Monday, December 28, 2009

Idiot of the week

Monday, Monday! Hope everyone had a good weekend. If you celebrated Christmas, hope you had a good one. We've got the New Year this Friday. Hope everyone's got some fun planned for that.

Meanwhile, the week's just started and I believe we've already seen the idiot of the week. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Janet Napolitano. From Politico:


Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Sunday that the thwarting of the attempt to blow up an Amsterdam-Detroit airline flight Christmas Day demonstrated that "the system worked."

The system did not work. Politico's got the video at the link. What an idiot. What a stupid moron. It was only luck that prevented a terrible tragedy and Napolitano wants to pretend the system worked?

What an idiot.

Kendra Marr (Politico) reports:

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano reversed course Monday and admitted the U.S. air travel security system failed after a Nigerian man allegedly attempted to blow up a plane on Christmas Day.

On the "Today" show, Napolitano said her comment over the weekend that “the system worked” was “taken out of context.” She said her words referred to the U.S. air travel security’s reaction — notifying law enforcement, airports and carriers — 60 to 90 minutes after the suspect tried to bring down the jetliner.

That's got video too.

What an idiot.

And to claim she was taken out of context? Her whole job is context. Idiot.

She truly is the idiot of the week. It's hard to believe anyone else can top her.

Okay, let's talk Third. As always Dallas helped and who else?

The Third Estate Sunday Review's Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess, and Ava,
Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude,
Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man,
C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review,
Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills),
Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix,
Mike of Mikey Likes It!,
Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz),
Trina of Trina's Kitchen,
Ruth of Ruth's Report,
Wally of The Daily Jot,
Marcia of SICKOFITRDLZ,
Stan of Oh Boy It Never Ends
Isaiah of The World Today Just Nuts
and Ann of Ann's Mega Dub.

It was a long, long writing edition.

  • Truest statement of the week
  • Because it was long, C.I. went ahead with this. If we weren't all exhausted, she would have said no. She would have said find someone else. But she was just too damn tired. Can't blame her. And this is a truest. We all agree on that.

  • Truest statement of the week II
  • This is Helen Redomond and C.I. is the one who recommended this. It's a great choice.

  • A note to our readers
  • Jim breaks down the edition.

  • Editorial: 'Universal' health care
  • This was a quick editorial. We had an idea for something longer but this worked. Betty and C.I. really took the rough sketch here and made it better.
  • TV: That fall season
  • Ava and C.I. go epic in this amazing piece that's a year-in-review and also one of the strongest advocating pieces for women you'll come across. My dad called to point out that the anti-woman Terry Gross did the hour with Quentin Tarantino tonight. That's Terry Gross.

  • Barack and Bush: Separated at Birth
  • They really are two of kind. It's amazing Bush didn't come out and endorse Barack in 2008. Barack just carries on Bush's legacy.

  • Must see film for 2010
  • Dad loved this pick. He loves this film. More American Graffiti is a good film. I like the first one and it's funny and all but this one's not really going for as many laughs. But it does deliver laughs. Especially with Terry the Toad fighting the authority.

  • Iraq: The War Continues
  • Our Iraq piece. C.I. and I basically worked on this and she said, "Mike, I'm just too tired." I was too. We could have made this much longer but it was already after 11 in the morning (my time) and we'd been working since ten that night.

  • The Best Actress of the 20th Century
  • Bette Davis. I agree with this and did before we wrote it. My big surprise was that I agree (and only did this month) that Joan Crawford was a better actress than Katharine Hepburn. Stan was bringing up some of her films -- he sees a lot of old films -- and so I checked some out (Elaine had seen most) and she can act. But Katharine Hepburn's always the same and it doesn't always work for her. Most of the time it doesn't. And once she hits her 40s, she's really pretty much a joke.

  • Ty's Corner
  • Ty's amazing and lengthy piece. He went and added some links today. He also went in and added some links to Ava and C.I.'s TV piece. He really would have loved to have had more time to work on this and when you praise him, he'll just say this is wrong or this should have had more and on and on. But this is really great. He wrote an amazing article.

  • Roundtable
  • This was it. We had either written everything or roughed it out or whatever and we did this. It worked out really great, I think. And I'm in it. If you read it when it went up, you didn't see me and Cedric. Jim took our question out. How come? I'm talking about my youngest sister who can get mad if she's written about online (which I realy don't worry about). Dona said, "Call Trina." And so they talked to my mom and she said she'd call my sister and find out but my sister was out like a light at her place so this went up and Jim added our comments later when he got approval. Apologies to Cedric who had to wait to have his comments included since he and I were both responding to the same question.

  • Idiot of the Week
  • Prohibition never works and it takes a real idiot to claim that it does.

  • Highlights
And the last one was written by Ann, Stan, Marcia, Cedric, Wally, Betty, Rebecca, Ruth, Kat, Elaine and me.

And that's that and I'm tired and, confession, also wanting to watch Terminator Salvation. I did not know that Elaine loved the films. I would have suggested we see it this summer. She rented it tonight and said she hoped I didn't hate it. I love it. So she's ready to watch it, so I'm done.

