Thursday, March 13, 2014

Kerry punks Congress


I'll have the snapshot in full at the end but thing is C.I. ends with reporting on a hearing today.  And I think it's the strongest part of the snapshot.  I think it contains needed information.  So I'm pulling that from the snapshot:


Secretary of State John Kerry appeared this morning before the House Appropriations State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs Subcommittee.  US House Rep Kay Granger is the Subcommittee Chair and US House Rep Nita Lowey is the Ranking Member.  Kerry was the only witness as he begged for money -- tax payer money.

The theme of the hearing was: Let's All Pretend Iraq Doesn't Exist.

I was tipped off to that theme last night by a State Dept friend when I noted I was going to have to be in two places at once -- the veterans hearing and the State Dept budget hearing.  "Iraq," I was told, "frankly doesn't matter to him [John Kerry] and he'll only bring it up if asked."

Looking at the roster of the Subcommittee members, it was obvious that Israel would be at least the first hour.  So I attended 90 minutes of the veterans hearing (while asking a friend at Kerry's hearing to text me if Iraq came up).

It did.  Briefly in Kerry's opening remarks:

We have kept our funding request in line with what was appropriated to the Department and USAID in Fiscal Year 2014 within our base request of 40.3 billion. And the additional part of our request for OCO, Overseas Contingency Operations, totals 5.9 billion. And with OCO funding, we support programs, as you know, in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, as we continue to right-size those commitments.

That one sentence was it for his opening remarks.

If you don't get how John Kerry ran from Iraq, notice what he had to say about the Syrian refugee crisis (and I'm using his prepared remarks that were marked up by my friend to note the changes between prepared and delivery):

For the Syrian people, for Lebanon, Turkey, for Jordan, coping with how to keep their societies running and keep extremists at bay while they host millions now of refugees, our support is critical to that. We’re the largest donor in the world. And that helps us, because it is critical to us that Lebanon and Jordan remain stable.

How do you talk about Syrian refugees and not note Iraq?

The only real mention of Iraq was from US House Rep Frank Wolf who kept mentioning the Iraq Study Group (which accomplished nothing, a fact Wolf misses) because he wants a Syrian Study Group and, get this, he wants US President Barack Obama to ask  Bully Boy Bush to head that Syrian Study Group.

US House Rep Barbara Lee doesn't give a damn about war these days.  Judging by her tired and expanding face, all she cares about is eating.  She didn't even note Ukraine.  I walked in when Barbara Fake Ass Lee was testifying (speechifying?  It wasn't questions).  I did a double take.  I don't know if she's had plastic surgery or if she had just pulled her hair back to harshly but her eye brows were up at least a half inch more than usual and it really did look like a botched face lift. If so, I'm glad she found a hobby to fill her time now that she no longer uses it to call out war.  And I'm especially glad she looks butt ugly.  In time, you do get the face you deserve and it's sitting on her neck right now.

Prior to my arrival, the topics were (going by the texts my friend sent me and his notes) Israel, Israel, Israel, that soda boycott (which Lowey did not support), Israel, Egypt, Egypt, Israel, Ukraine, Iran, Cuba, Israel, North Korea, Venezuela -- with the exception of Israel and Egypt it was basically war requests from members of the Subcommittee -- Democrats and Republicans -- to go to war on these countries.  Into that mix, Babsie Lee offered nothing on peace, just scratched herself a lot as she babbled on about Uganda (and it's LGBT issues). After I arrived?  War on Argentina because they don't fulfill their debts and even more nonsense, if you can believe it.  It's amazing how this Subcommittee thinks the answer to everyone of the petty grudges is to put US boots on the ground.

The US government does nothing to improve the lives of the Iraqi people -- despite the fact that billions of US tax dollars flow to Iraq for that supposed purpose.

So what does the State Dept work on?

They're lackeys for corporations.  The State Dept works on debt collection -- a fact John Kerry felt was worth bragging about.


