Tonight, one of Sherlock's old frenemies showed up. A Brit detective who'd previously claimed credit for a case Holmes had solved.
Joan's kinder to him but not that kind. Especially when they think he's responsible for a restaurant bombing. She steals his phone so Sherlock can break into it.
He's not the guilty party.
It's a woman who works for the federal government, specifically the Labor Dept. She tries to blackmail a man into making stock purchases before the latest jobs report is released. Which is how Sherlock figures out who was responsible.
In the meantime, he spends his time trying to raise two roosters to get along. It doesn't appear to be working.
At one point, Joan wakes up and he's left one of the roosters outside her bedroom door. She picks up the cage and goes looking for Sherlock to confront him. When she calls it by its name (Rhomulus or Rheemus) Sherlock corrects her which leads to the best moment of the episode.
Joan: I don't care which cock I'm holding, I just want to know how it got there. [Pause.] Okay, you got me to say it.
Lucy Liu is always funny, she's knows where the laughs are. She and Jonny Lee Miller make a real great team.
Norman Pollack has another great column at CounterPunch:
This was an interesting week. America seeks the rearrangement of European relations through Obama’s intervention-from-afar in Ukraine, one further notch in revivifying the Cold War in spirit and action; Hagel announces a Pentagon budget, paraded as the reduction of forces, which implements a global strategy of counterrevolution through more precise destructive power; and Obama shifts the onus onto Karzai for jeopardizing a bilateral security arrangement (B.S.A.) on which the US counts for maintaining its influence and power in Asia. Peace is war, under the smiley face of liberalism. The foregoing aspects of American foreign policy, each not momentous in itself, part of everyday life in the National Security State, nevertheless define an integrated pattern of activity geared to the doctrine of permanent war.
Forget the Republicans, convenient whipping boys for Obama and the Democrats’ excesses of militarism in fashioning a long-term capitalistic world order based on American leadership and guidance—the way we were, and are loathe to abandon! The Ukraine has proven a markedly opportune moment to take off the wraps and underscore what should in any case have been confirmed well before the presumed thaw in Cold War relations, namely, America must tenaciously cling to a posture of hostility to Russia, as confirmation of its own moral virtue, the galaxy of interventions notwithstanding (economic-political as well as military in character). Russia, the Evil Empire, justifies (first, validates America’s goodness) the most ambitious rearmament in world history, itself the forward edge and ratifying condition for internal structuring of classes–disguised by a psychopathology of consumerism—which is highly unequal in the distribution of wealth, income, and power, approaching the definition of a CASTE rather than class society.
Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"
Starting in the US with Senator Patty Murray.
That's Senator Patty Murray speaking on the floor of the Senate today about a very important issue. For those who need or prefer text, here are her remarks:
“On Tuesday I came here to the floor to discuss one issue we are rarely divided on in this building.
And
that is our duty to keep the promise we’ve made to provide not only
care - but opportunity - to all those who’ve honorably served in our
nation’s Armed Forces.
The
comprehensive veterans legislation before us today is really the test
for many members of Congress. Can we put politics aside for the good of
our nation’s veterans to keep
that promise?
Can
we show these heroes that - despite our differences - we will work as
diligently toward getting them the benefits and care they’ve earned as
they have worked for our nation?
“Unfortunately
our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are indicating they’d
prefer to put politics over promises under the guise of an alternative
to this
bill. Given what we have seen recently on other bills supported by a
majority of Americans, I shouldn’t be surprised. But I truly did think
this bill would be a different story. Because it contains ideas from
both Democrats AND Republicans. Because this is
an issue that has historically united this body. And because we have
ALL pledged to do whatever it takes on behalf of our veterans. But once
again, our colleagues have decided to use unrelated issues to sour this
entire effort for the veterans and their families
who stand to benefit the most from this comprehensive legislation.
“Additionally,
with their alternative bill, they’ve stripped away life changing
programs for veterans who are looking to take the skills they’ve learned
from the battlefield to the boardroom. They’ve
decided to halt the expansion of opportunities for caregivers – who are
integral to the health and well-being of some of our most vulnerable
heroes. But among these – and many other – examples of the Republican
effort to derail this landmark legislation, there
is one issue I find most egregious: And that is their shameful
opposition to providing our catastrophically wounded heroes with access
to the reproductive services they so desperately need to start a
family.