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

Monday, December 28, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, US veterans continue to wait for their GI Bill benefits check, pretty much All Things Media Big & Small stay silent on counter-insurgency (much to their lasting and historical shame) and rumbles of discontent with Nouri emerge in the Shia communities.
For the second weekend in a row, James Cameron's Avatar was the number one film at the box office. Bob Strauss (San Jose Mercury News) reports it took an estimated $75 million in ticket sales (North America) over the weekend and BBC notes it's total box office take (in North America only) so far is $212 million "and could be on its way to grossing more than $1 b[illion] (625.6 million pounds) worldwide." Cameron's last film was Titanic which grossed more than $1.8 billion at the box office. I know James and he more than deserves a plug but we open with that because it is Iraq related. David Price is with Network of Concerned Anthropologists. Last week, he observed:
Fans of Avatar are understandably being moved by the story's romantic anthropological message favoring the rights of people to not have their culture weaponized against them by would be foreign conquerors, occupiers and betrayers. It is worth noting some of the obvious the parallels between these elements in this virtual film world, and those found in our world of real bullets and anthropologists in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Since 2007, the occupying U.S. military in Iraq and Afghanistan have deployed Human Terrain Teams (HTT), complete with HTT "social scientists" using anthropological-ish methods and theories to ease the conquest and occupation of these lands. HTT has no avatared-humans; just supposed "social scientists" who embed with battalions working to reduce friction so that the military can get on with its mission without interference from local populations. For most anthropologists these HTT programs are an outrageous abuse of anthropology, and earlier this month a lengthy report by a commission of the American Anthropological Association (of which I was a member and report co-author) concluded that the Human Terrain program crossed all sorts of ethical, political and methodological lines, finding that:
"when ethnographic investigation is determined by military missions, not subject to external review, where data collection occurs in the context of war, integrated into the goals of counterinsurgency, and in a potentially coercive environment -- all characteristic factors of the HTT concept and its application -- it can no longer be considered a legitimate professional exercise of anthropology."
The American Anthropological Association's executive board found Human Terrain to be a "mistaken form of anthropology". But even with these harsh findings, the Obama administration's call for increased counterinsurgency will increase demands for such non-anthropological uses of ethnography for pacification.
Dropping back to the December 3rd snapshot:
The American Anthropological Association's annual meeting started yesterday in Philadelphia and continues through Sunday. Today the association's Commission on the Engagement of Anthropology with the US Security and Intelligence Communities issued their [PDF format] "Final Report on The Army's Human Terrain System Proof of Concept Program." The 74-page report is a blow to War Criminals and their cheerleaders who have long thought that the social science could be abused or that the social sciences were pseudo sciences.
Only a small number of outlets have covered the AAA's findings. First up were Patricia Cohen (New York Times), Dan Vergano (USA Today), Yudhijit Bhattacharjee (Science Magazine) and Steve Kolowich (Inside HigherEd). Another wave followed which included Tom A. Peter (Christian Science Monitor) reporting, "Today the program enjoys a core of supporters, but it's done little to address the concerns of anthropologists and, now, rising military complaints that the program has slowed the growth of the military's ability to train culturally sensitive warriors." Christopher Shay (Time magazine) added:
Two years ago, the AAA condemned the HTS program, but this month's 72-page report goes into much greater detail about the potential for the military to misuse information that social scientists gather; some anthropologists involved in the report say it's already happening. David Price, a professor of anthropology at St. Martins University in Washington and one of the co-authors of the AAA report, says the army appears to be using the anthropological information to better target the enemy, which, if true, would be a gross violation of the anthropological code. One Human Terrain anthropologist told the Dallas Morning News that she wasn't worried if the information she provided was used to kill or capture an insurgent. "The reality is there are people out there who are looking for bad guys to kill," she said. "I'd rather they did not operate in a vacuum." Price and other critics see this as proof that the anthropologists don't have full control over the information they gather and that commanders can use it to kill. "The real fault with Human Terrain is that it doesn't even try to protect the people being studied," says Price. "I don't think it's accidental that [the Pentagon] didn't come up with ethical guidelines."
Anthropologically informed counterinsurgency efforts like the Human Terrain program are fundamentally flawed for several reasons. One measure of the extent that these programs come to understand and empathize with the culture and motivations of the people they study might be the occurrence of militarized ethnographers "going native" in ways parallel to the plot of Avatar. If Human Terrain Teams employed anthropologists who came to live with and freely interact with and empathize with occupied populations, I suppose you would eventually find some rogue anthropologists standing up to their masters in the field. But so far mostly what we find with the Human Terrain "social scientists" is a revolving cadre of well paid misfits with marginal training in the social sciences who do not understand or reject normative anthropological notions of research ethics, who rotate out and come home with misgivings about the program and what they accomplished.
Now you might think National Public Radio, so fond of being seeing erudite (they wish), would be all over the study from a leading organization of social scientists. You would be wrong. It's not that counter-insurgency isn't discussed NPR, it is, it's just that they only do so to promote it. (Ava and I wrote about that earlier this month.) Similarly, the foundation grant heavy (bloated?) Democracy Now! has never taken on counter-insurgency. It's refused to do so. We've been covering it repeatedly in this community while Goody's been all over psychologists and blah blah. But never alarmed by this. You need to grasp that.
There's a lot of money being made in and off counter-insurgency. And there are a lot of people who will not speak the truth. You need to grasp that it's a bastardization of a science and you need to grasp that when such a thing happens, when science is used to attack a native people and a society is silent, you have the next Nazi Germany. That's not hyperbole. This has been going on throughout the decade and who will call it out. Tom Hayden will do so as an aside approximately every 15 months or so. That's still more than any of his peers. Davy D of KPFA can't cover it because his hero Samantha Power is a counter-insurgency pusher. She blurbed the manual with praise. And what you're seeing is a left incapable of standing up to the war pushers, a left incapable of calling out the disgusting Sarah Sewall -- who may very well be the modern day Josef Mengele -- and a foundation backed attack on native people. You've got the idiot Thomas E. Ricks -- an expert on nothing -- who can't stop going ga-ga over counter-insurgency (make he's sure he's called out the War Crimes trials, in fact make sure he's tried). So much so that 'reporter' Thomas E. Ricks attacks the Vice President of the United States today. Dumb ass Thomas E. Ricks wants to take on Joe Biden and wants to start false rumors (no, Joe Biden has not fallen asleep in meetings -- Thomas E. Ricks is LYING) because Joe Biden won't sign on 100% to Tommy Ricks' beloved war crimes.
These aren't just 'fact-finding' missions (for the military), these are experiments carried out in the field. And these expermients can result in death. No social scientist should be in bed with the military. Anyone who thinks otherwise is completely stupid (Thomas E. Ricks) or completely unethical (Monty McFate). And we started covering it, honestly, because I know the liar Monty McFate and she was shooting off her mouth (with lies as always) to the idiot George Packer (who never learned to fact check). That's why it landed on our radar December 20, 2006. We have now been covering it for over three years. And where's our 'brave' 'independent' media?
Two years ago, David Price was part of a panel (with pro-counter-insurgency advocates Monty McFate, Col John Agoglia and Lt. Col. Edward Villacres -- a three-to-one imbalance) on The Diane Rehm Show (see the October 11, 2007 snapshot for a transcript of some of the exchanges). Search in vain for serious explorations of this issue. Now everyone can bore you to death demonizing Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann -- and no one's ever supposed to notice that the same sexism Barack unleashed among 'progressives' in 2008 continues to run wild and trample on equality -- but you can't deal with the things that really matter. If it were you or your child being 'studied' by the occupiers so that they could enslave you, it damn well would matter to you. But it happens 'over there' and as long as 'over there' doesn't show up on your TV screens, it appears everyone's not wanting to rock the boat or risk offending Harvard or, yes, the "the Kennedy School of Government". And while America's salivates over another round of "Bash the Bitch" (it's amazing how often that game is played), don't for one damn minute think anyone's being informed.
Amy Goodman won't call it out, she's too wrapped up in War Hawk Sammy Power. Remember? Remember her interview with Sammy? Best if you caught it on WBAI because WBAI was in fundraising mode and there was Amy raving over her while trying to get people to call in and 'support independent media.' Amy was raving that Samantha Power "'might be the next Secretary of State" and, growing more excited in her pitch, qualifiers fell away and you were left thinking not only would Power be Secretary of State, if Barack won the general election, but Samantha Power was right up there with Mother Teresa, maybe even ahead of Blessed Teresa of Calcutta, to hear Amy rave on air. You can't take those moments back and those moments -- and Goodman's silence on counter-insurgency -- are very telling.
This refusal to question the counter-insurgency movement is a undemocratic refusal and it's completely against the norms of an open society. But that's what's taking place in the United State right now. Few will question it. Few will even bother to report on it. The findings of the American Anthropological Association are perfectly in keeping with the tenets of social science. There's nothing controversial about the study the organization issued. There's something very controversial about the group-think that refuses to question counter-insurgency. And when you grasp that Amy Goodman couldn't stop caterwauling about "we never see where the bombs drop" and yet refuses to devote even one damn segment in all these years to counter-insurgency, you realize how pathetic she and 'independent' media are. Now, in fairness, she will talk counter-insurgency . . . in past decades. But as she herself whined, if we can't talk about the war before it starts or while it's going on, when can we talk about it? After it's over!!!!! When it's too late!!! Amy Goodman needs her words tossed back in her face.
We've noted the number of Iraqi Christians as 800,000 often quoting one media outlet on that or another. An e-mail to the public account ask that we note Help Iraqi Christians (which we just did) and they note there were an estimated one million Iraqi Christians (in Iraq) at the start of the Iraq War. Their source is the US State Dept. If you go to the 2006 State Dept report, it reads, "According to official estimates, the number of Christians decreased from 1.4 million in 1987 to fewer than 1 million with Catholics (Chaldeans) compromising the majority. Christian leaders eastimated that approximately 700,000 Iraqi Christians lived abroad." Though the report uses "fewer than 1 million" (and 800,000 is fewer), if you look at the numbers it's not so simple. In fact, there numbers add up to over one million -- the State Dept numbers in that report (which may be not checking their figures or switching to pre-war numbers without including that notification). But we will now say "an estimated 1 million" when referring to the number of Iraqi Christians in Iraq at the start of the Iraq War.
Friday, Bushra Juhi (AP) reported that Bartela was placed under curfew after a conflict between Iraqi Christians and Shi'ite Muslims over decorations. UPI states 5 Chrisitans and 5 Shi'ites required hospitalization. A number of outlets take the position that Shias were wrong or Iraqi Christians were in the wrong. I have no idea. (I don't think the outlets do either.) But what is known is that Bartela (also spelled "Bartella") is a village with a majority Christian population. Many have long reported on that including Alice Fordham (Times of London) back on December 18th. That does not mean that reports of Shia entering Bartela and ripping down Christian decorations (as reported in Christian media) are true. But it is worth noting that only the Christian media (here for the Christian Post article by Ethan Cole) bother to note that the village is mainly Christian. That's a key detail to the story and it is telling that a number of outlets (including those trying to play it down the middle -- CNN among them) refused to identify the village as what it was.
Violence continued over the holiday weekend. As Third noted, " Friday 9 were reported dead and 25 injured; and Saturday 11 were reported dead and 36 reported wounded" while Sunday saw 7 reported dead and thirty-six wounded. Today Reuters notes the US military and Iraqi forces shot dead 1 person and arrested a second.
And on the 'freedom' front, in 'liberation' news, Alsumaria reports, "Strict traditions and social conventions are back in the spotlight in Iraq with the decision of Iraq's Education Ministry to separate boys and girls in Sadr City schools. The Ministry's surprising decision spurred mounting debates. Decision advocators confirm that social and religious status in Sadr City does not permit to mix boys and girls in schools." KUNA meanwhile reports, "Some 9,000 Iraqis registered as refugees in Jordan are now resident in third countries, out of 17,000 the UN Refugee Agency recommended be repatriated and out of an overall 53,000 refugees."
In Iraqi political news, Meanwhile Qais Mizher (Washington Post) reports Shi'ites demonstred against Nouri al-Maliki in Karbala on Sunday. And distaste for Nouri may be spreading throughout the Shia communities. Saad Fakhrildeen and Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) report the Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani has repeatedly delivered sermons on "the government's failing" and Friday, Sayed Ahmad Safi "delivered a scathing critique of the political establishments to the tens of thousands gathered for the religious rites" declaring, "More than 50% of our people live in poverty in a rich country, but when we see all the circumstances this poses a question mark. Why is there not a quorum in the Parliament? Why is there no legislation [passed]? Why don't the executives come spontaneously without an invitiation.":

