Vlahos

Hump day, hump day. And I'm hungry. I think I'm going to fix an omlette. We already ate dinner and I'm just still hungry. We had fish, shrimp, hush puppies, french fries and salad.

This is from Kelley B. Vlahos' latest column at Antiwar.com:

Up until now, the neoconservatives within the national security establishment had been almost demure and decorous, content like cats to paw at the growing number of “isolationists” among the GOP coming out against the U.S. intervention in Libya and for a more rapid withdrawal of forces from Afghanistan.

But when President Obama announced his plan last week to bring home the 33,000 so-called surge troops by the summer of 2012, the sniping quickly turned into the kind of vanguard attack we’re more accustomed to. The neoconservative wing of the Republican Party—a stalwart civilian proxy of the military in Washington—will not relinquish its 10-year grip on the national security agenda willingly, and if you listen carefully, you’ll hear the scribbling of what will likely become the script for attacking Obama and any disobliging GOP contenders on foreign policy from here through the 2012 elections.

It’s not terribly original but it needn’t be—the meme has worked before: Obama is “pulling the rug” out from under “his commanders on the ground,” mainly Gen. David Petraeus, who has worked so bravely, so selflessly to turn things around in Afghanistan. Now, because of political considerations, Obama will put his re-election before victory. If that isn’t enough—the Afghan people will feel betrayed, and no doubt turn against International Security Assistance Forces (ISAF) in the field, while the Taliban will take our “arbitrary date” for withdrawal and wait it out, before laying waste to all of Petraeus’ hard-fought gains.

Barack is so full of it. If Vlahos is right about how it's going to go down ("Poor Petraeus betrayed by Barry"), I say good. Good, let the little princess fall out of favor.

I really am sick of Barack. I'm sick of his refusal to focus on the economy. I'm sick of his endless wars. I'm sick of his lying and war mongering.

I wish it were already 2012 but it's better this way. It means there's even more time for him to have the air let out of his sails.