“This
shouldn’t be a political issue – Because this is about giving veterans
who have sacrificed everything -- every option we have to help them
fulfill the simple dream of starting a family. As we all
know, our men and women in uniform have become increasingly susceptible
to reproductive, spinal and traumatic brain injuries due to the
changing weapons of war. But thanks to modern medicine, many of these
servicemembers are being kept alive and are returning
home. In fact, as of the New Year, there are 2,348
servicemembers who are living with reproductive, urinary or pelvic
injuries. And like so many of our veterans, these men and women come
home looking to return to their lives, to find employment, and
so often to start a family. Yet what they find when they go to the VA
is that the fertility services available don’t meet their complex
needs.
“In fact, veterans suffering from these injuries find that the VA is
specifically barred from
providing more advanced assisted reproduction techniques such as IVF.
They are told that despite the fact they have made such an extreme
sacrifice for our nation we cannot provide them with the medical
services they need to start
a family. Veterans like Staff Sergeant Matt Keil – and his wife Tracy.
“Despite
returning home from Iraq a quadriplegic, Staff Sergeant Keil and Tracy
started exploring the possibilities of starting a family together. But
because his injuries prevented him from having children
naturally, Tracy turned to the VA and began to explore her options for
fertility treatments. But because of the VA ban, they were turned away.
Out of options, the Keil’s decided this was important enough to them
that they were willing to pay out-of-pocket
for IVF treatment in the private sector – to the tune of almost $32,000
per round of treatment. Thankfully, Staff Sergeant Keil and Tracy
welcomed their twins Matthew and Faith into the world after just one
round of treatments.
“Tracy
told me, ‘The day we had our children something changed in both of us.
This is exactly what we had always wanted, our dreams had arrived. The
VA, Congress and the American People have said countless
times that they want to do everything they can to support my husband or
make him feel whole again and this is your chance. Having a family is
exactly what we needed to feel whole again. Please help us make these
changes so that other families can share in
this experience.’
“Tracy
and Matt are not alone. There are many men and women out there who
share this common thread of a desperate desire to fulfill their dream of
starting a family only to find the catastrophic wounds
they sustained while defending our country are now preventing them from
seeing that dream through.
“It
should not be this way. Unfortunately, Republicans are indicating they
will not join us in overturning this absurd and antiquated ban.
Apparently they’d rather our nation’s heroes spend tens of thousands
of dollars in the private sector to get the advanced reproductive
treatments they need to start a family. They don’t see the problem in
letting our veterans’ marriages dissolve because the stress of
infertility, in combination with the stresses of readjusting
to life after severe injury, driving their relationship to a breaking
point.
“Any servicemember who sustains this type of serious injury
deserves so much more. Because we came VERY close to making this
bill a reality last Congress. In fact, with Tracy Keil watching from the
gallery here, we unanimously passed this legislation.
Unanimously.
“But
here I am today, once again imploring Republicans to stand up and
explain to our men and women in uniform – who I know are paying very
close attention to this debate – And explain to them why they
want to turn their back on the catastrophic reproductive wounds that
have become a signature of these wars. On Tuesday, I spoke to a crowded
room of heroes from Disabled American Veterans – and told them the
heartbreaking story of the Keil Family and why we
need this critical legislation. And if their cheers and applause are
any indication, I’d say they wholeheartedly agree that our women
veterans deserve this, our male veterans deserve this, and our military
families deserve this.
“So
I’ve come to the floor today to ask my colleagues a simple question:
Are you willing to tell all those brave men and women -- that didn’t ask
questions when
they were put in harm’s way -- that you are going to let politics get
in the way of our commitment to them? The catastrophic wounds we have
seen from injuries in Iraq and Afghanistan have meant that our veterans’
dreams to start a family have been put on hold
because of the tremendous cost of IVF services. But we believe that’s a
cost of war that VA absolutely should cover and it’s unacceptable to
let unrelated issues stand in the way.
“Even
the major Veterans Service Organizations and their leaders have said
issues like Iran sanctions have no place in this comprehensive
veterans legislation. People like American Legion Commander Daniel
Dellinger who said, ‘Iran is a serious issue that Congress needs to
address, but it cannot be tied to S. 1982, which is extremely important
as our nation prepares to welcome millions of U.S.
military servicemen and women home from war.’