Turning to the US, in the December 24th snapshot, we were noting the veterans were still not receiving their GI Bill benefits for the fall semester of 2009 -- the semester that has ended. And we were noting how the VA went before Congress in October and declared they needed no more funding, no more workers, they were on top of it, it was a glitch (one they attempted to blame on universities initially before they learned colleges weren't going to be played by a bunch of lazy VA workers) and they were on it. They said only a few "thousands" didn't have their checks yet. And a few "thousands" still don't have their checks. Where is the outrage? Over the long holiday weekend, stories emerged that may help put a human face on those who are suffering because the VA can't do the damn job they're supposed to. Joe Seelig (Highlands Today/ Tampa Tribune) reported:
Howard Jenkins is the local veterans employment representative for the Heartland Workforce in charge of the Veterans Work Study Program. He said he didn't know the number of students other programs have, but it is a big problem.
He's spoken with his counterparts in similar programs in Florida and they are having problems, too, he said.
"I have one that's affected also," said Jenkins. "He hasn't gotten paid for the hours he's been working here. He started working in October. He's never been paid. The Veterans Work Study Program augments their standard of living while they go to school."
Many of these veterans have families with children, he said.
"The young man I have is working for college for next semester," he said. "There are about 90 veterans signed up for classes at SFCC (South Florida Community College)."
About 277,000 veterans have signed up for school under the GI Bill across the country and only about 50,000 had been processed, he said.
Tom Tiefry, an Eastern Michigan University student and U.S. Marine, is among the thousands waiting for his money. Without any income, the Afghanistan war vet has been draining his savings, can't move out of his mom's home in Gibraltar and hopes his beat-up 1994 Chevrolet Camaro can survive the commute during the Michigan winter.

"It's very frustrating," said Tiefry, 23.

He made a commitment to his country for four years of service and views the delay in his GI Bill funds as the government not honoring its commitment to him.

"My word was good," Tiefry said. "But it wasn't a given that their's was. It never crossed my mind that this sort of thing could happen."

Patricia Alex (New Jersey Record) reports:


The delays had thousands of vets who served in Iraq and Afghanistan scrambling to pay rents and mortgages, and fearful they would not be able to continue school next semester.
"It's been three months of going into debt," said Chris Mazzoccchi of Saddle Brook, who served with the Marines in Iraq. Mazzocchi, 24, quit his job in ground service at Teterboro Airport to take advantage of the bill and began studying criminal justice at Bergen Community College this semester.
He is entitled to tuition reimbursement and a housing allowance of $2,033 a month, he said.
Idiot of the month is Mark K. Matthews (Orlando Sentinel) who 'reports' this morning on the delay, "A major problem has been the sheer number of applicants. Under the new GI Bill, recent veterans are allowed to transfer their benefits to children and spouses -- increasing an already inflated pool of new students." No, Marky, you stupid idiot, that's not true. And why do I know that's not true? Because the VA was specifically asked that in a Congressional hearing in October. I was there, Marky, where the hell were you?
Back in October, AP owned this story and the reason may be because they are one of the few outlets that still covers Congressional hearings. No surprise, they are the ones (specifically Kimberly Hefling) who broke the story last week. No surprise, a lot of idiots like Mark K. Matthews, who couldn't get off their fat asses (he's in DC) and sit through a hearing, are yet again offering defenses for the VA. Repeating, that had nothing to do with it. This was addressed in a Congressional hearing that you should have been present for Mark K. Matthews.