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

Wednesday, June 29, 2011. Chaos and violence continue, talk of Iraq developing a Sunni region is shot down, officials are repeatedly targeted in today's violence, Iraq is discussed in the US at a Senate Subcommittee, and more. Starting with this on veterans employment from Senator Patty Murray's office: Chairman Murray Applauds Committee Passage of Landmark Veterans Employment Legislation Having unanimously passed the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee, the bill will now go to the full Senate for consideration Watch Senator Murray discuss this important bill. (Washington, D.C.) -- Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Chairman of the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee, applauded the unanimous passage of her landmark veterans employment bill, the Hiring Heroes Act of 2011 (S. 951) through the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs. Chairman Murray's bill is the first of its kind to require broad job skills training for all service members returning home and comes at a time when more than one in four veterans aged 20-24 are unemployed. In addition to providing new job skills training to all service members, the bill will also create new direct federal hiring authority so that more service members have jobs waiting for them the day they leave the military, and will improve veteran mentorship programs in the working world. Having unanimously passed the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, the bill will now go to the full Senate for consideration. Read Senator Murray's statement about the passage below: "With today's passage, this critical legislation moves one step closer to providing veterans with the broad job skills training and support they need to break down barriers to employment. For the first time, this comprehensive bill will require service members to learn how to translate the skills they learned in the military into the working world. It will also ensure that more veterans have jobs waiting for them when they leave the military by streamlining the path to private and federal employment. "Our veterans sacrificed greatly to fight for our freedoms and they shouldn't have to fight for jobs when they return home. I'm hopeful that this legislation will quickly make its way before the full Senate, and I look forward to fighting for it when it does." Senator Murray has long championed veterans and her bill should be passed quickly by the full Senate. Turning now to the wars that produce the veterans (the wars also produce the fallen). On this week's Black Agenda Radio (first aired on the Progressive Radio Network, Monday at 4:00 pm EST), hosts Glen Ford and Nellie Baily played a section of former US House Rep Cynthia McKinney's speech on the Libyan War. Cynthia McKinney: Congress must exercise its authority and reign in this president. [Applause.] If this president proceeds -- now we already know that this president is guilty of committing war crimes. [Applause.] We know that. Now if having oral sex is an impeachable crime certainly war crimes and crimes against humanity are also impeachable crimes. [Applause.] Ignoring the War Powers Act and the Constitution is an impeachable crime. If President Obama refuses to heed public opinion in the United States -- 60% of which is against the involvement against Libya -- if he is determined to violate the Constitution and violate the War Powers Act and defy Congress, I'm hoping that we will bring enough pressure to bear on our members of Congress that they will follow the House and, in the Senate, also vote to cut off the funding for this NATO operation. [Applause.] Because of what NATO is doing in Libya, what we're seeing is the Israel-ization of NATO policy against the people of Libya. Whether it's collective punishment -- NATO now is refusing to allow food, fuel and medicine to come in as they bomb people and hurt people, NATO is refusing to allow Libya to import the necessary medicine. That too is against international law. That makes our president's actions also criminal in the collective punishment that is being visited on the Libyan people. They can't even fish in their own territorial waters because NATO is stopping that. Sounds a lot like Gaza, doesn't it? The Libyan War was also addressed this week on Law and Disorder Radio (began broadcasting at 9:00 am EST on WBAI and around the country throughout the week). Attorneys and hosts Heidi Boghosian, Michael S. Smith and Michael Ratner (Center for Constitutional Rights) discussed Libya and other topics during the opening of the show. And, FYI, Michael Ratner and Margaret Ratner Kunstler are the authors of the new book Hell No, Your Right To Dissent. Also Michael Ratner and Heidi Boghosian read from the column that Michael Ratner and Margaret Ratner Kunstler have written (The Progressive) about the current war on protest and dissent in the US. Excerpt: Michael S. Smith: Michael, Heidi, there's been a lot of ink spilled over Obama overstepping legal authority with the war in Libya. And Michael, you've litigated this question on the War Powers Act. What's your take on it? Michael Ratner: We should first say that, as hosts, we're against this war to begin with, apart from the legality, that this is just another US imperialistic war in the Middle East. I mean, whatever we think about that. But, in addition, what's come out lately is that it's flatly illegal and the administration is fighting an illegal war. I wrote an op-ed on this way back at the end of March that this was an unconstitutional war because it was attacking another country and under the Constitution you have to get the consent of Congress. He didn't. Since then, of course, the War Powers Resolution has clicked in. That's the resolution that was passed in the wake of the Vietnam War. And it was passed for a particular reason: Congress was afraid that presidents would continue to go to war without their consent and so they built an automatic trigger into the War Powers Resoultion saying that 60 days after the president initiated a war, for whatever reason, whatever basis, if it didn't have explicit Congressional consent, the troops had to automatically be withdrawn. I say that again: automatically be withdrawn within 30 days after the 60-day time clock expires. So that's 90 days. There shouldn't be any attack on Libya going on that the United States is involved in at all -- not involved in coordination, not involved in helping with the radar, not involved in helping send its own missiles -- which it's still doing, not involved in bombing -- which it's still doing. So the 90 days are over. The war started over 90 days ago. And there's now been a big debate in the administration with Obama saying, 'I'm not violating the War Powers Resolution. There's no hostilities. We haven't entered into hostilities.' I mean, it doesn't pass the straight-face test. I mean, it's ridiculous. It's a total lie. And what's sad about it, of course, is that he got advice from the administration official lawyers at the Office of Legal Counsel -- Michael S. Smith: And the Pentagon. Michael Ratner: And the Pentagon which -- the OLC actually is authoritative on the law with the president. Yes, he can override it, but it's authoritative. Very rarely over-ridden. Then he went to some other people at the State Dept and elsewhere -- including Harold Koh -- who I used to work with very closely. And they give him the opposite opinion. They said, 'Oh, no. There's no violation of the War Powers Resoultion here.' And Obama, to the American people, with a straight face, has the nerve to say, "We're not violating the War Powers Resolution." So now you see them scrambling around in Congress -- you know, [Dennis] Kuccinich and some Republicans -- saying 'let's cut off all the funding for this war.' They never actually funded the war. That's another interesting point. Obama took the money from some raw defense dept budget. He didn't even use specific funding for the war. Michael S. Smith: That's utterly unconstitutional. The Constitution [says the Congress] is supposed to have the power of purse and since war is so important they're supposed to fund them or not fund them. Michael Ratner: Right and I was asked this morning, about how do you compare Obama and Bush on the war? Well whatever you thought of the resolution authorizing -- 'authorizing' -- the war in Afghanistan or the war in Iraq, there was at least resolutions. I mean there isn't one for Libya. And now you see the great scene is to see [John] Kerry, our former presidential candidate who, you'll recall, when he ran for president saluted the Democratic Convention saying, "Reporting for duty" to show that even though he was against the Vietnam War after the fact, that he was still a figher. Well he proved he's still a fighter. He's now joined by [John] McCain at the hip to say, 'Now let's pass a resolution authorizing the war.' So here you go, the president does an unconstitutional war, he violates the War Powers Resolution and then, of course, exactly what the problem was in Vietnam, you're seeing with a war going on, Congress is saying, 'Well we can't abandon our troops in the field, we can't abandon our troops in the air, our credibility is at stake if we abandon NATO. The same BS we've heard forever. So underneath it, and it's the only analysis that counts, is this is one of a half-dozen imperial wars the US is fighting. And, as someone once said to me, "If you only have a hammer, everything looks like a nail." In the US, the world looks like a bunch of nails that it can just hit around when it gets into a problem. Michael S. Smith: I think the other point is whether it's Bush or whether it's Obama, whether it's a Republican, whether it's a Democrat, that certain necessities of empire that these guys follow regardless of what party they're in or what promises they make when they're running for office. Michael Ratner: I think that's right. I mean, you always tell me about there's two capitalist parties -- Michael S. Smith: One party with two wings. Michael Ratner: Right, so this is, you know, we have one War Party really, the question is are there even two wings? We'll stop there but I do love what Ratner says next. From the illegal Libyan War to the