I thought of Anne-Marie Slaughter but that seemed kind of obvious.
So I figured I'd go to ZNet where I can always find a wack job or two. I go to ZNet because it's stomachable. 2008 destroyed The Progressive and The Nation for me for ever. If there was a chance that they could lure me back, it would have required them calling out Barack instead of whoring for him and they didn't have the guts. So I'll go to ZNet and read some of the losers there and every now and then get someone smart.
So I'm picking . . . Michael T. Klare. And here's some of what he wrote:
 As
 details of his administration’s global war against terrorists, 
insurgents, and hostile warlords have become more widely known -- a war 
that involves a mélange of drone attacks, covert operations, and presidentially selected assassinations -- President Obama has been compared to
 President George W. Bush in his appetite for military action. “As shown
 through his stepped-up drone campaign,” Aaron David Miller, an advisor to six secretaries of state, wrote at Foreign Policy, “Barack Obama has become George W. Bush on steroids.”
 When
 it comes to international energy politics, however, it is not Bush but 
his vice president, Dick Cheney, who has been providing the role model 
for the president. As recent events have demonstrated, Obama’s energy 
policies globally bear an eerie likeness to Cheney’s, especially in the 
way he has engaged in the geopolitics of oil as part of an American 
global struggle for future dominance among the major powers.
 More
 than any of the other top officials of the Bush administration -- many 
with oil-company backgrounds -- Cheney focused on the role of energy in 
global power politics. From 1995 to 2000, he served as chairman of the 
board and chief executive officer of Halliburton,
 a major supplier of services to the oil industry. Soon after taking 
office as vice president he was asked by Bush to devise a new national 
energy strategy that has largely governed U.S. policy ever since.
Early
 on, Cheney concluded that the global supply of energy was not growing 
fast enough to satisfy rising world demand, and that securing control 
over the world’s remaining oil and natural gas supplies would therefore 
be an essential task for any state seeking to acquire or retain a 
paramount position globally. He similarly grasped that a nation’s rise 
to prominence could be thwarted by being denied access to essential 
energy supplies. As coal was to the architects of the British empire, 
oil was for Cheney -- a critical resource over which it would sometimes 
be necessary to go to war.So Klare's the Idiot of the Week?
No. I'm not picking one this week. I thought what he wrote was important enough to put "idiot of the week" on hold. So use the link and enjoy the article that proves there's still some life in our left pundits. Maybe Michael Klare could do us a huge favor and go occupy the offices of The Progressive and Pacifica Radio to see if his courage could rub off on the cowards there.
Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"
Friday,
 June 22, 2012. Chaos and violence continue as Iraq is slammed with 
bombings,  Moqtada's bloc doubts Nouri al-Maliki has a long range plan 
for Iraq, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta makes some important 
remarks, the VA's fiduciary system gets some attention, and more.
March 21st, Iraq War veteran Captain Ian Morrison called the military suicide hotline and 
waited for over one hour to speak to someone before killing himself. Steve Vogel (Washington Post) reports
 his widow Rebecca Morrison joined with other surviving spouses to share
 their stories of loss at a VA and Defense Dept cofnerence in DC 
following the record number of military suicides so far this year (in 
2012's first 155 days, 154 active-duty service members have taken their 
own lives. His wife Rebecca Morrison shares his story with Steve Vogel 
(Washington Post) who also quotes Secretary of the VA Eric Shinseki 
wondering, "Are we asking the right questions about sucides?" He notes 
that, in 2009, 'experts' were saying "mental illness was the leading 
cause of homelessness, and we have since learned that it is, more 
specifically, substance abuse."   Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta spoke on the issue (link is video).  His remarks on the concluding day of the conference included:
First
 of all, this is always critical when it comes to an operation like the 
Defense Department and to our military forces…leadership 
responsibility.  We are directing military leaders to take this issue 
head on.  Like almost every issue in our military, progress on suicide 
prevention depends on leadership. 