So where does is stand right now? Here's what the VA management hopes (three sources), they hope they can get the checks out (or all but 100 out) no later than January 5th (out in the mail, not received) and then, when Congress is back in session, the VA's attitude will be: "Oh, we already took care of it." If that happens and Congress lets them get away with it with no objections, not one member of Congress deserves to be re-elected. The VA swore in October, to Congress, that they were on it, that this was all being handled and no more problems and they were so on top of it, they didn't need additional money and they didn't need additional employees. The VA lied to Congress. And the VA shut out Congress. Three different members of Congress, in an open hearing, told the VA that if there were any other problems with this program, Congress needed to be notified immediately and the VA swore it would happen. Last week, Congress was notified . . . when Kimberly Hefling started filing AP reports on this subject.
Lastly, KPFA's Flashpoints Radio is facing serious cuts while other programs don't appear to be. For example, I can think of one mid-day program airing three times a week with two hosts. Strange because when one of the hosts was in management just a blink ago, the show got by just fine -- for months and months -- with just one host. Local Station Board member Henry Norr (at The Daily Censored) writes about what is seen as a targeted attack on Flashpoints and we'll note the last paragraph of the article: "To express support for Flashpoints, write to general manager Lemlem Rijio at gm@kpfa.org and turn out for the first meeting of the new LSB, now set for 7 p.m. on Monday, Jan. 11, 2010 (disregard dates announced earlier) at the Humanist Hall, 390 27th St. (near Telegraph), Oakland." For those who've never listened to KPFA's Flashpoints Radio, it remains the only program on KPFA that addresses the Iraq War. The Iraq War doesn't exist on KPFA without Flashpoints. That's reality. And remember just a second ago we were talking about a co-host of another program who could be let go? When that co-host was in management she was all for "The War Comes Home." It was going to be this, it was going to be that. It was going to be all over Pacifica and cover the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars. A lot of money was put into that project. Where did the money go? The show barely aired and that 'hard hitting' website that was supposed to back it up? If you care about "Santos Grill und die Gartenparty wird gelingen" (which is German and announces that the grill and the garden party will be successful) you should check out the website for War Comes Home. How the hell did KPFA not only lose their website but lose it to a German grill cook? And it's real cute how, at the bottom, it reads: "Copyright 2009, Warcomeshome.org. All rights reserved." Grill cooking. I really would love to hear where the money for The War Comes Home project went. And if Pacifica can't pay for websites, they need to return to Blogspot. That is where Wake Up Call (WBAI), for example, used to be. But someone needs to find out where the money for War Comes Home went because it was supposed to be funded.
Posted by at

Friday, December 25, 2009

The news today, oh boy

Christmas. First up, Merry Christmas to readers of The Common Ills mirror site. C.I. cross-posted my earlier post today and asked if I would do the same if I did another post. I will.

I will also note that Ruth has written a strong report that went up tonight. I planned to write about Iraq but between C.I. and Ruth today, I really feel like I have so little to add. "Should This Marriage Be Saved?" I can add that link. That's from before I started this site, from the first week in December 2004. C.I. wrote it and it still captures the need for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. I hope I've linked to that before but I may not have. I am linking to it now. It's important and still timely. And one more thing I can do is help get the word out on a March 20th action put together by numerous groups including A.N.S.W.E.R.


A.N.S.W.E.R.




So I'll focus on some other news. A Detroit plane had someone claiming to be a terrorist. He apparently had fire crackers or something more powerful. Details are still sketchy. The link goes to Politico so you do have the option to listen to it. You can also read this BBC story on the incident. Politico also has the story of John Edwards building homes in El Salvador. You'd think with his cheating and the fact that his wife's cancer is terminal, he'd instated spend his time by her side. But John Edwards is always about finding the PR and trying to make himself look good.

C.I.'s covered the VA scandal of refusing to pay the GI Bill benefits in a timely manner for months and hit on it again yesterday because there are "thousands" of veterans still waiting on their checks for last semester. For last semester. If you're not getting what a problem this is, listen to this individual story Marisa Schultz (Detroit News) offers in her look at the issue:

Tom Tiefry, an Eastern Michigan University student and U.S. Marine, is among the thousands waiting for his money. Without any income, the Afghanistan war vet has been draining his savings, can't move out of his mom's home in Gibraltar and hopes his beat-up 1994 Chevrolet Camaro can survive the commute during the Michigan winter.

"It's very frustrating," said Tiefry, 23.

He made a commitment to his country for four years of service and views the delay in his GI Bill funds as the government not honoring its commitment to him.

"My word was good," Tiefry said. "But it wasn't a given that their's was. It never crossed my mind that this sort of thing could happen."

You might also try realizing that some of these veterans have children. That some of these veterans are the sole provider for their children. And today is Christmas. And their benefit checks that should have arrived August 1st never did. While they try to pull together a Christmas for their kids.
Posted by at

Merry Christmas, Peace on Earth

Merry Christmas. We watched Desk Set this morning. Elaine and C.I. have a Christmas tradition of that. It was on TV their first Christmas together (in college) and they made it a point to catch it every Christmas. Due to both being busy, they had to watch it this morning on the phone together. C.I. watched it in the kitchen as she supervised the last minute touches on the meal they'll be eating later. Elaine and I watched it in the living room of my folks' home.

It stars Katharine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy. Katharine Hepburn heads the research department for a broadcast network. Spencer is a computer guy who's been brought in to make changes. Katharine and her employs are afraid the computer is being brought in to replace them. It's a funny movie. Katharine's very funny getting drunk and singing "Night and Day" as well as when she and Joan Blondell are discussing men driving past them slowly and then circling. :D

The most fun though was early this morning when we did gifts. My niece had a fit and a field day ripping open gifts. She did everyone's in the end. That's fine. She thought that was the fun part. She didn't realize that we got to keep gifts and there were things in the boxes. She just knew it was fun to rip wrapping paper off. :D

Here's a 2007 Christmas comic by Isaiah:

Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Scary Bullymas"

scarybullymas

And we all thought when Bully Boy Bush left the White House things would be better!!!

In 2007, I couldn't wait for that day. Once I saw Corporatist War Hawk Barack steal the Democratic nomination and the cult that followed him, I knew we were only going to be in more trouble. And we are. They're extending the Patriot Act, if you missed that.

Barry O's Cult has a lot of explaining to do. A lot. Hey Naomi Wolf, why don't you explain how it was the 'feminist' thing to extend the Patriot Act?

Here's a list of who posted last night.

I hope everyone's having a good day. I'm eager to eat!!!! :D

I plan to post this evening or tonight as well. I'll be more 'political' then. This was just a quick post because I know so many aren't posting today and I don't want it to all be on C.I.

Are you looking for a good video? Elaine asked me to note this video at Information Clearing House of Noam Chomsky explaining how the US isn't a democracy.
Posted by at

Thursday, December 24, 2009

Matthew Rothschild, James Hansen

Christmas Eve. Are you excited? I'm always excited. And we've got my niece in the house and she's all excited. My dad's playing tricks on her every few seconds pointing at a window and asking, "Was that Santa?" :D She'll nod all excited like.

I'm posting early because I want to get something up. I hope we never have another year like this one. I've never seen so much pandering and so many efforts to kill dissent on the part of the left. Granted, I'm not that old. But it was pretty gruesome.

One of the people who appears to have woken up and appears to not be a Norman Solomon type (where they want to pretend they never really drank the Kool Aid), is Matthew Rothschild and I'll see his acknowledgment as a strong and positive sign. This is from a piece he posted today at The Progressive:

Hold the champagne.

And don’t get rolled over by the hyperbole.

The Senate health care bill, which just passed 60-39, is nothing to cheer about.