never-ending Afghanistan War, Bill Van Auken (WSWS) observes Barack and Richard Nixon: In our response to the Obama speech, the World Socialist Web Site stated: "The plan announced by Obama will spell an escalation rather than a reduction in the bloodshed in Afghanistan. The aim is to carry out a military offensive over this summer and the next in an attempt to militarily crush the popular opposition to US occupation. To the extent that the withdrawal affects firepower available to US commanders, it will inevitably lead to the use of more air strikes and drone missile attacks and, as a result, an even greater number of civilian casualties." The opinion piece drafted by Rose provides added confirmation to this assessment. Both the author of this piece and the publication that he edits are worth examining. Foreign Affairs, the organ of the Council on Foreign Relations, has long served as a public forum for debating foreign policy issues within the US political establishment. It is the same magazine where Henry Kissinger, then a private citizen, first advanced views on Vietnam that would subsequently be embraced by Nixon after his 1969 inauguration. As for Rose, he is described by the magazine as an expert on international conflict, terrorism and economic sanctions. He was a Middle East advisor on the National Security Council during the Clinton administration, helping craft the sanctions regime against Iraq estimated to have claimed the lives of over half a million Iraqi children. And if Barack's Tricky Dick, Tom Hayden's Rose Mary Woods because his revisionary and 'creative' interpretation of Barack's speech creates its own highly edited response and we long to see him demonstrate the Rose Mary Wood stretch. David Walsh (WSWS) observes, "Hayden makes entirely unwarranted claims about the so-called withdrawal plan and then attributes the 'de-escalation' to pressure from a 'peace movement' that is largely the product of his imagination." Ivan Eland (Antiwar.com) also sees Richard Nixon when he looks at Barack: Richard Nixon faced the same dilemma presiding over the lost Vietnam War. In 1971, he wanted to withdraw U.S. forces from South Vietnam until Henry Kissinger reminded him that the place would likely fall apart in 1972, the year Nixon was up for reelection. To avoid this scenario, Nixon unconscionably delayed a peace settlement until 1973, thus trading more wasted American lives for his reelection. Obama appears to be up to the same thing. A phased withdrawal of 33,000 U.S. troops before the election will push back at Republican candidates' demands for more rapid withdrawal and signal to the conflict-fatigued American public that he is solving the problem, while leaving 70,000 forces to make sure the country doesn't collapse before that election. Again, American lives will be needlessly lost so that a slick politician can look his best at election time. WTVB reports on a new report from Brown University on the financial costs of the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars and the drone war in Pakistan which finds that $2.3 trillion dollars have already been spent in the last ten years on these wars. Reuters explains that the three wars have resulted in "between 224,475 and 257,655 deaths." Alex Sundby (CBS News) adds, "However, one of the project's co-directors told Reuters that the Pentagon's tally of troops who died from the wars should include those who come home and commit suicide or die in car accidents." And Tim Mak (POLITICO) offers that "the report asserts that conflict in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan will continue through the decade, adding to both financial and human costs." John Glaser (Antiwar.com) provides another aspect of these costs, the return: It's also worth contemplating what the return on the investment was. It has been helpful to the expansion of the American Empire and has put dough in the pockets of the military industry, but the notion that Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan are more stable countries than they were ten years ago is almost laughable. Iraq's "government, economy, legal systems, and basic services like electricity and water remain unstable," corruption is widespread, sectarian and insurgency-based violence is again on the rise, and governance there is slipping towards dictatorship with the Maliki government harassing media outlets who speak ill of him, harsh repression and crackdowns of Arab Spring protesters, and a closed political system. Afghanistan is in ruins: it is one of the poorest, most corrupt nations in the world, nation building efforts are failing, violence and civilian deaths keep hitting record-setting highs, and the U.S. is in an unending and dangerous quagmire there. Pakistan is increasingly unstable with rife poverty and corruption, pockets of extremists in the autonomous tribal regions are very strong, well over 1,000 civilians, and possibly a few thousand have been killed by Predator drones, and the dictatorial government relies on U.S. aid in the billions to even function at all. With those kind of numbers, you might think people would be wisely pulling up and pulling out of these costly and deadly wars; however, Xinhua (link has text and audio) reports 55 soldiers from Fiji are being deployed to Iraq, increasing their total number in Iraq to 278. The Fiji Times cites a statement from the Ministry of Information stating that the deployment was made at the request of the United Nations. Eight years after the start of the illegal war and the installation of exiles into a puppet government in occupied Iraq, there's little that can pass for 'progress' and "political stagnation" has become the watchword. Will US troops remain in Iraq? The issue, Al Mada reports, is little more than a "political pressure card" within Iraq used by various blocs in various ways. A political scientist at Baghdad University tells Al Mada that he fears that politicians are not factoring in what's best for Iraq but how to posture on the issue. Aswat al-Iraq adds that US Ambassador to Iraq James Jeffrey and Iraqi President Jalal Talabani met and Talabani's office issued a statement which includes: "The bilateral relations between the Republic of Iraq and the United States were discussed in the meeting, and necessity for their expansion and development, especially the bilateral future cooperation, within the Strategic Agreement, concluded between the two friendly countries." What the White House wants is an extension of the SOFA or a new agreement which would allow US troops to stay on the ground in Iraq beyond 2011 and under the US Defense Dept. If that is not possible, the plan is to take the troops remaining in Iraq and slide them under the umbrella of the US State Dept in which case their presence is covered under the Strategic Framework Agreement of 2008. Ed O'Keefe does the "Federal Eye" beat for the Washington Post. For the next several weeks, he is in Iraq. This morning, he Tweeted: edatpost edatpost Security for U.S. diplomats in Iraq still not ready, report says: BAGHDAD — The agency responsible for protecti... http://wapo.st/mu2vVG 9 hours ago In his article on this issue he explained that the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, in a GAO Office report, "acknowledged it is not designed to assume the military's mission in Iraq and will have to rely on its own resources and the assistance of the host country to protect the U.S. mission in the absence of the funding, personnel, equipment, and protection formerly provided by the U.S. military." He was referring to the report entitled [PDF format warning] "Expanded Missions and Inadequate Facilities Pose Critical Challenges to Training Efforts." The report stood as prepared remarks by GAO's Jess Ford as he appeared this afternoon before the Senate's Homeland Security Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, Federal Workforce and DC. Senator Daniel Akaka is the Subcomittee Chair. He noted, "This Subcommittee held a hearing in 2009 to examine staffing and management challenges at the State Dept's Diplomatic Security Bureau which protects State Dept employees and property worldwide. Today's hearing will build on the previous hearing, as well as examine the results of a Government Accountability Office (GAO) review of Diplomatic Security training challenges." There were two panels. Ford was on the first panel with the State Dept's Eric J. Boswell. The second panel was Susan R. Johnson of the American Foreign Service Association. We'll excerpt this from the first panel. Subcommittee Chair Daniel Akaka: My question to you, what planning is underway to make sure DS [State Dept's Diplomatic Security] will be able to be prepared to protect diplomats and US civilian personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan as the military withdraws? Ambassador Eric Boswell: Mr. Chairman, thank you for that question. We are engaged -- we the Dept of State and DS -- are engaged in a marathon of planning. I think that's the right way to describe it. It's probably -- The planning for the transition in Iraq is probably the most complex planning effort ever undertaken by the State Dept and perhaps one of the most complicated civilian planning efforts ever undertaken by the US government. We've been working on it for years. We think we have a very good planning strategy and we think we have a good plan and the short answer to your question, sir, is that I think that we will be able to be in a position to provide the security for our people in Iraq after December 31st of this year when all US troops will be gone from the country. Having said that, as I said, it's a very, very complex and difficult task. We are going to be dramatically increasing the number of security personnel at post in Iraq. And we will be increasing also the use of contractors in part for some of the things you mentioned and Mr. Ford mentioned, certain functions and activities that are not mainstream State Dept functions and were we are taking over functions now provided by the US military. We think we've got the structure in place to do it. I'l -- I-I-I should make the point that combat operations in Iraq ceased over a year ago, US military combat operations in Iraq ceased over a year ago. We have been providing security to