Secretary of State John Kerry:  With our urging, Argentina has taken some positive steps.  In October they settled a long running investment dispute with three US companies and implemented -- in January of this year -- implemented an improved inflation index in order to address inefficiencies in its IMF reporting and so forth.  But we continue to urge them to fulfill their global, international responsibilities.

US House Rep Debbie Wasserman Schultz wants war on Venezuela and demonized their president right after Kerry said the Venezuelan government needed to stop demonizing people.  Debbie Washerwoman needs to learn to wash that ratty, oily hair.  It looks like the Exxon Valdez took a dump on her head.

Kerry pulled the little stunt he's so fond of doing since become Secretary of State -- a stunt he wouldn't have stood for as Chair of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee.

See, Secretary John is an 80s power woman in a Nolan Miller dress with bulky shoulder pads.  Secretary John is not just an 80s power woman, John's an 80s super woman, rushing here, there and everywhere.  It's like a bad movie and he really needs an overweight sidekick (Baraba Lee, you're being paged!) to pull it off his whole: I'm so busy, I can't stay for the full hearing, I'm just too important and too busy to appear before Congress for a full hearing.  In other words,  John looks like a real bitch when he pulls this.

What John forgets?


If you pretend you have to leave, then you leave.  You don't insist that everyone be quick and that you'll reply in writing because you're in such a rush and then go on to yack  for 7 minutes straight because you didn't like a statement a member of the Subcommittee made.  He didn't like the doubts about Barack's foreign policy or Iran and felt the need to bore everyone with just how yawning inducing he can be ". . . we're helping Tunisia, we're working on Libya, I just came from a conference on Libya . . ."

Pretending, in that bitchy manner, that your time's too valuable for Congress is misguided unless you're looking to add "Bitch" to your professional title.  But what's even worse is pretending you have to go and then refusing to stop speaking.

It was during this marathon jaw boning that Kerry brought up Iraq for the second time.

Secretary John Kerry:  We have inspectors -- not as frequently as the other two but sufficiently - in Iraq in the plutonium reactor.  They are not able to complete the plutonium reactor.

Well thank goodness for that.  They're not able to complete the plutonium reactor.

Except . . .

"They" isn't Iraq.

He said "Iraq."

He meant Iran.

He didn't want to talk about Iraq and a useless Subcommittee didn't want to either.

Iraq's all over the State Dept's FY2015 budget.  Let's note some of it.  For the "Overseas Contingency Operations funding," the report notes:


In Iraq, OCO funding of $501.4 million supports operational requirements, movement security, equipment and associated Operation and Maintenance, physical and technical security, static guards, and security operations in Basrah and Erbil. The request is $4.4 million above the FY 2014 level and funded through Worldwide Security Protection, consistent with FY 2014 Congressional action.


That's a half billion right there on Iraq.  Right there.

But the useless members of the Subcommittee wanted you to instead know that they pledge alliegence to the government of Israel, that they want war on Venezuela's democratically-elected government and that the grudge-fu**ing of Cuba will never, ever end as long as they draw breath.

A half billion's a lot.  It's not all.  I told another State Dept friend I was going to review the budget and he couldn't stop laughing.  It's a fudged budget and it doesn't even add up on paper.

What?  I was confused.

He flipped to a table in the back which notes $250 million is the amount being requested for "Foreign Military Financing" for Iraq.

I was confused still.  He flipped several pages and pointed this section out to me:


The FY 2015 Foreign Military Financing (FMF) Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) request of $537 million is for Iraq and Pakistan.