It will do “more harm than good,” say the leaders of Physicians for a National Health Program.

They acknowledge “the salutary provisions included in the legislation, notably an expansion of Medicaid coverage, increased funds for community clinics, and regulations to curtail some of private insurers’ most egregious practices,” write Dr. Oliver Fein, Dr. David Himmelstein, and Dr. Steffie Woolhandler.

But these are outweighed, they say, by the bill’s killer flaws.

The individual mandate “would reinforce private insurers’ stranglehold on care” by forcing millions of people to buy insurance on the private market. “Those who dislike their current employer-sponsored coverage would be forced to keep it,” they write. “Those without insurance would be forced to pay private insurers’ inflated premiums, often for coverage so skimpy that serious illness would bankrupt them.”

I want to be really clear on this: NO UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE. My mother and I have stressed this at our sites over and over and for good reason. We live in Big Mass, we already have laws forcing everyone to buy insurance. It didn't provide the citizens of this state with universal health care. It didn't do a damn thing except criminalize not having insurance and forcing you to pay fines you couldn't afford or for insurance you couldn't afford.

It didn't help the working class one bit. And the poor? They're not helped at all.

James Hansen is a real scientist and someone who's really troubled by the environment. Not one of the faux set we saw over and over for two weeks. This is from an article at CounterCurrents:

NASA climate scientist James Hansen never expected the U.N. climate talks in Copenhagen to amount to much. He told the British Guardian newspaper that it would be better if Copenhagen failed. That’s because Hansen is a vocal critic of the economic policies discussed there, and he hopes Copenhagen’s failure gives the public a chance to talk about new options.

Hansen is arguably the world’s best known and most respected climate scientist. Sometimes called the “grandfather of climate change,” he began modeling the effects of warming three decades ago and first testified about climate change before Congress in 1988. He was one of the key figures to blow the whistle on the Bush Administration for censoring science and trying to muzzle warnings about the urgency of the climate crisis.

In the past few years, Hansen has expanded his activities outside the laboratory and into the political fray. In June, he was arrested after marching at a rally against mountaintop removal mining in West Virginia.

More recently, he has become a leading opponent of cap-and-trade, a market approach to greenhouse gas regulation that puts a limit on how much carbon can be emitted and then allows polluters to trade permits to emit. Hansen claims the approach ultimately will not produce the kinds of emissions cuts the world needs to avoid catastrophic climate change. It will simply allow “polluters and Wall Street traders to fleece the public out of billions of dollars,” he says. He is especially critical of the large number of offsets available under the current policy proposals, which allow polluters to pay for emissions reductions elsewhere in the world. He points to some offset schemes that have led to fraud, giving credit for pollution reductions that never actually happened.


Paul Krugman's taken to sneering at Hansen. Paul Krugman's only embarrassing himself. 2009 is the year Paul Krugman became a PURE WHORE. That's all he is now, PURE WHORE. He knows Bambi Care's a joke. But he championed it because that's what a WHORE does. Paul Krugman's a joke and his little girlfriend Bob Somerby is quick to insist that this person and that person shouldn't be allowed to write about global warming because they aren't scientists but Bibby Bobby never calls out Paul Krugman.

Paul Krugman doesn't know politics, doesn't know science. He may know economics. He at least knows economic theory.

But he's a WHORE and that's the big revelation of 2009. What a WHORE Paul Krugman could turn out to be.

He owes Hansen a big apolocy. He owes his readers a big apology.

I'll be blogging tomorrow. I hope everyone has a great Christmas. I may blog early like tonight or I may blog at my regular time but I'll blog tomorrow.

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

Thursday, December 24, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, Gen Ray Odierno shows leadership many below him lack, there's no 'safe' religion in Iraq, Congress is going to hold the VA accountable when?, and more.
The Ashura pilgrimage is ongoing in Iraq and so is the violence. Shi'ite Muslims head to Krbala for rememberance and mourning. As with all pilgrimages in Iraq -- and despite Nouri al-Maliki's claims of having brought 'security' to Iraq -- the pilgrims are targeted. AP reported 11 dead and seventy wounded in bombing attacks on the Pilgrims today in Babil Province -- AP has now updated the 11 to 13 dead and the number may continue to rise throughout the day. Li Xianzhi (Xinhua) explains, "An explosive charge went off at a parking lot in the center of Hilla, some 100 km south of Baghdad, detonated at about 1:30 p.m. (1030 GMT), the source told Xinhua on condition of anonymity. Minutes later, a car bomb parked at the site went off after Iraqi security forces and onlookers gathered at the scene, the source said." Al Jazeera notes yesterday's attacks which led to the deaths of 4 pilgrims in Baghdad and twenty-eight more injured. CNN adds, "Ashura commemorates the martyrdom of Hussein, grandson of the Prophet Muhammad. Hussein was killed in battle in Karbala in 680, one of the events that helped create the schism between Sunnis and Shiites, the two main Muslim religious movements." Michael Hastings (Washington Post) provides this context, "The Shiite festival, commemorating the death of Imam Hussein in 680 AD, has been marred over the past six years by sectarian violence." Along with Shi'ite pilgrims, Iraqi Christians are also being targeted. Catholic News Service provides some of the recent history of targeting:


In July, a series of church bombings in Mosul left at least four dead and more than 30 injured. A flare-up in violence in October 2008 claimed the lives of 13 Christians and forced thousands to flee the city.
In February 2008 Chaldean Archbishop Paulos Faraj Rahho of Mosul was kidnapped, and his driver and two bodyguards were killed. Two weeks later his body was recovered after kidnappers revealed where it was buried.
His replacement, Archbishop-elect Emil Shimoun Nona of Mosul, is scheduled to be ordained in January. Pope Benedict XVI confirmed his election in November.