our very large US embassy in Baghdad for over a year without any assistance from the military beyond certain very specialized funtions and we expect to be able to continue to do so. You asked about Afghanistan also, sir. Obviously, we are not there yet, there is not a transition yet. The president has just announced the beginning of a drawdown in Afghanistan but I can assure you that we have learned a lot in the planning process for Iraq and we will apply those lessons in Afghanistan. Subcommittee Chair Daniel Akaka: Thank you. Ambassador, as the military withdraws from Iraq and Afghanistan -- later Afghanistan -- DS will provide certain security and protective services that the military is performing now such as downed aircraft recovery and explosive ordinance disposal; however, the military provides many services such as intelligence collection and providing a visible deterrence in ways that DS cannot. How will the loss of these important capabilities effect the way DS provides security in Iraq and Afghanistan? And is DS equipped to handle all of the functions it will be asked to assume? Ambassador Eric Boswell: Uhm, senator, Mr. Chairman, I was in Iraq several years ago and the security situation in Iraq now, I think it's fair to say, is infinitely better then it was at the worst of times: 2005 to 2007. You are right, sir, in saying that certain key functions of the US military will be absent. They can't be replaced by DS -- notably, uh -uh, counter-rocket fire. We are not an offensive unit in DS. Some intelligence functions as well. We are going -- As Iraq normalizes as a nation, we are going to rely as we do in most countries on the Iraqi forces and the Iraqi police for these functions to the maximum extent that we can. Subcommittee Chair Daniel Akaka: Well, Mr. Ford, in 2009, GAO recommended that State conduct a security review of diplomatic security's mission, budget and personnel as part of State's Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review. While State agreed with the recommendation, the QDDR did not include this strategic review. Will you please discuss how inadequate the stategic planning may effect DS operations? Jess Ford: Uh, yeah, Mr. Chairman, let me respond to that. First of all, I can say that we were disappointed that the QDDR did not take a more strategic look at DS operations. Our 2009 report suggested that DS has been required to expand a number of missions that it's asked to support by the Dept overall and that they're often put into what I would characterize as a reactionary posture which we don't think is good from a planning point of view and our goal of that 2009 was that the Dept would take a longer look at DS and come up with a more strategic way of asessing needs, resources and requirements. I think I can say that our current report which is focused on the training parts of DS suggests that there still seems in my mind to be a gap here. Asked about the use of security contractors, Boswell insisted this was a must, that multiple studies demonstrated this and he cited his 2007 visit as somehow proof. He then suggested that at some point, as Iraq becomes more 'stable,' they might be able to replace the foreign security contractors with "nationals" (Iraqis) and stated that they currently use "nationals" in Erbil. He also claimed "about eighty" DS employees would be providing contract oversight to ensure that contractors were behaving properly (in his opening remarks, Subcommittee Chair Daniel Akaka noted the Nassar Square slaughter in September 2007 by Blackwater mercenaries guarding the State Dept). He noted there were two kinds of security contractors: contract guards and the bodyguards -- contract guards = static guards; bodyguards = protective security details, "the movement people who travel in the motorcades and who run the motorcades." Meanwhile Iraq has a Kurdish region, some want it to now have a Sunni region. And, no, we're not talking about US Vice President Joe Biden. (Biden favored a federation system for Iraq made up of a Shi'ite region, a Sunni region and a Kurdish region.) Al Mada reports that while Osama al-Nujaifi (Speaker of Parliament) has long supported (that's their call, I have no idea whether he's long supporter it or not) a centralized Iraq, he's now begun talking about a Sunni region. The Secretary-General of the Justice and Reform Movement, Abdul Hamidi al-Yawar, finds the idea distressing and claims it will add to the tensions. Aswat al-Iraq quotes Hussein al-Muayad stating, "The Iraqi people, with all their fraternal components, strongly reject any step to ignore the national principles, mainly the unity of Iraq. Sunnis in Iraq understand well that their real and active existence can't be achieved through projects of secession and division, but through cohesion towards Iraq's unity." Alsumaria TV carries the response from Iraqiya: "Al Iraqiya stands firmly against any attempt to strip down Iraq through despicable sectarian motives", Iraqiya official spokeswoman Maysoun Al Damlouji said in a statement which Alsumarianews obtained a copy of. "Marginalizing citizens is not restricted to a specified province. Bad services, unemployment and poverty affect all people while the only beneficiaries of Iraq's wealth are a group that does not represent a sect or a rite", she said. Aswat al-Iraq quotes the Iraqi Republican Gathering stating that this talk is "a dangerous turn that will open regional and international greed." Why might some feel the need for a Sunni region? They might be concerned, bothered or threatened by the new political landscape in Iraq. From Rawya Rageh's Al Jazeera report (video): Rawya Rageh: Sheikh Osama al-Tamimi recalls a time when he couldn't pray freely here. The Shi'ite cleric was imprisoned under Saddam for fourteen months for leading worshippers in this Baghdad shrine. But today the Sheikh calls the mosque named after a revered 8th Century Shi'ite figure has emerged into the light. He says thousands of visitors come here to pay their respect to an Imam whose life story exemplifies the suppression of Shia Islam with numbers swelling during an annual festival marking his death. Sheikh Osama al-Tamimi: We found the freedom to hold our religious rites and rituals and, year on year, there's more creativity and development in commemorating these religious occasions. Rawya Rageh: Scene like there would have ben unimaginable under Saddam Hussein. Iraq's Shia have been experiencing a renaissance that's enabled them to express their identity openly and proudly and has created a whole new political landscape. For the first time in modern history, Shia have come to power in an Arab country. Their various competing political parties have been predominantly shaping Iraqi politics differences between them at times advancing democracy, other times deadlock. Turning to today's violence, Reuters notes a military officer with the Ministry of Interior was left wounded in a Baghdad shooting, an employee of the Hajj Commission was injured in a Baghdad shooting, Lt Col Mohammed Abdul Ridha with the Ministry of Defense was injured in a Baghdad shooting, a Baghdad roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 police officer and left seven people injured, a Baghdad bombing injured two people and Ali al-Lami's brother Jamal Faisal was shot dead. In the US, an Iraq War veteran is facing legal trouble. 26-year-old Elisha Leo Dawkins, Susannah Nesmith (New York Times) reported last week, has been "in federal lockup" for a month with the government planning to deport him because of a passport application and his apparently not being a citizen. His attorney explains that Elisha was raised in this country and led to believe he was a citizen. He was never informed he wasn't. The US military considered him a US citizen and gave him a very high security clearance. The State Dept issued him a passport. Kyle Munzenrieder (Miami New Times) added, "Dawkins applied for a passport in order to serve in Guantánamo. A question on the form asked if he'd ever applied for a passport before. He checked no. That wasn't entirely true. He had begun an application for a passport before deploying to Iraq but never finished the process. That single check on a box is why he now sits behind bars." Carol Rosenberg (Miami Herald) explained, " His lawyer says he grew up fatherless and estranged from his mother, staying with relatives in Miami, believing he was a U.S. citizen. He even obtained a Florida Birth Certificate to get a passport to travel to war as a soldier, with neither the Navy, the Army nor the state of Florida apparently aware of a two-decade-old immigration service removal order issued when he was 8 years old." Today Susannah Nesmith (New York Times) reported that an offer was on the table: Elisha takes an offer of probation and completes the probation, he can then apply for citizenship. (A felony conviction would interfere with the citizenship process. Probation would allow him to avoid a felony conviction.) The judge, Judge Cecilia M. Altonaga, thinks it's a strong offer. Marc Caputo (Miami Herald -- link is text and video) reports US Senator Bill Nelson raised the issue on the Senate floor today and his remarks included: A federal indictment says the serviceman failed to acknowledge he'd once applied for a passport when filling out a new application - something prosceutors call passport fraud; something his public defender calls an innocent oversight. Mr. Dawkins now faces up to 10 years in prison, if he's convicted. All John Dillinger served in prison was 8 ½ years on a conviction for assault and battery with intent to rob and conspiracy to commit a felony. According to his lawyer, he came to this country from the Bahamas when he was just a kid. His mother brought him here. And he's still not a U.S. citizen.... Mr. President, some have wonder whether passage of the Dream Act might have prevented something like this from happening in the first place. That legislation would grant legal status to some undocumented young people who came to the U.S. as children and who join the military. Let's finally pass it. iraq wbai law and disorder radio michael s. smith heidi boghosian michael ratner glen ford black agenda report wsws bill van auken wtvb reuters xinhua the fiji times al mada aswat al-iraq alsumaria tv