I have made that clear, that this issue is first and foremost a leadership responsibility. 
All
 those in command and leadership positions – particularly junior 
officers and NCOs who have day-to-day responsibility for troops – need 
to be sensitive, need to be aware, need to be open, to signs of stress 
in the ranks, and they need to be aggressive, aggressive, in encouraging
 those who serve under them to seek help if needed.  They also must set 
an example by seeking help themselves if necessary.
As
 part of their leadership responsibilities, junior officers and NCOs 
must foster the kind of cohesion and togetherness that is a fundamental 
part of our military culture and can do so much to improve mental 
health.  My wife was a nurse, worked on mental health care issues, and 
she said to me time and time again, this is a human issue, a human 
problem.  You've got to look in people's eyes, you've got to be 
sensitive to their emotions, you've got to be sensitive to the 
challenges that they're facing, you've got to be aware, you've got to 
have your eyes open, and the more we can see those problems, the more we
 can do to try to help people in need.  To that end, we have to make 
clear that we will not tolerate, we will not tolerate actions that 
belittle, that haze, that ostracize any individual, particularly those 
who have made the decision to seek professional help. 
Leaders
 throughout the Department must make it understood that seeking help is a
 sign of strength, not a sign of weakness, it is a sign of strength and 
courage.  We've got to do all we can to remove the stigma that still too
 often surrounds mental health care issues.  Outreach efforts such as 
the Real Warriors Campaign, which work to increase awareness and the use
 of resources such as the Military and Veterans Crisis Lines, are also a
 very important part of these efforts. 
Secondly,
 we've got to do everything we can to improve the quality and access to 
health care.  This is the second pillar of the suicide prevention 
strategy – improving the quality of behavioral health care, expanding 
access to that care.
We now have more than 
9,000 psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers, mental health 
nurses, counselors working in military hospitals and in military 
clinics.  That number has increased more than 35 percent over the last 
three years.  Behavioral health experts are now being embedded into line
 units, and the Department has worked to place mental health providers 
in primary care clinics in order to facilitate access. 
Guardsmen
 and Reservists often do not have ready access to the same support 
network as the active duty force.  We've got to do what we can to 
increase initiatives like the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program that's
 working to address this kind of problem. 
And
 going forward, I want to make sure that all service members and their 
family members have the quality mental and behavioral health care that 
they need, the kind of care that must be delivered by the best health 
care professionals in the world.  Thanks to the efforts of so many of 
you in this audience, we are improving our ability to identify and treat
 mental health care conditions, and we are working to better equip our 
system to deal with the unique challenges that these conditions can 
present.  For example, I have been very concerned about reports of 
problems with the screening process for post-traumatic stress in the 
military disability evaluation system.  For that reason, I have directed
 a review of this process across all of the uniformed services.  This 
review will help ensure that we are delivering on our commitment to 
provide the best care for our service members.  We've got to do 
everything we can to   make sure that the system itself is working to 
help soldiers, not to hide this issue, not to make the wrong judgments 
about this issue, but to face facts and deal with the problems upfront, 
and make sure that we provide the right diagnosis and that we follow up 
on that kind of diagnosis.    
Thirdly, 
we've got to elevate the whole issue of mental fitness.  A third pillar 
of suicide prevention is better equipping service members with training 
and coping skills that they need to avoid or bounce back from stress.  
To
 that end, all of the Services, all of the Services – under the 
leadership of General Dempsey and his Senior Enlisted Advisor, Sergeant 
Major Bryan Battaglia – are working to elevate mental fitness to the 
same level of importance, we've got to elevate mental fitness to the 
same level of importance that DoD has always placed on physical 
fitness. 
Separately, a whole of government
 effort that has been led by the President and Mrs. Obama to combat 
veterans' unemployment and boost hiring of military spouses is aimed at 
helping to reduce the financial stress faced by military families and 
veterans.  