Alsumaria reports, "Iraqis are celebrating Christmas discretely due to deteriorated security and because of mounting attacks against Christians. Christmas ornament is decorating timidly Iraqi streets and Christian families are staying home after Mass." AFP explains, "Since the US-led invasion of 2003, hundreds of Iraqi Christians have been killed and several churches attacked. Around 800,000 Christians lived in Iraq at the time of the invasion, but their number has since shrunk by a third or more as members of the community have fled abroad, according to Christian leaders." Muhanad Mohammed and Suadad al-Salhy, Mustafa Mahmoud, Aref Mohammed, Missy Ryan, Alison Williams and David Stamp (Reuters) report 1 Iraqi Christian was shot dead in Mosul today along with another man (who may or may not have been an Iraqi Christian). Tuesday AFP reported that the Iraqi military was on high "alert" according to the Minister of Defense, Mohammed al-Askari, who stated, "We have put our forces on alert in Baghdad, the provinces of Kirkuk and Nineveh, including its capital Mosul, where our Christian brothers will be celebrating their holidays, because we have intelligence indicating they could be attacked during this period." Shi'ite Pilgrims and Iraqi Christians haven't seen any evidence of "high" alert. Saturday, noting the various high-level bombings in Baghdad, an Iraqi correspondent for McClatchy asked a question about the government's 'security strategy' that applies here as well, "After four bloody and brutal explosions, I wonder who has a strategy. Does our government have a security strategy or the enemy has a killing and destroying strategy????"
Reuters notes 1 man shot outside his Mosul home. AP notes a Sadr City which claimed 9 lives and left 33 people injured -- they were participating in a funeral process, while a Baghdad bombing resulted in the deaths of 4 pilgrims and ten being injured. Mohammed Al Dulaimy (McClatchy Newspapers) reports today on Wednesday violence: 3 police officers shot dead in Baghdad, a Baghdad roadside bombing injured two Shi'ite pilgrims, a Baghdad mortorcyle bombing claimed 1 life and left seven people wounded, a Falluja roadside bombing targeting Sawha leader Efan Sadoun and leaving two of his bodyguards injured (Sadoun is not reported harmed), and a Baghdad car bombing which claimed the life of 1 Iraqi soldier and wounded "a candidate to the coming national election" as well as relative accompanying the candidate. (I believe the other incidents Al Dulaimy reports on were noted in yesterday's snapshot.)
Now let's switch topics to the US military. First off, the top US commander in Iraq, Gen Ray Odierno, continues to demonstrate common sense (if you doubt that, you were not paying attention when David Petraeus was top US commander in Iraq). Mohammed Abbas, Missy Ryan and Jon Hemming (Reuters) report he stated that, starting January 1st, there will be no criminal punishments for soldiers in Iraq over the non-crime of pregnancy. If you're lost, consider yourself fortunate. Tuesday ABC World News Tonight with Diane Sawyer covered the issue of Gen Tony Cucolo playing God an issuing an order that pregnancy was now a crime for any soldiers serving in northern Iraq. Thankfully, Diane Sawyer has a great deal more on the ball than Kate Snow who presented a one-sided 'report' that found time to quote Cucolo at length, to quote anonmyous internet chatters (misquote actually) who agreed with Cucolo's policy, to quote a military 'expert' (forever wrong) who agreed with Cucolo's policy and the only noted objection in her report was 47 words from NOW president Terry O'Neill -- or as Snow wrongly called them "National Organization of Women" (it's the National Organization for Women). Snow did note, "A group of female senators today also sent a protest letter to the Secretary of the Army." She failed to identify the senators or to quote from their letter. The letter was in the Tuesday's snapshot and we'll note it again:

December 22, 2009

The Honorable John McHugh

Secretary of the Army

101 Army Pentagon

Washington, DC 20310-0101

Dear Secretary McHugh:

It has come to our attention that Major General Anthony Cucolo III -- the Commander of Multi-National Division-North, Iraq -- has implemented a stricter policy that criminalizes pregnancy for members of the United States Armed Forces under his command and for others "serving with, employed by, or accompanying" the military. While we fully understand and appreciate the demands facing both commanders and service members in Iraq, we believe this policy is deeply misguided and must be immediately rescinded.

Under the policy, it is possible to face punishment, including imprisonment, for "becoming pregnant, or impregnating a Soldier, while assigned to the Task Force Marne" Area of Operations. The policy even extends to married couples jointly serving in the warzone.

Although Major General Cucolo stated today that a pregnant soldier would not necessarily be punished by court-martialunder this policy, we believe the threat of criminal sanctions in the case of pregnancy goes far beyond what is needed to maintain good order and discipline. This policy could encourage female soldiers to delay seeking critical medical care with potentially serious consequences for mother and child.

This policy also undermines efforts to enhance benefits and services so that dual military couples can continue to serve. We can think of no greater deterrent to women contemplating a military career than the image of a pregnant woman being severely punished simply for conceiving a child. This defies comprehension.

As such, we urge you to immediately rescind this policy. Thank you for your prompt consideration of this most important request, and for your continued commitment to our men and women in uniform.

Sincerely,

Barbara Boxer

United States Senator

Jeanne Shaheen

United States Senator

Kirsten E. Gillibrand

United States Senator

Barbara A. Mikulski

United States Senator

If you need more background on this story, Feminist Wire Daily has a comprehensive item that they posted yesterday (so they don't note that Odierno has now killed the policy). We've covered this since Saturday and I'm assuming most reading are fully aware of this issue -- and I know the many service women e-mailing to complain about the policy know it very well -- including the issue that women who were sexually assaulted wouldn't be punished . . . after they'd proven their sexual assault. As if sexual assualt has ever been easy to prove in the military. Back to ABC where Snow quoted women from chat pages and Facebook who stated they were for the policy. She cherry-picked in order to just present women supporting the policy. But in terms of some women feeling that this policy punishing pregnancy was a good thing, why would women say that? Because there's a stereotype that women get pregnant to get out of service. That's a false stereotype and, in reality, it's no more common than straight males announcing they are gay in the hopes of being discharged. Instead of exploring that stereotype, Kate Snow just endorses it. (It's a sexist stereotype like the sexist and racist stereotype of the so-called "Welfare Queen" that Ronald Reagan always 'saw' -- remember he suffered from dementia.) Now there are women who say yes to the policy and women who say no and you can go through this American Women Veterans Facebook thread and find both. (Or you can be like Kate Snow and just pick the ones you agree with.) But what the policy plays into is a lot of hostility towards women and what you're hearing in what Kate Snow quoted is frustration women have with the system and their mistaken belief that it's "all" these women getting pregnant to get out of the military who are hurting their own chances to advance. No, girls, you're being lied to yet again. You're accepting a false stereotype that exists to turn you against other women and to blame other women instead of blaming a command culture that refuses -- despite multiple Senate investigations -- to move into the 20th Century even now as we are in the 21st one.
Let's note the end of Snow's 'report' (and you can stream video here at Sarah Netter and Luis Martinez's ABC news story which was much more balanced than anything Snow offered):
Diane Sawyer: But you're not saying that there was no criticism from inside --

Kate Snow: I'm certainly not saying that.

Diane Sawyer: -- the military?

Kate Snow: No, no. We scanned online, there is both. There are men and women in the military thinking this is a bad policy.

Diane Sawyer: But if he is the only general in Iraq with this policy is he going to be forced to back down?

Kate Snow: Not so far.
Kate Snow, with a straight face, insisted that she wasn't saying there was no objection -- when her entire report was built around that premise. (For full transcript, click here.) She then lied and said "Not so far," when Diane asked her if Cucolo was backing down. Uh, yeah, he was backing down. He'd declared Saturday he'd court-matial and imprison and on Tuesday he was rushing to say he'd decided not to do that. That's backing down, Kate Snow.