They work together to harm us

Tuesday. Ugh.

John Kerry's tired ass gets on my nerves every day. He's too busy rescuing Barack to serve my state. Next go round, we're ditching his ass. Scott Wong (POLITICO) reports on Kerry's latest crazy:

A key Senate panel on Tuesday waded into the fight over President Barack Obama’s use of military force in Libya, overwhelmingly approving a resolution authorizing the mission just days after the House rejected a similar measure.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted 14-5 in favor of the legally binding resolution, which would expire after one year and bar the deployment of U.S. ground troops in the North African nation.

I have no respect for Kerry at all. He believes one thing when Bush is in the White House, he believes something else when Barack is in there. It's really too bad that John Kerry has neither a spine nor ethics.

You sort of get the reason why he and Edwards teamed up in the first place, don't you? They're both frauds.

So a bunch of fakes came together to provide cover for Barack the same way they're working together to destroy the social net. Joseph Kishore (WSWS) explains:

President Obama met Monday with Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in an effort to work out a bipartisan plan to cut trillions of dollars in social spending.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said after the meeting with Reid that “everybody believes a significant deal remains possible.” He added that Obama and the Democrats are pushing for a “balanced approach” to an agreement tied to the raising of the US debt ceiling. The US Treasury has said that the government will be unable to pay its bills after August 2 if the ceiling is not raised.

By “balanced” it is meant a deal that contains some token gestures—either the elimination of a few select corporate tax loopholes or minimal cuts in defense spending—that will give Democratic legislators political cover to vote for what all sides agree must involve major cuts in social spending.

Obama’s intervention comes after the well-orchestrated breakdown of talks involving Vice President Joseph Biden and a number of Republican and Democratic lawmakers. The group has reportedly reached agreement on at least $1 trillion in cuts, but talks stalled over a blanket rejection by the Republicans of any revenue measures, such as the elimination of certain corporate tax breaks. The Republicans are instead seeking even deeper cuts as well as a hard spending cap.

And they wonder why no one trusts Congress and why politics is held in such low esteem.