“Or
IAVA Founder and CEO Paul Rieckhoff, who called this comprehensive
legislation, ‘a game changer that will change the trajectory
for millions of veterans for decades to come.’
“As serious and timely as they may be, unrelated issues like Iran sanctions are calculated attempts to intentionally dismantle
our bipartisan effort to expand health care, education opportunities, employment and other benefits for our nation’s heroes.
We can’t allow our commitment to them to lapse or to get caught up in separate issues or political grandstanding.
“I’d
like to once again thank the Senator from Vermont and his staff for
their tireless work to work to bring this legislation here to the floor.
“I
hope our colleagues will reconsider opposing this common-sense step
that will give those who have sacrificed everything the reproductive
treatments they need to start a family.”
Good for Senator Murray.
But I'm really confused here because we've been attending House and Senate Veterans Affairs Committee hearings for years and what Senator Murray's calling for and backing has never been seen as controversial in hearings. It's been seen as needed and no member of either Committee over the years has ever uttered an objection in a hearing. So these objections that are coming now? No one offered to the faces of veterans and their families.
Senator Murray notes the Keil's in her statement today. And no one had an objection when Tracy Keil appeared before the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee and declared, "I'd like to emphasize this statement: War time changes a family, it shouldn't take away the ability to have one."
Tracy's husband is Iraq War veteran Matt Keil. She appeared before the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee June 12. Senator Murray was the Chair of the Committee then (she now chairs the Senate Budget Committee and Senator Bernie Sanders now chairs the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee). Murray had S. 3313, The Women Veterans and Other Health Care Improvement Act of 2012. to address these issue. We covered that hearing in the June 27th and June 28th snapshots and let's drop back so we can let Tracy Keil discuss why legislation is needed:
My husband Matt was shot in the neck while on patrol in
Ramadi, Iraq on February 24, 2007 just 6 weeks after we were married.
The bullet went through the right side of his neck, hit his vertebral
artery, went through his spinal cord and exited through his left
shoulder blade. Matt instantly because a quadriplegic. When I first
saw him 3 days after he was injured I was in shock, they explained to me
that he had a "Christopher Reeve type injury." He would be on a
ventilator for the rest of his life and would never move his arms or
legs.
Matt and I looked at each other in
his hospital room at Walter Reed and he asked me if I still loved him? I
said "baby you're stuck with me!" at that moment we knew that we would
be okay if we stayed in this together. I knew that we just needed to
work really hard to get Matt off his ventilator to increase his life
expectancy. Ultimately we moved to Craigh Hospital in Denver to be
closer to family support.
Four weeks to
the day of arriving at Craig Hospital in Denver, Matt was officially off
of his ventilator and we could truly concentrate on him doing physical
rehabilitation. Matt has regained about 10% function of his left arm
but not his hand. He was feeling good and getting used to his new
normal of being in a wheelchair and asking for help for everything.
It
was while we were at Craig Hospital that we started talking about
having a family. Craig doctors talked to us about in vitro fertilzation
and recommended some doctors for us to speak to when we were ready to
start a family. We started to get really excited that even though so
much had been taken away from Matt physically that we could still have
the future we always dreamed of.
My
husband is the most amazing man I have ever met, he is strong, honest
and loyal and he wanted us to both have everything we always wanted
before his injury and we agreed that this injury wasn't the end, it was
the beginning of a new life, and we were in this together.
We
had our whole lives ahead of us. Matt was just 24 when he was injured
and I was 28. We are very fortunate that he survived his injuries that
day and we made a promise to each other on our wedding day "For better
or worse, in sickness and in health" I meant every word and still do
today. It is a challenge for my husband and I everyday but we knew we
still wanted to start a family. I remember back when he was in
rehabilitation at Craig Hospital it's all we could talk about was when
we were going to be adjusted to our new normal and when we would we be
ready to have children. We always knew we had wanted children.
In
2008 we moved into a fully handicap accessible home built for us by
Homes For Our Troops. We were starting to feel like things were falling
into place in our lives. We felt like we were starting to get back on
track to where we were before Matt was injured.