Finally, fourthly, we've got to
 increase research in suicide prevention.  In partnership across 
government and with the private sector, the fourth pillar of our 
approach is to improve our understanding of suicide, to improve our 
understanding of related mental health care issues through better and 
more improved scientific research.  I'd like to note the leadership of 
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sibelius on this issue and 
thank her for coming to address this conference earlier.
  
I think it's an important speech and hopes the press will pay attention to it.  (Click here to read it in full.)  I know Leon and I like Leon so he doesn't get a fair shake here.  This morning we called him out with regards to statements he made and I don't have a problem with that but he made some historic and important remarks (click here for video)
 last week and we were too busy to note it.   Anyone else would have 
gotten their deserved attention for those remarks but I always want to 
be sure that I'm fair with regards to him because I do like him and I've
 known him for years. And factor in all of that because what he said   
in the speech today needed to be said.  But no one in leadership has 
wanted to say it.  If words are followed up by the brass immediately 
below Panetta, this should be a historic shift regarding suicide and 
mental health issues in the military.  As with his remarks earlier this 
year on sexual assault within the military (click here for January 19th snapshot
 if you missed it), he said was needed and should have been said long 
before.  But he's the first Secretary of Defense to say these things.  
The National Suicide Prevention Lifeline is 1-800-273-TALK.
At the New York Times' At War blog, Iraq War veteran and Afghanistan War veteran Thomas Brennan shares his experience with Post-Traumatic Stress.  Excerpt:
P.T.S.D.
 is an anxiety disorder that can occur after a traumatic event. Given 
that troops deployed to Afghanistan and Iraq see fallen comrades, 
experience combat, or survive horrific events, the likelihood of a 
veteran being diagnosed with P.T.S.D. is high. According to the 
Department of Veterans Affairs, someone with P.T.S.D. is at least twice 
as likely to commit or attempt suicide, or experience substance abuse. 
Tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, are suffering from 
alcoholism and drug abuse, depression or mood disorders, according to a 
2010 report by the Coalition for Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans.
The Center for a New American Security discusses the stigma in the service associated with mental health treatment. In a study on the rising suicide rate
 in the military, the organization found that troops were two to four 
times more interested in receiving care than reported but were afraid of
 repercussions from their superiors. That same fear initially kept me 
from getting treatment. But I finally sought help. My superiors met me 
with neither resistance nor support. It felt like I lost their respect, 
  that they forgot who I was and what I had done for the Marine Corps 
during my tours in Iraq and Afghanistan.
P.T.S.D.
 is something that some in the military do not accept or understand. 
Unlike physical wounds, it is invisible, intangible. I once heard a 
senior Marine say P.T.S.D. was "fake." In a way this makes sense for a 
military institution that prides itself on toughness and resilience in 
the face of adversity. But the time has come to realize that all 
battlefield wounds must be healed.
And
 Senator Patty Murray, who is the Chair of the Senate Veterans Affairs 
Committee,  has been calling for answers as to how some service members 
and veterans were diagnosed with PTSD but then were given new diagnoses 
and suddenly they didn't have PTSD -- except most of them still did.  So
 who ordered the change and was someone trying to cut out needed 
treatment to save a few bucks?  As she gets more answer on what recently
 happened, she's now insisting that the scope be expanded to see who 
else was effected.  Wednesday her office issued the following:
(Washington,
 D.C.) – Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Chairman of the Senate
 Veterans' Affairs Committee sent a letter to Defense Secretary Leon 
Panetta to request details on how the Department of Defense will conduct
 a major review of mental health diagnoses made since 2001. The review, which Secretary Panetta announced last week
 at a hearing with Senator Murray, comes after Murray has repeatedly 
pointed to inconsistencies in the Pentagon's mental health evaluation 
system. In Washington state, those inconsistencies have led to hundreds 
of service members having their proper diagnosis of PTSD restored after 
being accused of lying about their symptoms. 