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

Tuesday, February 28, 2011. Chaos and violence continue, Sahwa and government officials remain targeted, political stagnation is the new term to describe the Iraqi government, the US Senate hears from Vice Adm William McRaven that US forces should stay in Iraq, CBS Evening News with Scott Pelley explores the subject of which families receive condolence letters and which ones don't when a loved one in the military dies, and more. This morning Gen James Thurman, Vice Adm Wililam McRaven and Lt Gen John Allen appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee regarding promotions. For example, McRaven is nominated to become Commander of United Nations Command/ Combined Forces Command/United States Forces Korea. The issue of Iraq came up at length twice. The first time was near the start of the hearing when Senator John McCain asked his questions. (As Ranking Member, McCain asked directly after Chair Carl Levin finished his questions.) Ranking Member John McCain: Adm McRaven, do you believe that the United States should have a residual force in Iraq in order to assist -- with particularly special operations, functions and intelligence? Vice Adm William McRaven: Sir, I think that it would be mutually beneficial to us and the Iraqis if in fact that was the case. Obviously, remains to be seen whether the Iraqis will want us to stay past the intended drawdown time. But clearly there is still a threat in Iraq. And a small, soft presence there I think would be advisable. Ranking Member John McCain: And if you look at recent US casulties, the situation -- at least in some respects -- politically as well as militarily has shown some deterioration. Would you agree? Vice Adm William McRaven: Sir, I would. Statistically that appears to be the case, yes, sir. The second time the issue arose was when Mark Udell felt the need to embrace, to wallow in counter-insurgency. Save the transcripts of his praise for the War Crimes Tribunal. It's really sad that (a) ethics are so unimportant in the Senate and (b) that with all that's going on in Iraq currently, anyone would think Iraq could be sold as a 'success.' Senator Mark Udell: Gen Allen, if I could turn to you. I know that you've had some Let me turn to the success that you had and we had in Anbar in Iraq. You reached out to a population that had been previously pretty hostile and then worked with them to turn their focus to al Qaeda and the elements of terrorism that had really created enormous chaos. In the process, the COIN doctrine was validated. I don't want to imply that the two countries are alike but could you talk about the primary lessons that we learned in Anbar and how we're going to apply those lessons in Afghanistan. Lt Gen John Allen: Senator, much of what was accomplished in the Anbar Province, needless to say, much of it was accomplished on the shoulders of the sacrficie of many soldiers and marines and sailors and Airmen. We honor that service and their sacrifice. And having accomplished that really remarkable outcome. But what was accomplished in the Anbar Province was really the result of a comprehensive civil-military counter-insurgnecy strategy. It was a strategy that leveraged every aspect of military capacity that could be brought to bear in the battle space -- civil affairs, conventional military capabilities, advisory capacity to build the Iraqi police, the Iraqi security forces. the two divisions of Iraqi infantry that we had, special operators who worked both as advisors and mentors but also euphemistically the term "black soft" the strike forces that would enter the battle space to attack the insurgent network. We pressurized the insurgent network constantly. And while we were pressurizing and shredding the insurgent network and blunting their capabilities with the use of conventional forces, we worked very, very hard to build the capacity of the Iraqi security forces -- both the army -- those two divisions -- and we went from about 4,000 police to almost 30,000 police in the year that we were there in '07 and '08. All of that was complimented with a comprehensive plan with respect to civilian outreach as well. USAID resourced 3 embedded PRTs and resourced our PRT -- our provincial PRT in Ramadi. And I believe that the wise outreach to the sheiks in the tribe. The wise expenditure of tax dollars with respect to both [. . .] In addition to testimony, Vice Adm Willam McRaven was given a take home test by the Senate Armed Services Committee entitled [PDF format warning] "Advance Policy Questions for Vice Admiral William H. McRaven, USN Nominee for Commander, United States Special Operations Command." Page 17 contains the Iraq questions and his replies. From your perspective as Commander, Joint Special Operations Command, what are the main "lessons learned" from Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation New Dawn? Both operations have provided us with many lessons learned which we have incorporated into our current operations. Some of these lessons include: the need for a unified U.S. government approach, active and integrated interagency coordination, the necessity for culturally attuned forces and the need to maximize combined operations. U.S. military and government efforts need to be synergized to provide a focused effort while reducing the likelihood of duplication and opposed efforts. Inter-agnecy integration is essential in our fight against violent extremism. Some of our greatest accomplishments would not have come to fruition without this coordinated effort. Our forces are now more culturally sensitive than ever before, greater language skills and incorporating female military personnel into our post operations activities have allowed out forces greater access and integration with the Iraqi and Afghan civilian populace. Lastly, we have maximized out combined operation efforts by working with and through the host nation forces. Every operation is coordinated with the Government of Iraq and Afghanistan and the Iraqi and Afghan Partnering Units. These combined operations are not only doing a tremendous job in accomplishing the mission but, also help enable and empower the Iraqi and Afghan special operations forces for future success. What's McRaven saying? Nothing really. He's using buzz words . . . from twenty years ago. He's demonstrating he can string together words . . . if not answer a question. The question was about Iraq and page 16 clearly indicates "IRAQ" And asked about "lessons learned'' in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation New Dawn (September 1, 2010, the Iraq War is renamed "Operation New Dawn" -- you're soaking in it -- by the White House), McRaven attempts to run to Afghanistan ("Both operations . . .") immediately indicating that he has little to offer on the topic of Iraq. Staying with the topic of US forces remaining in Iraq (under the umbrella of the Defense Dept), Al Jazeera reports today: "US troops are scheduled to withdraw completely from Iraq by year's end, though few observers expect they will fully meet that goal. Iraq, after all, has no viable air force; struggles to control its borders; and lacks sophisticated military intelligence and surveillance technology. So the Pentagon has long planned to leave a 'residual force', perhaps 10,000 to 12,000 troops, to perform those functions and to continue training Iraqi troops." Meanwhile using an unnamed source (presumably someone in Parliament or in the Cabinet), Al Mada reports that talks are ongoing between political blocs and US government representatives over US forces remaining in Iraq beyond 2011. The source states that there are the talks various blocs know of and that thee are also "secret talks" but insists that any deal reached will have to be approved by Parliament. Alsumaria TV reports, "A senior official from the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) led by President Jalal Talabani stressed on Sunday the necessity for US Forces to stay in Iraq beyond the end of 2011. Iraq is still an inconsistent State, he said noting that the majority of political parties approve the extension of US troops term in Iraq." In another article, Al Mada speaks with political scientist Hussein al-Shammari who worries that conflicts between Al Iraqiya (led by Ayad Allawi) and State of Law (led by Nouri al-Maliki) may lead to a bloody physical conflict. If you look at all the fears, the continued stalemate or the Iraqi military's lack of readiness, you really don't see the 'success' that Bush, Barack and various others have painted the war to be. Meanwhile (more success?) Aswat al-Iraq notes that Jalal Talabani (president of Iraq) and Iraqiya's Saleh Mutlaq met today to discuss "political stagnation" and how to overcome it. Al Jazeera provides a brief backstory on the conflict between Iraqiya and State Of Law: Maliki and Allawi agreed to set up a national strategy council as part of the power-sharing deal they reached in December. The council was meant to be a check on Maliki, who as prime minister enjoys wide authority over the Iraqi security forces. But the agreement left key details unresolved, namely, the