Pakistan ($280 million): Given the ongoing transition in Afghanistan and continued terrorist attacks against civilian and military targets throughout Pakistan, FMF is essential to Pakistan’s efforts to increase stability in its western border region and ensure overall stability within its own borders. The $280 million Pakistan request will enhance the Pakistan Army, Frontier Corps, Air Force, and Navy’s ability to conduct counterinsurgency (COIN) and counterterrorism (CT) operations against militants throughout its borders, especially in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, improve Pakistan’s ability to deter threats emanating from those areas, and encourage continued U.S.-Pakistan military-to-military engagement. FMF will continue to focus on seven priority areas identified and agreed to with the Government of Pakistan, including precision strike; air mobility and combat search and rescue; counter-improvised explosive devise and battlefield survivability; battlefield communications; night operations; border security; and maritime security/counternarcotics in support of CT aims.

Iraq ($267 million): The $257 million requested for Iraq in FY 2015 broadly focuses on helping the Iraqis improve the capability and professionalism of their military and builds upon the efforts made since 2003 by the U.S. military, coalition forces, and Iraqi military operations and initiatives. Of the Iraq request, $7 million will fund administrative costs associated with the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq, which also supports implementation of Iraq’s own significant and ongoing purchases through the Foreign Military Sales program. FMF will help ensure that a strong U.S.-Iraq relationship is in place as Iraq continues to rely on its own fiscal resources to contribute to peace and security in the region. The program will focus on the development of enduring logistics capabilities and institutions to sustain U.S. and Iraqi post-war investments; professionalizing the security forces; and strengthening the United States' long-term strategic partnership with Iraq.



Do you get that.  The table's saying $250 million.  The text is saying $267 million.

They don't give a damn.

This is what they turned into Congress.

The figures within the report turned in can't even be reconciled within the report/request itself.


And Congress is so damn stupid that they don't even notice it.  (No, I might not have caught it on my own. But, to the relief of most Americans, I'm also not a member of Congress so it's not like it's my job to pay attention to the budget the State Dept misrepresents to Congress.)

There are 'glitches' like that throughout the report.

This is US taxpayer money and this budget demonstrates how much scorn the administration has for the American people.  They don't even care that their own figures within the report don't add up.

And they know Congress will spread or bend over (to each their own desired position) and just holler "Yes!" in an orgasmic orgy of spending -- of wasting -- the tax payers money.

Can you image a business -- a legitimate one -- turning in a budget that didn't add up, whose figures said one thing in one section and another thing in another?

(If you want to crunch numbers, PDF format warning, you can find the budget online here.  You'll find many interesting tidbits such as 1.4 million for Iraq's "International Military Education and Training," 11 million for "International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement" and 22.5 million "Economic Support Fund.")

One thing to remember, something the Subcommittee members all seemed to forget, this was billed as a "budget" hearing.  But outside of two Democrats whining on behalf of the farmers in their communities, no one felt the need to even acknowledge the money issues.



----------------------------------------------------

Okay, that's the end of it.

But wasn't that some strong reporting?

And I can't find anything on the hearing in news searches.

I just really can't believe how bad the State Dept. is.  Kerry and Company just lie. 



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

 
Wednesday, March 12, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, the assault on Anbar continues, Nouri trying to create a crop of 9-year-old child brides gets some press attention, in the US Senator Patty Murray continues to fight for veterans, in the US House a Subcommittee doesn't care that the State Dept's budget figures make no sense (not even from page to page in the budget request), Secretary of State John Kerry plays at being an 80s super woman, and much more.


There are War Crimes taking place in Iraq as Nouri's assault on Anbar Province continues.  Nouri and his Cabinet approved a bill, now sent to Parliament, to strip mothers and wives of their rights and to allow fathers to marry girls off as young as nine-years-old.  Elections are supposed to take place April 30th.  The Kurds are refusing to be bullied by Nouri or his budget threats.  Moqtada al-Sadr is standing up to Nouri.  Those are just some of the big issues in Iraq right now.

Into this mix, Greg Mitchell wades in today at The Nation.  Which of the above issues does he grab?

None of them.

He's doing a media critique.

