga Aguayo will be speaking at UCLA Riverside, in the Interdisciplinary Building at 6:00 pm) is taking his fight for CO status to the US Supreme Court. Where's the coverage of that? Where's the coverage of any of it in our 'brave' and 'independent' media? It's not enough to say these stories need to 'get out.' It requires noting who is not 'getting' them 'out.' The American public is more opposed to the illegal war now than before it started. It is the failure of Panhandle Media to regularly cover it that promotes distractions. Until that is confronted, keep expecting to hear these airy claims of "We need to get the message out" over and over without any change taking place. As they did in 2007 with no coverage (In These Times is an exception), war resisters are still going public this year. And Panhandle Media is still ignoring them.

When we're all ready to confront that reality, we may see a greater interest in the illegal war across the board. The protests that took place for war resisters in Canada are another example. They took place in the US and in Canada. Goodman didn't cover them. One action took place in NYC but even that didn't make it as a segment. After they were over -- having offered no heads up to them ahead of time -- Goody would rush with a quick mention of these national and international protests in a brief headline. She would also be wrong about when they took place in the US. But when no one's calling you out on the 'coverage' you ARE NOT offering, you can get away with that.

War resisters who went to Canada need the coverage right now. They were dealt a serious set-back when the Canadian Supreme Court refused to hear the appeals of Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey. Today, Canada's Parliament remaining the best hope for safe harbor war resisters have, you can make your voice heard by the Canadian parliament which has the ability to pass legislation to grant war resisters the right to remain in Canada. Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use. That is the sort of thing that should receive attention but instead it's ignored.There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Matt Mishler, Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Justiniano Rodrigues, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).Meanwhile IVAW has a DC action this month:In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & AfghanistanMarch 13th through 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation. Dee Knight (Workers World) notes, "IVAW wants as many people as possible to attend the event. It is planning to provide live broadcasting of the sessions for those who cannot hear the testimony firsthand. 'We have been inspired by the tremendous support the movement has shown us,' IVAW says. 'We believe the success of Winter Soldier will ultimately depend on the support of our allies and the hard work of our members'." IVAW's co-chair Adam Kokesh will, of course, be participating and he explains why at his site, "But out of a strong sense of duty, some of us are trying to put our experiences to use for a good cause. Some of us couldn't live with ourselves if weren't doing everything we could to bring our brothers and sisters home as soon as possible. The environment may be unking, but that is why I will be testifying to shooting at civilians as a result of changing Rules of Engagement, abuse of detainees, and desecration of Iraqi bodies. It won't be easy but it must be done. Some of the stories are things that are difficult to admit that I was a part of, but if one more veteran realizes that they are not alone because of my testimony it will be worth it." The hearings will be broadcast throughout at the Iraq Veterans Against the War home page an on KPFA March 14th and 16th with Aimee Allison (co-host of the station's The Morning Show and co-author with David Solnit of Army Of None) and Aaron Glantz hosting and the KPFA live stream will also be available at Glantz' War Comes Home.KPFA's Aimee Allison and Aaron Glantz will be covering it. Anyone else? Possibly not. If you listened to Democracy Now! today, apparently there was no news on Iraq. An Iraqi helicopter went missing yesterday (we noted it in the snapshot) and crashed in a sandstorm. 7 Iraqis died in the crash and 1 US service member. It's not mentioned. None of it gets covered. In some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports two Baghdad bombings that left two people wounded, fuel truck bombings that wounded two fire fighters, a Baghdad bombing that wounded two more civilians, the deaths of 2 US collaborators in Salahuddin Province via a car bombing attack on an "Awakening" council, a Sinjar bombing that left one person wounded, a Nineveh Province bombing that wounded five people and a Diyala Province bombing that wounded a member of an "Awakening" council.

Shootings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a truck driver shot dead in Baghdad, a Baghdad dry-by shooting that wounded one person, Dr. Abdul Sattar Tahir Sharif was shot dead in Kirkuk and, dropping back to Tuesday night, a home invasion in al Bastamli village resulted in a husband and wife being shot to death and their three children wounded.

Kidnappings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 4 truck drivers from Syria were kidnapped in Baghdad.

Corpses?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 4 corpses discovered in Baghdad 3 in Mosul.