"The
 Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs are losing
 the war against mental and behavioral health conditions," Murray wrote. "As
 you acknowledged, huge gaps remain in how both the Departments of 
Defense and Veterans Affairs approach, diagnose and deal with these 
cases. A review across each service is a necessary step forward in 
addressing concerns I have been raising about both the disability 
evaluation system and the diagnosis and treatment of behavioral health 
conditions."
In the letter Murray 
outlines four key issues the Pentagon must consider in proceeding with 
the review, including one about the timeline for this massive review. 
Murray also calls on Secretary Panetta to "clearly communicate the scope
 of the review as well as the impact on individual servicemembers and 
veterans."
The full text of Senator Murray's letter follows:
June 20, 2012
The Honorable Leon E. Panetta
Secretary of Defense
1000 Defense Pentagon
Washington, DC 20301
Dear Secretary Panetta:
As
 I stated during the Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee hearing 
on the Department of Defense FY 2013 Budget Request, the Department of 
Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs are losing the war 
against mental and behavioral health conditions. The recent events at 
Madigan Army Medical Center, where hundreds of soldiers have had their 
proper diagnosis of PTSD restored after being told they were 
exaggerating their symptoms, lying, and being labeled malingers, 
demonstrate the weaknesses within the Department of Defense in properly 
evaluating and diagnosing behavioral health conditions. 
As
 you acknowledged, huge gaps remain in how both the Departments of 
Defense and Veterans Affairs approach, diagnose and deal with these 
cases. I was pleased to see you share my belief that a review of 
behavioral health evaluations and diagnoses in support of the disability
 evaluation system needs to be a Department led effort. A review across 
each service is a necessary step forward in addressing concerns I have 
been raising about both the disability evaluation system and the 
diagnosis and treatment of behavioral health conditions. I applaud your 
commitment to undertake this comprehensive review, however, I have 
questions about how the Department will proceed. 
· Has
 the Department developed or provided guidance to the services in order 
to accomplish this review? If so, I would request copies of any guidance
 that has been developed or issued. 
  
· What
 is the timeline for execution of this review? When do you expect the 
other services to begin this review and when do you expect findings and 
recommendations from each of the services? 
· Which
 senior leaders at the Department and each service will be responsible 
for conducting this review and the development and implementation of 
recommendations? 
· How will the Army's current review be incorporated into this broader effort? 
As
 the review begins, the Department of Defense must clearly communicate 
the scope of the review as well as the impact on individual 
servicemembers and veterans. Appropriate steps must also be taken to 
ensure the performance of this review does not adversely impact the 
timeliness of cases currently processing through the disability 
evaluation system. 
Ensuring
 greater consistency in the evaluation and diagnosis of behavioral 
health conditions is not the only challenge currently confronting the 
Integrated Disability Evaluation System (IDES). As highlighted by a 
recent Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee hearing I held on IDES, the 
number of men and women enrolled in this system continues to climb, the 
number of servicemembers cases meeting both of the Departments' 
timeliness goals is unacceptably low, and the amount of time it takes to
 provide benefits to a servicemember transitioning through the system 
has risen each year since inception. Both Departments must take 
immediate action to reverse these trends. 
Following
 a recent discussion with Deputy Secretary Carter on these issues, I 
outlined a series of recommendations to improve the disability 
evaluation system. The letter to Deputy Secretary Carter dated June 6, 
2012 outlining these recommendations is enclosed, and I urge you to act 
quickly to implement these solutions. I appreciate the opportunity, 
which you offered at the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee hearing,
 to discuss these issues with Secretary Shinseki and you in the near 
future, and I look forward to hearing your recommendations about how we 
can improve this system. 
I appreciate your attention to this request and I remain committed to working with you to address these very serious issues. 