Okay, that's good.  That's needed.  The US media has done a lousy job covering Iraq since their drawdown at the end of 2008 (the US media's drawdown).  So thank goodness Greg Mitchell is making time to seriously address what is taking place today.

Oh, wait, he's not.

He's jerking off to 2002 pre-Iraq War coverage.  He wants you to know that Judith Miller wasn't the only reporter involved in selling the illegal war.

Wow, that blows my mind.  What acid did Greg hand out with that blog post?

We don't have to trip to fall back to a July 9, 2005 entry here:

Miller is responsible for her reporting. She is not, however, responsible for the reporting of others. It's an easy out to act as though Miller persuaded the nation. The Times does have a reach but other papers and TV (and radio) do as well. Making her the fall guy for every bad reporter is letting a lot of people off. Offering that her story, wavied around by Dick Cheney, silenced dissent means you know of a Meet the Press rule that I don't. I'm not aware of any rule that Tim Russert has to operate under which says, "If a guest cites the New York Times, the debate is over."
Miller wrote her stories (and Howell Raines was fine with running them -- some occur under Keller's tenure but the bulk that people complain about are under Raines' tenure). Hold her accountable for them. But she didn't anchor and report for Nightly News. NPR didn't offer up an hour or two to her daily to produce, report and star in The Judith Miller Report. Miller wasn't laughing it up with the weather man on Good Morning America before tossing to a breaking report, live from D.C., reported by Judith Miller.

I'm not defending her reporting. But there's a tendency to overlook the others involved. I don't know if that results from people being late to criticism of the reporting on the lead up to the war or what. It can't just be a case of "bash the bitch" because there are a number of women who cheerleaded into war and while one now deceased columnist may get a pass since she's no longer around, a lot of the reporters are still around, still on your TV, still on your radio, still in print.


For those late to the party on the American pastime of "bash the bitch," you can use that link and you can also check out Ava and my "TV: Katie Was a Cheerleader."

So it only took until 2014 for Greg Mitchell to discover it wasn't just Judith Miller.   Most Americans require 12 years to make it through school.  How many years did it take Greg?

And who he is fooling with this babble when Iraq's on fire right now?

All he's done is pull quotes from a Howard Kurtz article everyone (including us) noted years ago.

The right-wing website Thy Black Man pointed out today, "Seems like there is rarely a mention of Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Libya in the mainstream news anymore, and more importantly, from the oral cavities of U.S. politicians."  I doubt the website was asking that Greg Mitchell indulge in an acid flashback.


That he or The Nation magazine thinks anything he did made a contribution goes a long way towards explain the Death of Independent Media.


Contrast Greg's self-made state of uselessness with this:

The context that kind of led to the situation began over a year ago -- but essentially with the current present situation a little over a month ago -- the Iraqi government started shelling the city of Fallujah. They circled it off and claimed that the city had been taken control of by ISIS, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, a group that was affiliated with al Qaeda, that they had taken control of the city.
The reality is, while ISIS did have a small presence within the city, the city remained largely under control of the tribes in the area and of course the people living in the city and so they were trying to deal with the situation themselves. They did not want those people present in the city either but nevertheless the Maliki government sealed off the city, stopped medical supplies from being allowed in, started shelling the city and as of just a few days ago according to doctors that I interviewed in the city there were 109 civilians had been killed and 632 wounded including several dozen women and children killed and wounded.

So it’s a crisis situation. It’s ongoing. It’s displaced about 300,000 people around Al Anbar province. The UN has called for an end of what the Maliki government is doing as have other NGOs operating in the areas but unfortunately it is ongoing as we speak.

That's Dahr Jamail speaking  on Unauthorized Disclosure to hosts Kevin Gosztola (Firedoglake's Dissenter) and Rania Khalek (Dispatches from the Underclass).  If I misunderstood the credits, please e-mail again to correct me.  What I do know is Unauthorized Disclosure is welcoming to all -- it's an audio program you can stream and they also provide a transcript if you're unable to stream or if streaming doesn't help you due to hearing issues/challenges.