His
injury unfortunately prevents him from having children naturally. In
mid 2008 I started asking the VA what services they could offer my
husband and I to assist us with fertility. I can remember hitting road
blocks at every turn. I decided to take things into my own hands and
write letters and make phone calls to try and get anyone to listen to us
that we needed help. Fertility treatments are very expensive and since
I had left my full time job we were still adjusting to living on one
income.
I felt helpless and hopeless and
thought that our dreams of having a family may never come true. The VA
finally said that they would cover the sperm withdrawal from my husband .
. . that costs $1,000 and that they would store the sperm for us at no
charge.
It was very difficult when I found
out there was no help available for us from the VA or Tricare. I felt
very defeated, sad, disappointed and in some ways I felt helpless. I
researched everything I could about how to get Tricare to cover some of
the costs but they couldn't because it was a direct result of my
husband's injury and that fell under the VA. The VA said that they had
no programs in place for this sort of thing. I even started asking non
profits to assist with the cost and they couldn't help due to the other
immediate needs of injured service members.
Why did Tracy and Matt suffer?
Because there was nothing in place to take their situation into account. There are many other veterans families in the same situation. They're not asking for a high rise or a shiny car, they just want to be able to have a family. And they can. It is medically possible.
Matt Keil didn't say, "Hey, I want a vacation. I think I'll go to Ramadi and work on my tan." The US government sent him to Iraq and that is where he was injured. How dare anyone in Congress think they can ignore his needs now.
And there was no objection in the Senate in 2012. The following year, US House Rep Rick Larsen noted, "The Senate unanimously approved a version of this bill authored by Sen. Patty Murray last year, but the House did not act on the companion legislation that Larsen had introduced before the end of the 112th Congress. Murray reintroduced the Senate version of the bill earlier this year." So in 2012, universal support and, two years later, someone's 'rethought' it? Maybe they need to explain to the veterans? Rick Larsen is a Democrat. He made his observation when he and Republican House member Steve Stivers joined together to introduce similar legislation in the House.
It also needs to be pointed out that DoD provides this service for service members. It's just VA that's not providing it for veterans. It is thought that the Iraq War and the Afghanistan War have produced approximately 2,000 veterans who could utilize this service. Why are they being denied it? How does this not fall under needed health care.
The costs would not 'break the bank' and it really is the right thing to do. To quote Tracy Keil one more time, "I'd like to emphasize this statement: War time changes a family, it shouldn't take away the ability to have one." Shame on anyone in the US Congress who can't grasp -- or refuses to grasp -- that.
Violence has slammed Iraq this month. Just through yesterday, Iraq Body Count counts 853 violent deaths in Iraq so far this month. And the violence didn't stop yesterday. The Buenos Aires Herald counts 52 deaths today.
National Iraqi News Agency reports an al-Shaab bus bombing claimed 1 life and left three more people injured, Commander Rashid Falih announced 4 suspects were shot dead in Anbar, a Tarmiyah bombing left three Iraqi soldiers injured, Commander Mohamed Khalaf al-Dulaimi of the 10th Army Division announced 10 suspects were killed in Krahh Village near Kirkuk, 1 person was shot dead in Muqdadiyah, Baghdad Operations Command's Saad Maan announced 7 snipers were shot dead outside Qarma, an armed battle in Albu Jabir left 3 rebels dead (and two more injured), the Ministry of the Interior announced they killed 4 Da'ash "near al-Mowdhafeen bridge in Anbar," a Mosul attack left one police officer injured, the Ministy of Interior says they killed 4 Da'ash in the desert of Ishtar, and a Sadr City motorcycle bombing left 11 dead and 35 injured.
Kareem Raheem, Suadad al-Salhy, Ned Parker and Mark Heinrich (Reuters) report the death toll of the Sadr City bombing increased to 31 with the number injured increasing to 51. Mu Xuequan (Xinhau) notes the death toll then rose to 32 with the injured rising to 56. The Irish Times adds, "The motorcycle was in a market in the Shia Muslim neighbourhood that sells used bikes and was filled with people, mostly young men."
It should also be noted that many outlets are running with usual claims of Sunnis and blah blah. Why would Sadr City be attacked by Sunnis? And the attack also comes after yesterday's report that Moqtada al-Sadr had left and returned to Iran for more religious studies.