exact powers and responsibilities of the council. Iraqiya signed the deal anyway; al-Maliki now claims that the council is unconstitutional; and without a concrete agreement, Iraqiya has found itself politically sidelined. "Iraqiya keeps asking for the implementation of 'balance' in the ministries of state, as well as the creation of a strategy policy council," Reidar Visser, a senior research fellow at the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs, said. "But if the details weren't hammered out at the time, Iraqiya's leverage is now greatly diminished." Moqtada al-Sadr's having to calm his 'followers' who are eager to assault those who did not take place in the government organized faux protests on the last Fridays which attacked the real protesters in Baghdad. This comes as the Washington Post's Tim Craig reports that Sunnis in Iraq discuss "death calendar" -- how, every 7th day or so, a Sunni male is being executed in a northern Baghdad neighborhood and they see this as an intentional scare tactic and message. Saban Alwan speaks of living in this neighborhood where the assailants don't even feel the need to use silencers on the fire arms when they kill Sunnis. Since March, envelopes have been left outside homes -- envelopes containing insults and bullets as a threat. AP notes "hundreds of thousands" are making the pilgrimage to the Kadhim shrine for Imam Moussa al-Kadhim and that some estimates put the number of visitors to the mosque at three million recently. Al Rafidayn adds that young children and all the way through the elderly are walking north of Baghdad on this annivesary of the Imam's death. He was persecuted, imprisoned and then poisoned, dying in 799 AD. The article notes that he was praying in the mosque when he was arrested (795 AD). The Great Iraqi Revolution notes, "Our Correspondent in Baghdad: Da'wa Party members taking advantage of the Anniversary of the death of the Imam Moussa Al Khadhim by carrying Maliki's pictures during the marches!" NTD television (link has text and video) quotes Kitab Shran stating, "The pilgrimage process is going well and the processions too, thank God. Police and army are at the service of the people and the pilgrims and the service is very good and beyond our expectations. The service is good and everything we need is available and if one has an emergency he will find assistance. Thank God, the pilgrimage is going smoothly and all the streets are open." Al Jazeera's Rawya Rageh shares these observations of the pilgrimage via her Twitter feed: RawyaRageh Rawya Rageh In prvs years Shia pilgrims visiting Imam Kadhim were targeted with bombs, mortars fell near shrine. #Iraq 5 hours ago » RawyaRageh Rawya Rageh I gotta say tho, officials put half the capital in shut-down mode, w vehicle ban in all Kadhimiya vicinity, sealing many n'hoods #Iraq 5 hours ago » RawyaRageh Rawya Rageh Not to jinx it: Shia pilgrimage to #Baghdad Imam Kadhim shrine concluding. No security incidents reported! Good news from #Iraq 5 hours ago Friday on The World (PRI), Jane Arraf offered a look at a Baghdad spot. Leo: (singing Jimmy Buffett's "Margaritaville") Nibble on sponge cake, watching the sun bake . . . Jane Arraf: That's Leo. Now during the day he teaches music but at night you can find him in what has become my favorite restaurant. And Leo plays music, the most amazing music with that fantastic accent you just heard. And we have to remember this is a country where Iraqis are pretty much divided over American soldiers, American culture. He says that one thing that pretty much all of them agree on are American movies and music. They love it. Leo: Two part of Iraqi people. One of them called them liberators, the other called them invadors. But most Iraqi people, as I saw in front of my eyes, like American culture. Leo: (singing the Bee Gee's "To Love Somebody") You don't know what it's like, you don't know what it's like, to love somebody Jane Arraf: I have to say that while Jimmy Buffett is a particular favorite of his, his real love is the Bee Gees. "Tragey," "Staying Alive" particularly suited to life in Iraq of course and this one. Leo: (singing) You don't know what it's like, you don't know, you don't know what it's like, To love somebody . . . Jane Arraf: It really is hard to describe how awful it was for Iraqis during the civil war when a lot of people basically just stayed home for those entire two, three years. And when the was on what they did when they were trapped in their homes was watch TV and like thousands of Iraqis, Leo is a huge fan of Dr. Phil. But his real love, his dream is to be on with Oprah. Leo: If I sit in with Oprah, I want to tell Oprah one thing is people are people Jane Arraf: Leo says one day he'd like to visit the United States again particularly, because of the songs, San Francisco and Boston. In the meantime though he sings about it Leo: (singing the Bee Gees "Massachusetts") I'm going back to Massachusetts, something's telling me . . . Staying on the cultural topic, Al-Mutanabbi Street in Baghdad was a cultural point for many years and remains so even now despite the bombings and other violence. (The area is known for its bookstores and even at the height of the ethnic cleansing, when the yearly book festivals take place, Iraqis turn out.) In San Francisco, poet Beau Beausoleil started to the Al-Mutanabbi Street Starts Here project to foster a sense of community with Iraq's lively and culturally rich Al-Muntanabbi Street. Sarah Browning (Foreign Policy In Focus) reports: Al-Mutanabbi Street Starts Here grew as printers and poets responded to the call to build solidarity with the people of Iraq and, at the same time, remind Americans of the great toll the war is taking on Iraqi society. "I have come to feel that wherever someone sits down to read, or where someone takes up their pen and paper to write, it is there that al-Mutanabbi Street starts," says Beausoleil. The broadsides now number 130, one for each person killed or maimed in the attack. An anthology will be published in 2012 by PM Press. The broadsides may present just a few words, such as "Books Not Bombs" by Nina Ardery of Carillion Press of Indianapolis, Indiana, in which the word BOMBS is slowly transformed into the word BOOKS. Or they may incorporate full poems by contemporary and historic poets writing in English or Arabic, poets such as Iraqis Buland al-Haydari and Saadi Yousef, Palestinian Americans Naomi Shihab Nye and Deema Shehabi, and Iranian Americans Persis Karim and Sholeh Wolpé. They are stark and bloody and beautiful, a great diversity of visual styles, and they can all be viewed on-line. Beausoleil explains: "Some broadsides are kind of subtle. Some are really anti-war. Some address the idea of censorship and the idea of attacking a street that sold books, a place where ideas were exchanged, and how no matter the devastation, whoever had done it could not erase what was there, ultimately." Turning to today's reported violence. Reuters notes a Baquba roadside bombing injured Baquba Mayor Abdulla al-Hayali and two bodyguards, an Abu Ghraib sticky bombing claimed the life of a Sahwa leader and 1 male corpse was discovered in Kirkuk. Aswat al-Iraq adds that Bayan Di'zai'i (former Minister of Reconstruction and Housing) was targeted today in Kirkuk when her convy was attacked and she was injured and "rushed to hospital, without any further details." AFP reports that US forces caught three Iraqis -- Mohammed Salim Lafta, Munif Hashim Shinawa and Saeed Ubayd Sabir -- "on a highway south of Baghdad" March 14th where they were suspected of placing a roadside bomb. Today the 3 appeared before court for approximately 2 hours before they were let go without being charges with any crime. The time limit and being unable to provide testimony has angered the US military whose spokesperson, Col. Reginal Allen, states, "We are deeply disappointed in the court's decision." Three US soldiers died in Iraq Sunday. L. Finch (Boston Globe) reports that one of the three is 22-year-old Sgt Matthew Gallagher who was on his deployment to Iraq and who was supposed to have a brief leave to return home next week for his 23rd birthday. James Ruggiero, Matthew Gallagher's step-father, states, "He loved the Army so much he was talking about reenlisting when the time was up." Sean Teehan (Cape Cod Times) adds a quote from Katie Gallagher, Matthew Gallagher's spouse, "He died a hero." In addition to his wife and his step-father, his survivors include his mother Cheryl Ruggiero and his biological father Peter Gallagher. His mother explains the military told her that he was doing "a house sweep" when he had been shot and she states, "I'm a gold star mother. But I'd give that gold star back if it could bring my baby back." WCVB offers a video report which includes Katie Gallger speaking of her late husband, "He's the most generous nice person that I've ever met in my life. He was everything to me. He was my best friend." Manny Gamallo (Tulsa World) reports 20-year-old Pfc Dylan Jeffrey Johnson was killed by "a grenade attack in Iraq on Sunday, his father said" in Jalula and that another soldier (a sergeant) was killed as well. Jeff