As Dahr rightly noted in the interview, "The UN has called for an end of what the Maliki government is doing as have other NGOs operating in the areas but unfortunately it is ongoing as we speak."  The Nation hasn't covered it.  The US government hasn't called for an end.

As his assault on Anbar Province continues, so do Nouri al-Maliki's War Crimes.  The thug and prime minister of Iraq continues to resort to the crime of collective punishment.  Today that means his military shelling of Falluja residential neighborhoods today left 1 child dead, two children injured, one woman injured and one man injured.


Collective punishment is illegal and defined as a War Crime.  When Nouri practices collective punishment, he is in violation of the following:




Hague Regulations (1899)
Article 50 of the 1899 Hague Regulations provides: “No general penalty, pecuniary or otherwise, can be inflicted on the population on account of the acts of individuals for which it cannot be regarded as collectively responsible.” 


Hague Regulations (1907)
Article 50 of the 1907 Hague Regulations provides: “No general penalty, pecuniary or otherwise, shall be inflicted upon the population on account of the acts of individuals for which they cannot be regarded as jointly and severally responsible.” 


Geneva POW Convention
Article 46, fourth paragraph, of the 1929 Geneva POW Convention provides: “Collective penalties for individual acts are also prohibited.” 


Geneva Convention III
Article 26, sixth paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention III states: “Collective disciplinary measures affecting food are prohibited.” Article 87, third paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention III provides that “[c]ollective punishment for individual acts” is forbidden. 


Geneva Convention IV
Article 33, first paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides: “Collective penalties … are prohibited.” 


Additional Protocol I

Article 75(2)(d) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides: “The following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever, whether committed by civilian or by military agents: … collective punishments”. 


Additional Protocol II

Article 4(2)(b) of the 1977 Additional Protocol II provides: “The following acts against the persons referred to in paragraph I are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever: … collective punishments”. 


Statute of the Special Court for Sierra Leone

Article 3 of the 2002 Statute of the Special Court for Sierra Leone provides: The Special Court shall have the power to prosecute persons who committed or ordered the commission of serious violations of article 3 common to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 for the Protection of War Victims, and of Additional Protocol II thereto of 8 June 1977. These violations shall include:

Jane Arraf (Washington Post) quotes the Muslim Scholars Association's spokesperson Muthana al-Dari in her report on Anbar:

"Maliki has attacked the people, so the people defended themselves, rose up and revolted. So it has now been transformed into a revolution," Dari said.
Since the start two years ago of widespread Sunni protests, the country's Sunni leadership has fragmented, and many have become more radicalized. Many tribal leaders are still allied with the Iraqi government, and the scholars association and those fighting Iraqi government forces are believed to represent a much smaller constituency.

Dropping back to yesterday's snapshot:

If you ever doubted Nouri al-Maliki's ability to lead, it's on full display right now.  Tomorrow is the big terrorism conference that Brett McGurk's endlessly praised Nouri for.  The State Dept's Brett has praised this effort to bring the region's countries together to address the issue.
But today comes the news that two won't be participating.  NINA reports Qatar and Saudi Arabia have decided not to participate.  This decision comes after Saturday's broadcast of Nouri al-Maliki's interview where he slammed Qatar and Saudi Arabia repeatedly.  (See Saturday's "Nouri 'celebrates' International Women's Day" and "Iraq snapshot.")
He couldn't even keep his big mouth shut until after the conference.


And the fall out just keeps coming.  Al Arabiya News reports, "The UAE recalled its ambassador to Iraq on Wednesday in protest against Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki’s accusations of Saudi Arabia that the kingdom supports terrorism."  Gulf Times notes:

State Minister for Foreign Affairs Anwar Gargash handed ambassador Mowafak Mahdi Abboud a memorandum protesting Maliki’s “claims that Saudi Arabia supports terrorism,” the official Wam news agency said.
“Such remarks are false and not based on a proper assessment of the situation in the region concerning terrorism, especially as Saudi Arabia plays a significant role in combating all forms of terrorism,” said Gargash.