Sincerely,
Patty Murray
Chairman
cc: The Honorable Carl Levin
The Honorable Eric K. Shinseki
Enclosure
###
Matt McAlvanah
Communications Director
U.S. Senator Patty Murray
202-224-2834 - press office 
202--224-0228 - direct
That was released on Wednesday and we're staying on Wednesday for a moment.
Chair Bill Johnson: H.R. 3730,
 the Veterans Data Breach Timely Notification Act, was introduced by our
 Subcommittee's Ranking Member, Congressman Donnelly of Indianana. His 
bill would require the VA to notify Congress and directly affected 
individuals, within 10 business days or less, of a data breach that 
compromises sensitive personal information. This imporved transparency 
and responsiveness would be a boost to the VA's efforts at improving its
 information security image. As the system currently works today, the 
lapse of time between the VA knowing of a data breach and a veteran 
knowing his or her information has been compromised and may be floating 
around is entirely too long. In discussions with staff, Assistant 
Secretary Baker acknowledged that the current duration between the VA 
learning of a data breach and a veteran being notified that his or   her
 personally identifiable information, or "PII," may have been 
compromised could be shortened, and this legislation is a good measure 
toward that end. I am proud to co-sponsor this bill. I urge my 
colleagues to consider adding their support and look forward to Ranking 
Member Donnelly's further remarks on it. 
Wednesday
 the House Veterans Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
 held a hearing on proposed legislation. (Yesterday the House Veterans 
Affairsl Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity and a section of it was 
covered in yesterday's snapshot.) 
 That was one of four important bills that were addressed.  Another 
important one was H.R.5948.  This is the fiduciary bill.  On February 9th,
 this same Subcommittee held a hearing on VA's fiduciary system.  We 
coverd aspects of that in that day's snapshot and I had no idea it was 
as big an issue as it was.  That snapshot resulted in a ton of e-mail 
then and since and we still get e-mails asking, "Has anyone mentioned 
fiduciary again?" I'm hardly the smartest   person in the room so I'm 
not surprised that I had no clue on this one's importance.  But I think 
it's also true that this isn't necessarily an issue that you're going to
 have veterans showing up at hearings to talk about because if they have
 someone overseeing their benefits, there's usually a reason for that.  
So this is a veteran's issue but it's one that's more likely to catch 
attention from veterans' families.  Chair Johnson did raise the issue 
while questioning the VA's Director of Pension and Fiduciary Service 
Dave McLenachen and we'll include some of that exchange.   
Chair
 Bill Johnson: I find it interesting that you used the term working 
constructively together on the fiduciary program because at our hearing 
on the VA's fidcuiary program in February, you said you intended to look
 at the statutes governing the fiduciary program and make 
recommendations that might improve it. Outside of the testimony that 
you've given today, four months later we haven't heard anything from you
 or your Dept. Currently, our bill addresses a number of issues we 
brought to your attention and yet you're against these. After the issues
 raised at the February hearing and the recent media coverage of 
fiduciary issues, I would think that you would have some ideas on how to
 improve the program. Can you provide for us improvements in the 
fiduciary program that you've made since our February hearing?
Dave
 McLenachen: Well sir, in addition to the -- the policy and procedures 
that we've issued even since the February hearing, as I mentioned, we've
 completed our proposed fiduciary recommendations. Now as we were 
working on those recommendations, we determined that there was different
 authority that we needed from Congress, we would certainly develop a 
legislative proposal for that purpose. But I have to say, having worked 
on those regulations and looking at the authority that we have, we 
believe we have the authority we need to correct the program. And all of
 the things that we do support in the bill are things that we have 
implemented ourselves, like I said, over the last seven months. I 
believe we are making real progress.
Chair
 Bill Johnson: You mentioned that you've completed the regs and that you
 have the authority to implement the program, but you didn't really 
answer my question. Can you describe some specific improvements that 
you've made in the fiduciary program since February?