Who knows who attacked Sadr City?
But the best guess anyone could make right now would be that a Shi'ite group attacked and that possibly the increased danger in Sadr City is why Moqtada left for Iran.
Moving to another topic, Anadolu Agency reports Iraq's Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi went to Erbil (in the Kurdistan Region) today to meet with KRG President Massoud Barazni and discuss the "tension between the sides [Baghdad and Erbil] over oil exports and budget distribution." NINA reports Sadr bloc MP Bahaa al-Araji has talked about the visit, "Al-Araji told the National Iraqi News Agency / NINA / that Nujaifi’s visit to the Kurdistan region came upon the authorization of the heads of political blocs , who met with him in order to finally resolve the standoff between the federal government and the Regional government. " Hiwa Barznjy (Niqash) explains the issues behind the conflict:
Conflict between Baghdad and Iraqi
Kurdistan over oil exports has resulted in something of a financial
crisis in the northern region. State employees haven’t been paid, MPs
are threatening to resign and there are rumours that Turkey was asked
for a loan. Negotiations are continuing but some senior politicians are
saying that Iraqi Kurdistan is ready for financial independence if a
compromise is not reached soon.
Negotiators from the semi-autonomous region
of Iraqi Kurdistan have visited Baghdad three times already this year.
They went there to discuss many of the seemingly-intractable conflicts
that the partially-independent region populated mainly by Iraqis of
Kurdish ethnicity is having with the rest of the country, as governed
from Baghdad.
The list of these conflicts is similar to
those of past years: The disputed areas of Iraq which the Iraqi Kurdish
say should belong to their region but which Baghdad says belong to Iraq
proper. The oil and gas law - Iraqi Kurdistan has one and Baghdad does
not. Who pays for the services of the Iraqi Kurdish military, the
Peshmerga. Iraqi Kurdistan’s share of national income, based on oil
earnings.
Nouri al-Maliki has been unable to stop the KRG's various oil and gas deals because there's no national oil and gas law. Along with stomping and screaming like an angry child, Nouri's also attempted to use the country's budget to blackmail the Kurds. Press TV (link is text and video) notes:
The president of Iraq’s Kurdistan Region says Baghdad’s decision to withhold the budget is a declaration of war against Kurdistan. President Massoud Barzani’s comments come as Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki continues to withhold Kurdistan’s share of the national budget. That includes monthly wages of more than $700m for hundreds of thousands of government employees.
Rudaw adds, "The Iraqi government has suspended the flights of two small airlines that operate between Europe and the Kurdistan Region, an airport official in Erbil said, the latest in an oil feud between Baghdad and the autonomous Kurds." NINA reports:
The President of Kurdistan, Massoud Barzani said: "The source of the problems is (breach the constitution and the monopoly of power and the failure to provide security)."
Barzani added, during a meeting with the Director General of the Department of Middle East and North Africa in the French Foreign Ministry, Francois Giroux, according to a statement to the presidency of the Kurdistan region, " getting Iraq away from all the meanings of the state and non- delivery of services and the failure to provide security is the result of breaching the Constitution and the monopoly of power."
Barzani expressed his hope that "the political parties' commitment by the constitution and hold elections for the House of Representatives opens avenues towards resolving the problems in Iraq."
Nouri has been a huge failure. The Economist notes of his assault on Anbar:
Since sending the Iraqi army to dismantle a protest camp in Ramadi, the capital of Anbar, in December, Iraqi security forces have been embroiled in a standoff with tribal fighters, some backed by al-Qaeda types who are also fighting in neighbouring Syria. From a former American base, the Iraqi army has mortared the outskirts of the city of Fallujah, sending over 300,000 civilians fleeing in the biggest displacement since the civil war of 2006-2007.
Iraq’s government bills the battle as a fight against al-Qaeda rather than a struggle against Sunni Iraqis who say the government arrests and executes its young men and has shut it out of power. Unable to speed up delivery of American attack helicopters, the Iraqi government has persuaded the American government to lease it some. Both Iraqi and foreign journalists are banned from the area.
All Iraq News notes that Sabah Karhot, Chair of the Anbar Provincial Council, is declaring that Nouri's extended a 'cease-fire,' "'The duration granted by the Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki to suspend the military operations in Fallujah city, was extended for a week.''