 Arab News adds, "Bahrain also strongly condemned Saudi bashing by Al-Maliki and his false accusations against the Kingdom."  Nouri's big mouth has tanked his own conference.  He's such a failure.  Despite that, Nouri intends to dig the hole even deeper.


Turning to Nouri's attempt to create 9-year-old child brides in Iraq, Human Rights Watch weighed in yesterday with "Iraq: Don’t Legalize Marriage for 9-Year-Olds" and that's already had an impact.  RTT notes, "The draft law would cover Iraq's Shia citizens and residents, a majority of the population of 36 million. It includes provisions that prohibit Muslim men from marrying non-Muslims, legalizes marital rape by stating that a husband is entitled to have sex with his wife regardless of her consent, and prevents women from leaving the house without permission from their husbands. The law would automatically grant custody over any child age two or older to the father in divorce cases, lower the marriage age to nine for girls and fifteen for boys, and even allow girls younger than nine to be married with a parent's approval."

Diana Moukalled has a column on the move which is carried by Asharq Al-Awsat and Al Arabiya News. The column notes:

The suggested Iraqi draft law strips women who belong to the Ja’afari Shi’a sect of their basic marriage, divorce and inheritance rights, and worst of all, permits the marriage of nine-year-old girls. One cannot but be shocked by the delinquency of those who approved the draft law, and yet here it is now on its way to parliament for approval.

At Rudaw, Ruwayda Mustafah Rabar weighs in on the measure and its meaning:

Female activists in Baghdad gathered at Parliament to protest a proposed Ja’fari Personal Status Law which will permit the marriage consummation for girls as young as nine-years-old. The women wore black, to mourn the regression of women’s rights in Baghdad. It is perhaps strange that with the fall of Saddam Hussein women’s rights have regressed, as opposed to progressing. While other countries’ judicial systems attempt to elevate the status of women by ensuring they are treated equally before the law, in Baghdad women’s rights violations are sanctified through the law.
What was perhaps the most saddening part of the protest was the low turnout, the lack of male presence to stand by women in the fight against patriarchy. Instead, a few women gathered, all of them were from the ‘older generation’ and they held homemade placards. It is no surprise that the current political climate in Iraq deters women, especially young women, from feeling comfortable enough to become socio-politically active.
Patriarchy is on the rise in Iraq because of the influx of religious thought which is not only interpreted at the expense of women’s rights but also heavily influenced by sectarian, as well as cultural, beliefs. When society fails to recognize the human rights of women, you would be correct to assume that a higher law, applicable to all citizens, would enshrine such rights. But unfortunately this is not the case for Iraq.




On violence, through Tuesday, Iraq Body Count counts 381 violent deaths for the month thus far.  Today?

National Iraqi News Agency reports a Baiji suicide car bomber took his own life and the lives of 3 police members with seven more left injured, a Tikrit bombing left two members of the police injured, 1 woman was shot dead in al-Baaj, 1 man was shot dead in al-Qahera, the Second Infantry Command announced they killed 3 suspects "southeast of Mosul," a Tuz Khurmatu roadside bombing left 3 people dead, the Ministry of the Interior announced they shot dead 1 suspect in Salahuddin Province, a Heet car bombing claimed the life of 1 police member and left five more people injured, armed clashes in Ramadi left 3 rebels dead and two Iraqi soldiers injured, Joint Special Operations Command announced they killed 20 suspects in Anbar, a Mosul bombing killed 3 people, and a Baquba sticky bombing killed 1 woman and left eight more people injured.

Still on violence, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) issued the following today:

The Director-General of UNESCO, Irina Bokova, today voiced concern for the safety of media workers in Iraq following the killing of two Iraqi cameramen, Muthanna Abdul Hussein and Khaled Abed Thamer, on 09 March.