Repeating, Gen Ray Odierno has common sense. The order dies January 1st. Good for Ray Odierno. Thank you for having common sense, Ray Odierno, and showing leadership on the issue. No one else stepped up to the plate.
Okay so Odierno steps up to the plate, what about the US Congress? We have to ask that question because yesterday Kimberly Hefling (AP) broke the story that the GI Bill payments due at the start of the fall semester? Some still haven't received them. "Thousands" still wait. For the checks that should have been cut no later than the first day of the fall semester last August or September (depending on when the semester started which differed for some campuses). It is now the end of December. It is now Christmas in fact. And veterans are still waiting. The year will end with them still waiting. Now let's be really clear, the rent doesn't wait, the food doesn't wait, the bills don't wait. Veterans have to take care of all of those things. While waiting for the VA to get off it's happy and bloated ass and do what it should have done months ago.
October 14th, VA Secretary Eric Shinseki appeared before the US House Committee on Veterans Affairs. At that point, veterans across the country were struggling as they waited for the VA to make good on the payments they were led to believe would start with the fall semester. And the Committee should have focused on that but they didn't. They fretted that Shinseki kept his "light under a bushel" (that's a direct quote from a member of Congress) and that he needed to hire a PR person so that everyone would know what a wonderful job he was doing. What wonderful job? The scandal had broken, the press was all over it and the committee was kissing Shinseki's ass instead of holding him accountable. They all played dumb when he volunteered that the VA always, ALWAYS, knew this would happen, that a huge number of veterans would wait and wait and wait for checks. The Committee should have exploded with righteous indignation over the fact that (a) this was done to veterans and (b) the VA failed to inform Congress of what they knew.
Of course, they didn't. They weren't holding him accountable. It was embarrassing in real time and it's only more embarrassing today as we now know the problem that Shinseki said was fixed has not, HAS NOT, been fixed. Here's the money quote from Shinseki, here's what he told Congress:
I'm looking at the certificates of eligibility uh being processed on 1 May and enrollments 6 July, checks having to flow through August. A very compressed timeframe. And in order to do that, we essentially began as I arrived in January, uh, putting together the plan -- reviewing the plan that was there and trying to validate it. I'll be frank, when I arrived, uh, there were a number of people telling me this was simply not executable. It wasn't going to happen. Three August was going to be here before we could have everything in place. Uh, to the credit of the folks in uh VA, I, uh, I consulted an outside consultant, brought in an independent view, same kind of assessment. 'Unless you do some big things here, this is not possible.' To the credit of the folks, the good folks in VBA, they took it on and they went at it hard. We hired 530 people to do this and had to train them. We had a manual system that was computer assisted. Not very helpful but that's what they inherited. And we realized in about May that the 530 were probably a little short so we went and hired 230 more people. So in excess of 700 people were trained to use the tools that were coming together even as certificates were being executed. Uhm, we were short on the assumption of how many people it would take.
He knew. He knew when he came into office. He was told it and he confirmed it with an outside consultant. But he never told Congress. No one ever told Congress and no one told the veterans waiting for the checks. "Thousands" of whom are still waiting all this time later.
The October 16th snapshot covers the October 15th appearance of the VA's Keith Wilson appearing before the Subcommittee that US House Rep Stephanie Herseth Sandlin chairs. We'll note one exchange from that hearing:
US House Rep Harry Mitchell: Mr. Wilson, this is not your first appearance before this subcommittee. You have appeared before it several times since the GI Bill was signed into law to keep the committee members apprised of the VA's efforts to implement the GI Bill. And you offered assurances that the VA would be ready by August 1st. You even brought in a detailed timeline to show us how the VA would be ready by August 1st. In February, [John] Adler of this Committee asked if the VA needed more tools to accomplish the goal of program implementation and you responded by stating, "This legislation itself came with funding. This funding at this point has adequately provided us with what we need for implementing payments on August 1, 2009." If this legislation provided you with what you needed then why did you go to the VA -- or then where did you and the VA go wrong in meeting the implementation goal? So I'd like to ask two questions. How are we supposed to believe the assurances you're offering today? And, two, knowing how interested Congress is in implementing the GI Bill, once you knew you were running into problems, why didn't you let us know? Why did we have to first hear about it from veterans and read about it in the Army Times?
Keith Wilson: You rightly call us out in terms of not providing timely service to all veterans. We acknowledge that and uh are working as hard as humanly possible uh to make sure that we are meeting those goals. Uh the timeline that we provided to the subcommittee uh I believe was largely met uh in terms of our ability to generate payments on the date that we were required to deliver the first checks -- first payments did go out August 3rd. Uh there were a couple of significant challenges uh that we had not anticipated. One was uh the volume of work created by the increase in applications for eligibility determinations that did not translate into student population dropping off other programs. But we had significantly more work in our existing programs than we would have expected to have to maintain going into the fall enrollment. One of the other primary challenges that we have responded to is uh when we began our ability to use the tools that were developed uh to implement the program in the short term. Uh May 1st is when we began using those tools and it was very clear to us from the get-go that even accounting for our understanding that they weren't perfect, we underestimated the complexity and the labor-intensive nature of what needed to be done. We responded by hiring 230 additional people to account for that.
US House Rep Harry Mitchell: And I read all of that in your testimony. My point is, once you knew you were running into problems, why didn't you come back to us? We heard it first by veterans and through the Army Times that you were having problems.
Keith Wilson: [Heavy, audible sigh] It has been our desire from the get-go to make sure that the subcommittee has been informed all along. If we did not meet those expectations, then we need to be held accountable for that. We provided information that we had at each of the hearings and we have had a long standing mechanism by which we have provided updates to staff on a regular basis. Uh we did notify the Subcommittee at the time of the hiring of the 230 additional people.
In that hearing, Stephanie Herseth repeatedly asked if he needed additional staff at the call center for educational benefits. She also underscored that "we need to be made aware of the problems immediately if there's any complications that arise" and "if you start anticipating problems or start experiencing problems" then let the Committee know. She wasn't alone in stating that. US House Rep John Adler also touched on this repeatedly such as asking Wilson "are there any other tools you need from Congress" and reminding him that "we would like to hear from you as needs arise, before the crisis arise" and "tell us what you need from us." Congress hasn't been informed of these problems and if the checks still aren't out, then obviously the VA needed additional staff. Obviously. Another VA witness lies to Congress (or doesn't know the status) and veterans are again waiting. And when does Congress intend to take the VA to task? This is nonsense. No veteran who enrolled for the fall 09 semester should still be waiting for the monies owed to them from the new GI Bill. That is ridiculous, that is insulting and until Congress gets ready to hold the VA accountable, there won't be any improvement.
The next hearing on this issue should get to when a problem was known and why Congress was not immediately notified. The next hearing should probe whether a decision was made to keep Congress out of the loop. Congress is supposed to offer supervision and thus far the VA has thwarted that by repeatedly providing the Congress with false information -- and a good portion of the false information was provided intentionally.
It is outrageous that as so many use tomorrow to celebrate with families or reflect, veterans continue waiting for fall '09 checks. It is outrageous that the New Year will begin with these veterans still waiting. If the Congress doesn't pursue this and do so strongly, then their behavior will be outragoues. Right now, it's just sad.
In other news, Black Agenda Report is not on 'holiday' this week (many sites are). Among their new offerings is a commentary by Glen Ford (link is text and audio) which includes):
It is now beyond question that civilian military contractors -- mercenaries -- are permanently embedded in the structure and longterm planning of the United States Armed Forces. In recent years, about half the U.S. personnel in the combined South Asia theaters of war -- Afghanistan and Pakistan -- have been civilians, according to Pentagon figures. The one-to-one ratio of military to civilians -- a percentage that would have been unthinkable prior to the invasion of Iraq -- may become even more lopsidedly mercenary with President Obama's troop escalation in Afghanistan. The Congressional Research Service estimates that as many as 56,000 civilian contractors may accompany the 30,000 uniformed troops scheduled for deployment to Afghanistan. That's a ratio of almost two-to-one civilian to military. The Afghanistan/Pakistan theater has become the modern world's first large scale corporate/civilian war.
In an update to that, Walter Pincus (Washington Post) reports on a new proposal by the Dept of Defense to replace contractors with "full-time federal personnel" as a cost-cutting measure. The only thing to add to his article is that such a shift would carry with it the belief (right or wrong) that accountability would be easier since these would be government employees with codes of conduct.
Turning to England, the Iraq Inquiry concluded public hearings for the year December 17th. They resume public hearings January 5th. In the new year, they will hear from former prime minister Tony Blair and current prime minister Gordon Brown. Helene Mulholland (Guardian) reports that the latter "has been called to give evidence to the Iraqi Inquiry" as have David Miliband (disclosure, I know Miliband) and Douglas Alexander, but all will testify after England's upcoming elections. Mulholland also notes: "Alastair Campbell, Tony Blair's former chief spin doctor, is included on the list alongside the former prime minister hemself, who recently caused controversy by telling the BBC he would still have thought it right to remove Saddam Hussein if he had known he had no weapons of mass destruction." In addition, Miranda Richardson (Sky News) adds, "Lord Goldsmith, the former Attorney General whose advice on the legality of the 2003 invasion has been at the centre of controversy, will give evidence in January or February." Yesterday the Liberal Democrats released the following statement:

"Gordon Brown signed the cheques for the Iraq war, and he should explain that decision before polling day," said the Liberal Democrat Shadow Foreign Secretary.

Commenting on today's statement from Sir John Chilcott which reveals that Gordon Brown, David Miliband and Douglas Alexander will not appear before the Iraq inquiry until after the election, Edward Davey said:
"Giving special treatment to Labour ministers not only undermines the perception of independence of the inquiry but will damage the public's trust in politics further still.
"This looks like a deal cooked up in Whitehall corridors to save Gordon Brown and his ministers from facing the music.
"Gordon Brown signed the cheques for the Iraq war, and he should explain that decision before polling day.
"British soldiers will not be impressed by a Prime Minister unwilling to step into the firing line."
William Hague has accused Gordon Brown of "the very opposite of open and accountable government" after it emerged that he will not give evidence to the Iraq Inquiry until after the General Election.
The Shadow Foreign Secretary said that the public will rightly ask why it is that numerous officials have given evidence to the Inquiry about their role in carrying out the Government's policy on Iraq, but not a single Minister has had to face questioning.
William said that it was becoming "clearer and clearer" why Gordon Brown delayed setting up the Inquiry for so long after it should have begun its work, and he added:
"His intention throughout has been to ensure that the Inquiry won't report until after the coming General Election -- and now we have the added effect of Ministers not having to give evidence at all before the election."
That the political establishment in Britain and the US have no interest in conducting an honest inquiry into the war is not surprising, given its legacy. Iraq is a fractured country with a wrecked economy and simmering sectarian and ethnic tensions that threaten to engulf society in violence.
George Bush and Tony Blair's war, supported by the Tories and the rest of the political establishment in Britain, is the cause of this.
When the allied occupation - "Operation Iraqi Freedom" - began, Iraq was thrown into chaos. Widespread looting broke out and millions of Iraqis were cut off from electricity and water supplies. But the main priority for the occupying forces was not to prevent Iraq's social collapse but to secure oil fields and ministries.
US and UK multinationals immediately began a lucrative contract carve-up of the Iraqi oil industry, and the supplies of arms and military equipment - the least priority being rebuilding the shattered infrastructure and supplying the Iraqi people with essential services.
For the US capitalist class "regime change" in Iraq meant unchallenged control and profits from an abundant oil supply.
Oil wasn't the only reason for going to war. The war was part of a wider agenda of strengthening US imperialism's prestige - a message to third world leaders and imperialist rivals that any opposition to US hegemony would not be tolerated.
This inquiry will be used as a PR tool by the political establishment to attempt to appear to be listening to the public, particularly those directly affected, such as military families.
But in the eyes of millions who opposed the Iraq war and continue oppose the war in Afghanistan, they are guilty and should be tried as war criminals.
We need 'regime change' of the rotten political establishment in Britain, who conducted the war on behalf of big business and imperialism, by building a mass socialist opposition.
Francis Elliott (Times of London) reports, "But the evidence of Mr Brown, Mr Miliband and Mr Alexander will be saved until the inquiry resumes its public sessions next summer, after the election." Michael Savage (Independent of London) continues, "However, Jack Straw, who was the Foreign Secretary at the time of the Iraq invasion and remains in the Cabinet, will be questioned before the election. Tony Blair, the former Prime Minister, Alastair Campbell, his former spokesman, and Jonathan Powell, Mr's Blair's former chief of staff, will also give evidence before the start of any election campaign." Olivia Midgley (Spenborough Guardian) reports Pauline Hickey wants Blair to answer questions: "Her son, Christian, a sergeant with the 1st Battalion Coldstream Guards, was killed by a roadside bomb during a foot patrol in Basra - just three days before he was due to return home, in 2005." Meanwhile Joe Murphy (London Standard) reveals, "A letter by Jack Straw asking Tony Blair to consider alternatives to invading Iraq is set to be revealed at the official war inquiry." Dmitry Babich (Russia's RIA Novosti via the Telegraph of London) reports that M16 head John Sawers is insisting that Russia -- by refusing to go along with sanctions as a member of the UN Security Council -- forced England into the Iraq War but that Andrew Billigan's response is, "I would say to John Sawers: 'Nice try.' but I don't think there is any truth in what he said at all."
Today, Chrismas Eve, Free Speech Radio News examines the costs to Iraqis of the Iraq War in a special half-hour broadcast:

Iraqis make up the world's largest population of refugees. The 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq released a wave of violence and economic instability and brought with it the destruction of key infrastructure and the near-collapse of basic services. More than 2.7 million Iraqis have been displaced within their borders and another two million have fled their country, largely to Syria and Jordan. Today we bring you a special FSRN documentary called, "Guests in the Waiting Room: Iraqi refugees in Jordan," produced by Hanan Tabbara and Salam Talib.
Next snapshot, which will probably be Monday, will note this article by David Price. Closing with this from Sherwood Ross' "Federal War Spending Exceeds State Government Outlaws" (Veterans Today):

The U.S. spends more for war annually than all state governments combined spend for the health, education, welfare, and safety of 308 million Americans.
Joseph Henchman, director of state projects for the Tax Foundation of Washington, D.C., says the states collected a total of $781 billion in taxes in 2008.
For a rough comparison, according to Wikipedia data, the total budget for defense in fiscal year 2010 will be at least $880 billion and could possibly top $1 trillion. That's more than all the state governments collect.
Henchman says all American local governments combined (cities, counties, etc.) collect about $500 billion in taxes. Add that to total state tax take and you get over $1.3 trillion. This means Uncle Sam's Pentagon is sopping up nearly as much money as all state, county, city, and other governmental units spend to run the country.
If the Pentagon figure of $1 trillion is somewhat less than all other taxing authorities, keep in mind the FBI, the various intelligence agencies, the VA, the National Institutes of Health (biological warfare) are also spending on war-related activities.
A question that describes the above and answers itself is: In what area can the Federal government operate where states and cities cannot tread? The answer is: foreign affairs---raising armies, fighting wars, conducting diplomacy, etc. And so Uncle Sam keeps enlarging this area. His emphasis is not on diplomacy, either.
Posted by at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)