What a load of nonsense.
Nouri did a 72-hour move he called a 'cease-fire' (one he called '72 hours' as well) and it wasn't (see Monday's snapshot). Civilians in Anbar were injured and killed by the military's bombings.
Get honest, it's insulting at this point to lie so.
Nouri doesn't have to forces to enter Falluja.
He's been threatening to count to three and turn this car around, he means it, for about five weeks now.
Why?
Because it's past time to enter Falluja.
But he can't. The military keeps deserting on him. They don't want to go in. I doubt they're 'scared,' it's like Nouri 2008 attack on Basra.
That resulted in mass exodus from the ranks. They self-checked out because they didn't want to go hand-to-hand with other Iraqis, they didn't see signing up for the Iraqi military meaning they had to kill Iraqis. It's happened again. It's the least reported development in the assault on Anbar, the defections. There was a very high profile one over the weekend but AP, Reuters, AFP all ignored it. All Iraq News reported, "The chairman of the military council of Anbar, Ali Hatim al-Sulaiman, fled of Anbar to unknown destination."
Nouri's a War Criminal. He's not being nice or doing a 'cease-fire.' He's had an excuse one week after another. And the reason for these excuses? He doesn't have the forces to enter Falluja successfully.
Despite Nouri's attacks on the Iraqi people, the White House keeps insisting he must armed and armed again. Erin Evers (Human Rights Watch) observes:
The US has long supported the Iraqi government with arms, though the Iraqi government has committed serious, widespread abuses against its own people in the name of counterterrorism. That has proven ineffective in combating terrorism but has stoked resentment. Psaki acknowledged that the US has “providedthe Iraqi military and security forces with more than $15 billion in equipment, services, and training,” and recently delivered to Iraq “Hellfire missiles and hundreds of small arms along with large quantities of small arms and tank ammunition,” but did not address the copious evidence giving cause for concern that Iraq will use these weapons to continue abuses.
The State Department’s own 2012 Human Rights report noted that “Human rights violations committed by [Iraqi Security Forces] personnel were rarely investigated, and perpetrators were seldom punished,” and that the government “did not take widespread action to reform security forces to improve human rights.”
The new Human Rights Watch research about the treatment of women in Iraq’s criminal justice system, for example, shows that security forces frequently subject detained women to torture and ill-treatment, including the threat of sexual abuse. In early January, Anbar residents told us that the army’s mortar fire on residential neighborhoods had killed at least 25 residents in the first few days of fighting in Fallujah.
In November, we documented how Iraqi security forces, including agents from Special Weapons and Tactics [SWAT] in the Counterterrorism Service [CTS]—precisely the security forces who, along with the army, are at the forefront of the fighting in Anbar—abused residents by surrounding and closing off majority Sunni neighborhoods, illegally raiding homes and carrying out mass arrests. Since 2010 we have repeatedly reported that security forces including SWAT, Federal Police, and the army use unlawful force against peaceful protesters; carry out illegal arrests, interrogations, and detentions, and systematically use torture during interrogations.
It's just one critical pan after another for thug Nouri al-Maliki. Justin Marozzi (The National Newspaper) reviews constitutional attorney Zaid al-Ali's new book The Struggle for Iraq's Future: How Corruption, Incompetence and Sectarianism Have Undermined Democracy:
Much of this book, in fact, can be read as a passionate polemic against Al Maliki who, with the Americans, must surely take a great share of the responsibility for the unholy mess in which Iraq is now stewing.
Instead of seeking to build an Iraq that eschewed sectarianism, al-Ali writes, “his sole concern became to capture the state and to divide and conquer opponents, to remain in power for as long as possible”. By those limited, cynical criteria, so typical of Iraqi politics in living memory, and perhaps far beyond, Al Maliki’s efforts have been an unqualified success: parliament emasculated; armed forces shunted under his direct control; the judiciary nobbled; critics intimidated and silenced.
iraq
xinhua
mu xuequan
the irish times
anadolu agency
press tv
niqash
hiwa barznjy
reuters
ahmed rasheed
suadad al-salhy
ned parker
national iraqi news agency
all iraq news
the economist
erin evers
human rights watch