“I condemn the killing of Muthanna Abdul Hussein and Khaled Abed Thamer,” the Director-General said. “The number of media workers killed in Iraq is a source of grave concern. I call on the authorities once again to ensure that those responsible for the death of journalists be brought to justice. Decisive action is needed to ensure that the media can carry out their work and the public can remain informed.”
Muthanna Abdul Hussein and Khaled Abed Thamer, cameramen for Al-Iraqia TV were killed in a suicide bomb blast in a checkpoint at the city of Hilla.
The Director-General has condemned the killing of 18 journalists in Iraq since January 1, 2013.
                                            ****
Media contact: Sylvie Coudray, s.coudray(at)unesco.org,  +33 (0)1 45 68 42 12
UNESCO is the United Nations agency with a mandate to defend freedom of expression and press freedom. Article 1 of its Constitution requires the Organization to “further universal respect for justice, for the rule of law and for the human rights and fundamental freedoms which are affirmed for the peoples of the world, without distinction of race, sex, language or religion, by the Charter of the United Nations.” To realize this the Organization is requested to “collaborate in the work of advancing the mutual knowledge and understanding of peoples, through all means of mass communication and to that end recommend such international agreements as may be necessary to promote the free flow of ideas by word and image…”


Now we're going to note a press release which is really important.  After which, I'll explain about a House Subcommittee hearing today where the State Dept showed their contempt for the tax payers and the Congress and the Subcommittee was too busy grinding their own axes to even note the State Dept budget despite the fact that this was the topic of the meeting.  First though, we're noting this from Senator Patty Murray's office:



FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                        CONTACT: Murray Press Office
Wednesday, March 12th, 2014                                                            (202) 224-2834
 
VIDEO: EASTERN WASHINGTON: Murray Presses Top VA Officials on Spokane Medical Center, Walla Walla Vets Home
 
Murray: “You told me there was no evidence that any medical center would be unable to provide the care we expect.  Unless your view has changed, Spokane’s assessment seems to disagree.
Murray: “How are we going to ensure that we’ve got the funds for state veterans homes like Walla Walla?”
 
(Washington, D.C.)—Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), a senior member of the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs (SVAC), pressed U.S. Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric Shinseki and Under Secretary for Health Robert Petzel on continuing issues at the Spokane VA Medical Center, including understaffing and budget shortfalls, and critically needed federal funding for the planned Walla Walla State Veterans Home.
“The Spokane medical center recently prepared a draft response to questions from the network about their budget.  They talk about the significant challenges of declining budgets, numerous staffing vacancies, and, leading the network in new veteran patients,” said Senator Murray. “I want to ask you what you and the network are going to do to get Spokane the resources that they do need?”
“I am concerned about the future of the Walla Walla State Veterans Home, especially because the budget request proposes reducing funding for state veterans homes grants.  These veterans have been waiting a long time for this facility, and we have more than a thousand veterans who need care,” said Senator Murray.  “So I want to ask whether the system is correctly prioritizing state home projects – do we have enough flexibility?  And how are we going to ensure that we’ve got the funds for state veterans homes like Walla Walla?”
Full text of the exchange below:
SPOKANE VA MEDICAL CENTER
 
Sen. Murray:  
“Secretary Shinseki, several times we have discussed my concerns about getting medical centers the resources they need to provide top-quality care for our veterans.
 
“The Spokane Medical Center recently prepared a draft response to questions from the network about their budget.  They talk about the significant challenges of declining budgets, of numerous staffing vacancies, and, leading the network in new veteran patients.
 