Staying with abductions, Archbishop Paulos Faraj Raho was kidnapped Friday. As noted in yesterday's snapshot, Asia News reports, "The men who have the fate of Msgr. Paulos Faraj Rahho, Chaldean Archbishop of Mosul in their hands since February 29th last, have raised the ransom and dictated 'political conditions' for his release, according to AsiaNews sources in Iraq, close to mediators who are negotiating his safe return. Late yesterday afternoon another phone call was made. The group which holds the bishop hostage, used Msgr. Rahoo's mobile phone to communicate, but has still given no proof of his wellbeing. 'It almost seems as if his release -- anonymous sources in Mosul tell -- is of secondary importance in their demands and the conditions which they have imposed greatly complicate matters, leading us to think that they are not just simple criminals interested in money'. Concern is increasing for the 67 year-old hostage who suffers ill health, for which he needs daily treatment." Aid to the Church in Need has issued a press release stating the ransom is one million in US dollars and their source is Bishop Anreas Abouna in Baghdad who explained to them, "The people who are dealing with the kidnappers have told them it is impossible to afford the ransom. The mediators asked to hear the voice of the archbishop but they weren't allowed." Today, Reuters reports that US Maj-Gen Mark Hertling has declared that there might be a ransom (might be?) and that the Archbishop "could easily be killed, and that would be really unfortunate." Unfortunate are half-assed statements from Hertlin.

He wasn't the only one trying to get out his talking points today. At the Pentagon today, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Michael Mullen (Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) held a joint-press conference. Sounding like he was prepping to take over the John McCain role in Senator Crazy Goes To Baghdad, Mullen went on and on about his recent 'walks' in Iraq and -- apparently they have no new script -- "there shops were open, people were out, life was coming back." For those who have forgotten the original, Senator Crazy Goes to Baghdad opened April 1, 2007. On April 2, 2007, Flashpoints' Robert Knight panned the would-be blockbuster noting:
And finally there was yet another major American deployment Sunday in a Baghdad market where Senator John McCain engaged on a walking tour to promote the Bush administration's current escalation in Iraq. McCain, in defiance of various independent reports that Iraq's daily death toll actually increased last month, nevertheless declared that the so-called 'surge' was "making progress" and that Americans were "not getting the full picture of what is happening in Iraq"; however a zoom out from McCain's photo op shows that he was actually surounded by orbiting F16 fighter planes, three Black Hawk attack helicopters, 2 Apache gun ships, more than 100 US troops, snipers and armed vehicles, a flak jacket and personal body armour. The presidential contender and Congressional comedian concluded his celebration of April Fool's Day by declaring with a straight face that "There are neighborhoods in Baghdad where you and I could walk through those neighborhoods today. These and other indicators and reasons for cautious optimism about the effects of the new strategy."

Michael Mullen's attempt at emerging starlet in a summer blockbuster probably won't take any better than Senator Crazy's attempt did. Like Senator Crazy, Mullen wasn't just breezing through, he was heavily guarded/protected. The lesson appears to be that, one month shy of a year later, if you have US troops accompanying you in large numbers, you can safely walk around two tiny areas of Iraq. Mullen's announced he was against any timetable for withdrawal (putting him at odds not only with the people of the US but Iraq as well) but did remember that the military is under civilian control in the United States by nothing that the next president, "whoever that might be, he or she will make that decision and we'll move accordingly."

Whomever the next US president will be. At the White House today, the Bully Boy met with Senator Crazy to offer his glowing endorsement which did not include, but probably should have, "The American people have had a power-hungry fool for nearly 8 years, why not someone insane?" Instead the Bully Boy dismissed notions of "change" by noting he ran on that in 2000 but obviously not in 2004 and declared of McCain, "He's a President, and he's going to be the President who will bring determination to defeat an enemy, and a heart big enough to love those who hurt." Senator Crazy is apparently running on the "Love It Away (So Cheer Up)" platform -- who knew he was an Ashford & Simpson fan? Bully Boy declared, to questions about a possible McCain running mate (McCain sewed up the nomination in yesterday's primaries), "People don't vote for Vice Presidents --- as much as I hate to say that for those who have been candidates for Vice President --- they're going to vote for who gets to sit inside that Oval Office and make decisions on how to protect the country and keep taxes low and how to have a culture that respects the dignity of every human being." Having used Dick Cheney's experience to shore up his own lack of it, Bully Boy still needs to pretend that didn't matter. He's lived in the Land of Delusion for some time. On the day Bully Boy was giving his endorsement of McCain, White House flack Dana Perino was declaring, "But there are differences that we have with Senator McCain. There's no doubt about that. That's plain for everybody to see." Ah, a 'unity' campaign.