Dave
 McLenachen: Yes, sir. One of the concerns of the Committee was the 
independence of the fiduciary. We had a policy in place that required a 
fiduciary to check with VA, as you mentioned the form. Well it wasn't 
just the form, we had a policy in place that required a fiduciary to 
check with VA for any expenditure over $1,000. I rescinded that policy. 
That was since the hearing. In addition to that, there's concern about 
transparency in the program. We have never provided veterans with copies
 of audited accounting by VA. I changed that policy. Every -- every 
fiduciary is instructed to provide a copy an audited true accounting by 
VA to the beneficiary. Criminal background checks. We have contracts in 
place to do a criminal background check on every fidicuiary we appoint. 
There's a number of other developments, sir, that I could go through 
with you but we are making progress in this program. 
Chair
 Bill Johnson: That would have been great. We would have liked to have 
gotten that information before today. But that's good. Based on recent 
articles about nationwide problems in the fiduciary program, it seems 
that there's been little improvement other than the things that you 
mentioned today. Do you have any further response to the media reports 
of the numerous and horrific stories in those stories?
Dave
 McLenachen: Yes, sir. I disagree with the view that the fidcuariy 
program is plagued with fraud. I am aware of those articles and it is 
our position that any misuse of VA benefits is unacceptable. That's our 
position. And we work hard to prevent that type of misuse. That's the 
reason why we do over 30,000 accounting audits every single year. That's
 the reason why we do 70,000 or more field examinations every year. So 
we work hard to prevent misuse and we've been very successful. I 
testified in February that our misuse rate during Fiscal Year 2011 was 
less than one-half of one-percent. Looking at the articles, sir, I 
think, in reality, the articles are about a broader problem and that is 
general abuse of veterans. We looked at the cases that were mentioned. 
In the state of Texas, 6.5% of our beneficiary population in our program
 live in Texas. Yet the misuse rate in Texas is only 4.4% compared to 
all of the cases. So while the articles   may have been reporting the 
broader problem of misuse, I don't think that we've been able to confirm
 that it points out a specific problem about the fiduciary program. And,
 that said, that doesn't mean we're going to ease up on misuse of 
benefits.
Chair
 Bill Johnson: The VA opposes the provision that would authorize the VA 
to limit the appointment of a fiduciary to management of VA funds. The 
VA contends that the purpose of this provision is unclear and probably 
unnecessary because the VA appoints fiduciaries only for the limited 
purpose of receiving VA benefits on behalf of a beneficiary. However, I 
have VA e-mails that direct a VA representative to take control of 
non-VA funds. Why the difference between your actions and your comments 
on the legislation?
Dave
 McLenachen: Mr. Chairman, I'd be interested to see -- to see the 
information that you have about that. Congress has authorized us to 
appoint fiduciaries for the purpose of VA benefit funds under 
management. That's what we have authority to do. Now there may be some 
disconnect about the accounting process. When we do an accounting, we 
need to see all income and expenses in accounts and sometimes in those 
accounts there is other income such as, for example, Social Security 
benefits. 
Chair Bill Johnson: So you would find it inappropriate for a VA representative to take control of non-VA funds?
Dave McLenachen: Yes, sir. Without knowing more about the facts of the case, I would say, yes, I would.
Chair Bill Johnson: We will provide you with that information. 
Dave McLenachen: Thank you.
Chair
 Bill Johnson: You discuss the provision concerning appeals and the 
removal of fiduciaries as limiting a beneficiary's ability to have his 
or her competency restored. Can you describe how a veteran currently has
 his or her competency restored and subsequently can get out of the 
fiduciary program?
Dave
 McLenachen: Yes, thanks for that question because this is an area that 
I've really been interested in addressing and we are doing that in our 
regulations, just to let you know, that's one thing that we are 
addressing. Currently, if an individual has been rated as being unable 
to manage their VA benefits. They can be taken out of the program by 
having a medical evidence such as a doctor's opinion that they can in 
fact, based on their disability or regardless of their disability, 
manage their own VA funds. In addition to that, there might -- if there 
was a legal process -- uh -- where a court held that a person was 
incompetent to manage their own affairs and a court concludes otherwise,
 that would be evidence considered.