Johnson says of his son, "He knew they were going to Iraq, but he didn't know when. He was really excited about going over there." The three deaths Sunday brought the number of US soldiers killed in Iraq this month to 12, with 11 of them dubbed combat deaths and 1 under investigation. Please note, if parents above are accurately remembering what they were told (and I'm sure they are), there are 12 combat deaths. The 1 under investigation is from Sunday and was a single soldier. Now we learn that soldier was shot dead while doing a house sweep? Unless it was by a fellow US soldier, that was combat or else there's another death that hasn't been acknowledged. This needs to be cleared up by the Pentagon and it needs to be cleared up very quickly. June 6th there was an attack that resulted in the deaths of 6 soldiers (5 died that day, one of the wounded died after he had a medical transport back to the US). One of the six who died June 6th was buried yesterday, 27-year-old Spc Micahel Cook Jr. CBS3 Sprinfield provides a video report which includes, "While family members of Cook declined to go on camera, they tell us Cook leaves behind his wife Samantha and two young children. Even though Cook is not from Pioneer Valley, family and friends say it's special for him to be buried with full military honors at the Massachusetts Veterans Cemetery in Agawam because his uncle, who also served in the military, is buried there as well." I'm going to go ahead and be rude here and not give a damn about it. It's your job to know what you're saying. If you're on camera or you're in print, it's your damn job. You need to learn to do it. CBS 3 wrongly states June 5th was the worst attack (based on US deaths) in Iraq in 2 years. No. That was the week of June 6th. Go back to June 12th here and you will find "Another US soldier dead from the Iraq War" and the Defense Dept annoucement: The Department of Defense announced today the death of a soldier who was supporting Operation New Dawn. Spc. Marcos A. Cintron, 32, of Orlando, Fla., died June 16 at a medical facility in Boston, Mass., of wounds suffered June 6 at Baghdad, Iraq, when insurgents attacked his unit with indirect fire. He was assigned to the 1st Battalion, 7th Field Artillery Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 1st Infantry Division, Fort Riley, Kan. For more information, the media may contact 1st Infantry Division public affairs office at 785-240-6359 or 785-307-0641. That took the number to six dead from that attack. June 12th. It's now June 28th. There's no excuse for not knowing about Marcos A. Cintron's death now. It's disrespectful to him and makes you look like a lazy ass when you can't get your facts straight. 6 US soldiers were killed in that attack, not 5. That is so disrespectful. It's not like DoD just announced the death yesterday. Nor is it like you're doing a podcast. You've got a whole newsroom behind you and you can't get your facts right. Here's DoD's June 9th release on the 5 who died on June 6th: DOD Identifies Army Casualties The Department of Defense announced today the deaths of five soldiers who were supporting Operation New Dawn. They died June 6 in Baghdad, Iraq, of wounds suffered when enemy forces attacked their unit with indirect fire. They were assigned to the1st Battalion, 7th Field Artillery Regiment, 2nd Heavy Brigade Combat Team, 1st Infantry Division, Fort Riley, Kan. Killed were: Spc. Emilio J. Campo Jr., 20, of Madelia, Minn.; Spc. Michael B. Cook Jr., 27, of Middletown, Ohio; Spc. Christopher B. Fishbeck, 24, of Victorville, Calif.; Spc. Robert P. Hartwick, 20, of Rockbridge, Ohio; and Pfc. Michael C. Olivieri, 26, Chicago, Ill. For more information, the media may contact the 1st Infantry Division public affairs office at 785-240-6359 or 785-307-0641. Here's George Graham (The Republican) writing about Cook in a story published yesterday at 5:00 pm, "U.S. Army Spc. Michael Benjamin Cook Jr., one of five soldiers killed in action in Iraq earlier this month, was laid to rest here Monday at the Massachusetts Veterans Memorial Cemetery." But, as we've established, he wasn't "one of five," he was one of six. Again, there's no excuse for this. I am appalled. Jake O'Donnell (Patch) notes, "During the funeral ceremony Cook was honored with several posthumous awards and medals, including the Bronze Star, the Purple Heart and the Good Conduct Medal. Cook has also been honored with the Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, the National Defense Service Medal, the Overseas Service Ribbon, the Iraqi Campaign Medal, the Combat Action Badge and the Army Service Ribbon." O'Donnell provides a photo essay of the service here. David Roback (The Republican) offers a photo essay here. There are two who were seriously wounded this month. There are probably more than that but they aren't getting noted by the Pentagon. One lost both his legs, a 28-year-old soldier. June 11th, Ryan E. Little (The Ledger) reported that Spc Charles Lemon has arrived back in the US early after surviving a bombing ("improvised explosive device in An Najaf") June 8th. Lemon has "lost both legs and suffered other injuries including burns to his body" according to his sister Kimberly Lemon. June 18th, Matthew Pleasant (The Ledger) reported on the event (Clicks For Charles) Brianna Towns was doing to raise funds for her cousing Charles' immediate family who were at Walter Reed with Charles Lemon and Pleasant noted, "On Tuesday, he was strong enough for doctors to remove him from life support, but he is still undergoing surgeries." Updates can be found at Charlie's Change for Change where secure donations can also be made. Judy Zavalla (Alvin Sun) reports Joseph L. Finney was injured in the June 6th attack. Zawalla notes of the father of three and husband of Heather Kinsey Finney, "He is doing better at this time. His brain has experienced trauma and he still has serious injuries to his right shoulder. The last report said the doctors were keeping him sedated to let the brain swelling subside. When he is awake, he will not rest because he is constantly texting his family to assure them he is alright." Yesterday on the CBS Evening News with Scott Pelley, Pelley (link has text and video) introduced Bill Whitaker's latest investigative report, "On any given day in this country, more than 75,000 military veterans are homeless. So we were shocked to discover what's become of land in southern California that's meant to house homeless veterans and once did." Whitaker's report reveals how the city of Los Angeles is misusing land that was given to the city for veterans housing and how the city can't explain why they've misused the land for over a century or where the money has gone that they've charged various companies they've rented it out to in that time. Today CBS Evening News with Scott Pelley (link has text and video) reported on military families whose loved ones take their own lives receive no letter of condolence from the president of the United States. Elaine Quijano reports on Gregg and Jannett Keesling whose 25-year-old son, Spc Chance Keesling, took his own life while serving his second deployment in Iraq. In addition, the president sends no condolence letters to those like Jessica Conckling's family whose loved one dies "in stateside training accidents." Sara Conkling tells Elaine Quijano, "She was willing to put her life on the line and she did lose her life doing it. But it doesn't count as much to them." Senator Patty Murray is Chair of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee. For some time she has been raising the issue of veterans employment -- young veterans of today's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan suffer from a very high unemployment rate -- as she's pointed out in hearings and in news conferences, many are worrying that listing their service is harming their employment chances. Tomorrow her Committee will address proposed legislation and her office notes: (Washington, D.C.) -- Tomorrow, Wednesday, June 29th, U.S. Senator Patty Murray, Chairman of the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee, will hold a hearing on pending legislation. During the hearing, the committee will vote on pending legislation. Included among the bills to be considered is Senator Murray's Hiring Heroes Act, a major veterans employment bill that make jobs skill training necessary for the separation of service members from the military and provides new pathways to federal and private sector employment. A full list of the bills the committee will vote on is available HERE. WHO: U.S. Senator Patty Murray, Chairman Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee WHAT: Markup on Pending Legislation WHEN: TOMORROW - Wednesday, June 29th, 2011 3:00 PM ET WHERE: Russell Senate Office Building Room 418 Washington, D.C. iraq al rafidayn al mada the register-guard stefan verbano the boston globe l finch the cape cod times sean teehan wcvb cbs3 the republican george graham patch jake odonell david roback jane arraf pri the world the ledger ryan e. little cbs evening news with scott pelley scott pelley bill whitaker al jazeera rawya rageh aswat al-iraq