On the Democratic side, Senator Barack Obama won the state of Vermont yesterday. Senator Hillary Clinton was said to need either Ohio or Texas victories. Some argued she needed both. Clinton won Ohio and Texas as well as Rhode Island yesterday. The Obama team is attempting to spin those wins as unimportant and are now whining about how they were behind a month ago in Texas. The polls had Obama with a lead at various points over the last weeks. As his campaign repeatedly noted, he had record crowds turning out to see him . . . They just didn't turn out in record numbers to vote. Or maybe it's an indication that he should focus not on a presidential campaign but on inspirational workshops across the country? Barack was the front runner before polls closed on Tuesday. He lost three states -- two of them huge states (Ohio and Texas). Falling back now on "We were behind at one point" is beyond stupid. The Obama campaign's Melissa Harris-Lacewell, aka Professional Lie Face, was no PBS's The Charlie Rose Show yesterday (before the results from Texas were in) and she floated the threat that if Obama is not GIVEN the nomination by the Democratic Party, African-American voters will walk. Harris-Lacewell does not speak for all African-American voters but if she wants to pretend she does and float that card, the DNC will factor in the Latino turnout so far this year which has been huge and the fact that Latinos are the emerging minority population in this country in terms of size demographics. It's not a card the Obama campaign can play and should Obama not secure the nomination, it's not a card that the candidate himself would play. Harris-Lacewell likes to play pit-bull for the campaign (while not disclosing that she's working for the campaign) and someone in the Obama campaign needs to yank her leash pretty quick. If Obama's seen by his White Republicans and Independents flocking to Democratic primaries and caucuses to support him as making any kind of a race-based argument, his support (however great or small it is) will dry up real quick among those factions. To stem the damage already done by Melissa Harris-Lacewell's threat (which is an unrealistic one), the Obama campaign should immediately issue a statement and, if they don't, the press should begin asking the campaign whether they support Harris-Lacewell's threat or not. While all other commentators noted the very weak and discomforting concession speech Obama gave (before the Texas vote was known), Harris-Lacewell insisted the speech was fine and the only problem was that the "inter-racial" backdrop that's usually on stage behind Obama was not present when he was speaking. Props make the man?

The next primary focused on is in Pennsylvania and that state's governor, Ed Rendell, issued the following statement today:

"Last night made clear that there has been a momentum shift in this race. Despite being outspent two-to-one, despite Sen. Obama benefiting from outside political funds, and despite all of the glowing press coverage he received leading up to March 4th, voters ultimately chose Senator Clinton. I am confident that Hillary is heading into Pennsylvania with momentum and a new energy.
"The people of Pennsylvania are focused on the two largest issues facing our nation - the state of our economy and national security. On both counts, Pennsylvanians understand how important it is to elect someone who is truly ready to become President and Commander-in-Chief. Hillary is ready to lead our nation, returning us to both prosperity and peace.
"We look forward to making our voice heard in the coming days and playing our part in determining the Democratic nominee. And when we do, the people of Pennsylvania will send a clear message -- we want a President who is ready, not one we hope will one day be ready."

On Monday, Barack was pressed on his campaign's communications with the Canadian government (that the remarks in last week's debate about NAFTA were just for-show for the American public and nothing for the Canadian government -- which supports NAFTA -- to worry about) and on his decades long friendship with Antoin "Tony" Rezko whose federal trial is beginning. Obama ended the press conference quickly and in a huff. As Andrew Stephen (New Statesman) observes today, "What remains to be seen is whether this was just a bad week for Obama and a good one for Clinton. Most worrying for Obama's supporters is that he wilted under the pressures of a routine, albeit hostile, press conference. If he is so fragile that he can be rattled by questioning from a handful of Chicago reporters (who have his measure by now) can he survive pressures in the White House? There is a growing acknowledgement that he has been accorded a uniquely easy ride by the media, and that is changing; Rezko's trial will now proceed and his lawyers say they want to call Obama as a witness, a prospective nightmare for him."




agustin aguayo



aaron glantz




Posted by at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)