Iraq has again been slammed with bombings today.  AP reports there were 2 roadside bombings, one after the other.   Kareem Raheem (Reusters) quotes
 police officer Mudhaffar Khalaf stating, 'Fruit and vegetables have 
been scattered everywhere.  Some children were wounded.  We have started
 to eacuate the injured people."  Sameer N. Yacoub (AP) quotes
 shoe store owner Mohammed Hussein al-Jizani stating he heard one blast,
 "Three minutes later   there was a second explosion as people and 
policemen were rushing to the site of the first bomb.  The evil 
insurgents chose the best time to attack, because the market is usually 
busy on Fridays with young people gathering to sell and buy birds."  The
 Voice of Russia counts
 14 dead and over one-hundred injured.  But that's just Baghdad.  If you
 visit the Iraqi press, you'll find Alsumaria is reporting a roadside bombing near Samarra Hospital which left three people injured, a Samarra
 suicide car bombing targeting a bus of pilgrims claimed the life of 1 
of them and left nine more injured as well as one Iraqi soldier and two 
police officers, and the
 Sunni Endwoment in Samarra was also targeted with a bombing resulting 
in serious structural damage and injured civilians (plural   -- so at 
least two, no actual number is given for the wounded) who were passing 
by.
Violence has been on the rise in Iraq for some time and this month has been particularly violent.
Haider Najm (Niqash) explained yesterday:
The past week has been a deadly one for Iraqis. A wave of coordinated attacks around the country targeted Shiite Muslim pilgrims and others observing a week of holy days. The results, according to Iraqi Body Count, an organization that analyses reports of deadly incidents in Iraq from around the world and from Iraq, saw 92 killed on the deadliest day, Wednesday June 16, and a further 121 killed over the following week. Many hundreds more were wounded with around 300 injured on Wednesday.
This was one of the deadliest weeks in Iraq following the withdrawal of US troops late last year and Iraqi Body Count estimates that 315 civilians had been killed up in Iraq up until June 19.
Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) adds, "Also, in a separate incident, gunmen opened fire at a police checkpoint near an outdoor market in a southwest Baghdad neighborhood leaving three police officers dead, police said." Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) counts 23 dead in today's violence and 170 injured and among the dead: a girl, 4 years-old, who had been kidnapped but was found beheaded in Ishaqi. Kidnappings appear to be on the rise in Iraq although it just may be that the reporting on them has increased. As noted on Tuesday: " Into the continued violence of Iraq where Alsumaria reports that the son of a local council member was kidnapped in Ramadi today and that security forces quickly secured the area and began searching for clues. While kidnappings have not been uncommon throughout the Iraq War, today's may end up getting attention due to the fact that is it one of two kidnappings. Al Rafidayn reports two young girls were kidnapped yesterday in Tikrit and that one is the daughter of a a member of Tikrit's security council."
Violence has been on the rise in Iraq for some time and this month has been particularly violent.
Haider Najm (Niqash) explained yesterday:
The past week has been a deadly one for Iraqis. A wave of coordinated attacks around the country targeted Shiite Muslim pilgrims and others observing a week of holy days. The results, according to Iraqi Body Count, an organization that analyses reports of deadly incidents in Iraq from around the world and from Iraq, saw 92 killed on the deadliest day, Wednesday June 16, and a further 121 killed over the following week. Many hundreds more were wounded with around 300 injured on Wednesday.
This was one of the deadliest weeks in Iraq following the withdrawal of US troops late last year and Iraqi Body Count estimates that 315 civilians had been killed up in Iraq up until June 19.
Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) adds, "Also, in a separate incident, gunmen opened fire at a police checkpoint near an outdoor market in a southwest Baghdad neighborhood leaving three police officers dead, police said." Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) counts 23 dead in today's violence and 170 injured and among the dead: a girl, 4 years-old, who had been kidnapped but was found beheaded in Ishaqi. Kidnappings appear to be on the rise in Iraq although it just may be that the reporting on them has increased. As noted on Tuesday: " Into the continued violence of Iraq where Alsumaria reports that the son of a local council member was kidnapped in Ramadi today and that security forces quickly secured the area and began searching for clues. While kidnappings have not been uncommon throughout the Iraq War, today's may end up getting attention due to the fact that is it one of two kidnappings. Al Rafidayn reports two young girls were kidnapped yesterday in Tikrit and that one is the daughter of a a member of Tikrit's security council."
In Iraq, the political crisis continues and Nouri al-Maliki and his sycophants insist he's incredibly popular.  Alusmaria reports Moqtada al-Sadr's response:  Saddam Hussein used to claim 100% of Iraqis stood behind him.  Meanwhile Al Sabaah reports
 the head of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, Ammar al-Hakim, is 
stating that he's putting together a meeting between Nouri and Moqtada. 
 Not stated is that all this work doesn't endear him to the elders of 
ISCI who, like Ammar's late father, do not   care for Nouri al-Maliki.  
Ammar might want to consider that when you only got your position 
because your father died, when you never earned it yourself, you might 
want to be careful about cozying up to your father's enemies because if 
the elders feel you're not honoring your father, they will work to 
remove you.  
Iraqiya's Hadi al-Dalemi is dismissive of al-Hakim's efforts, Raman Brusk (AK News) reports, noting that his alleged 'ideas' were proposed by Iraqiya earlier but were blown off. He states further that "the time for this step [dialog] is over and the political blocs are now trying to take the step of interrogating [the PM] . . . which is more serious and through which the differences can be settled." As Lara Jakes (AP) reported yesterday, Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi declared Nouri would be summoned before the Parliament shortly to answer questions and they are prepared to move towards a vote as to whether confidence remains in Nouri's ability to lead. This is how Moqtada's explained it, Alsumaria notes.
Raman Brusk (AK News) reports that Nouri is attempting to derail the effort:
Yesterday Maliki called for the urgent session to discuss the violation and authorities of the executive and legislative bodies and the areas of overlap between the authorities of the two bodies.
The demand to convene an urgent session is only an effort "to gain more time and affect the efforts for withdrawing confidence from government" said Muayyad Tayyeb who leads the Kurdistan Blocs Coalition.
Iraqiya's Hadi al-Dalemi is dismissive of al-Hakim's efforts, Raman Brusk (AK News) reports, noting that his alleged 'ideas' were proposed by Iraqiya earlier but were blown off. He states further that "the time for this step [dialog] is over and the political blocs are now trying to take the step of interrogating [the PM] . . . which is more serious and through which the differences can be settled." As Lara Jakes (AP) reported yesterday, Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi declared Nouri would be summoned before the Parliament shortly to answer questions and they are prepared to move towards a vote as to whether confidence remains in Nouri's ability to lead. This is how Moqtada's explained it, Alsumaria notes.
Raman Brusk (AK News) reports that Nouri is attempting to derail the effort:
Yesterday Maliki called for the urgent session to discuss the violation and authorities of the executive and legislative bodies and the areas of overlap between the authorities of the two bodies.
The demand to convene an urgent session is only an effort "to gain more time and affect the efforts for withdrawing confidence from government" said Muayyad Tayyeb who leads the Kurdistan Blocs Coalition.
Dia al-Asadi is the parlimentary head of Moqtada al-Sadr's bloc and he tells UPI
 that, "Our main concern is that Maliki doesn't have a plan to 
administer the country.  And if he ahs, then we want to know about it.  
If he hasn't, then there's a big problem because we are living in a 
country that needs comprehensive, fast and integrated development."
 