“And they said, and I’ll quote it: ‘Overall, senior management is very aware of the budget shortfall and is taking actions to limit the deficit.  However, most actions will significantly limit staffing levels and access to care.  These actions will have – and have had – a significant negative impact on morale and will drive some dissatisfaction amongst patients.’
“Dr. Petzel, I asked you about a similar budget problem at Indianapolis at the hearing on the 2012 budget, and you told me there was no evidence that any medical center would be unable to provide the care we expect.  Unless your view has changed, Spokane’s assessment seems to disagree.
 
“I want to ask you what you and the network are going to do to get Spokane the resources that they do need?”
Asst. Sec. Petzel:
“Senator Murray, thank you. I am assuming that that’s some employee’s assessment of the situation, it’s not the senior leadership’s assessment of the situation.”
Sen Murray:
“It is the senior leadership’s assessment.”
Asst. Sec. Petzel:
“I am not aware of this. We do believe, and the budget was distributed back in October, and at that time, there was a consensus of the network directors and the facility directors that they had sufficient funds.”
Sen. Murray:  
The questions were asked to them by the VISN, and they responded back, so it was the senior leadership at Spokane VA Center, saying very clearly they do not have the dollars to be able to do the duties that they need.”
Asst. Sec. Petzel:
“I will have to go back and talk with both the network and with Spokane. This is information that is new to me.”
Sen. Murray:
“OK, well, their draft response also calls for a discussion about the mission of the medical center. 
 
“It asks if they will remain a full service medical center, and whether programs and services should be eliminated.  That is deeply concerning to me.
 
Are there any plans to reduce services at the Spokane medical center?”
Sec. Shinseki:
“We have no plans to do so.”
Sen. Murray:
“I need you to follow up on that and let me know what’s happening that they are facing such a budget shortfall, and it was very clear in the documents that we’ve seen that they are facing an extreme budget shortfall that is hampering their ability to care for the veterans in that region.”
Asst. Sec. Petzel:
“We will follow up.”
WALLA WALLA STATE VETERANS HOME
 
Sen. Murray:
“I also wanted to ask both of you about the Walla Walla State Veterans Home. As you know, I’m very concerned about that, especially because the budget request proposes reducing funding for state veterans homes grants.
 
“These veterans have been waiting a very long time for this facility, and we have more than a thousand veterans who need care. 
 
“So I want to ask whether the system is correctly prioritizing state home projects – do we have enough flexibility?
 
“And how are we going to ensure that we’ve got the funds for state veterans homes like Walla Walla?”
Asst. Sec. Petzel:
“Senator Murray, you and I have discussed on numerous occasions the Walla Walla State Veterans’ Home, and I share your angst about that particular project. 
 
“We are looking at whether there is a solution that will allow us to use the 2014 money in order to accomplish that construction but we’re not finished looking at what the alternatives are.
 
“Obviously after we’ve done that, and discussed it with the Secretary, we will get back to you.”
Sen. Murray:
“We need to know where that’s going, and overall, not just that one, but all of them, how are we going to deal with these veterans homes with declining budgets?
 
“I think that as members of Congress, we need to know what the need is and then we need to figure out how to fund it rather than just being told everything’s OK. I want to know specifically about Walla Walla, what we’re going to do, but also the funding in general.”
 
 ###
 
 
Sean Coit
Press Secretary
Office of U.S. Senator Patty Murray
202-224-2834
 
  



 
 
 
RSS Feed for Senator Murray's office


That's the end of the Murray office press release.  It's an important issue, we include it in full and I'll make it its own entry tomorrow.  In tomorrow's snapshot, I hope to cover a hearing I attended today -- but I attended more than one today and we're going with the one that let's us talk about Iraq.



Secretary of State John Kerry appeared this morning before the House Appropriations State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs Subcommittee.  US House Rep Kay Granger is the Subcommittee Chair and US House Rep Nita Lowey is the Ranking Member.  Kerry was the only witness as he begged for money -- tax payer money.

The theme of the hearing was: Let's All Pretend Iraq Doesn't Exist.

I was tipped off to that theme last night by a State Dept friend when I noted I was going to have to be in two places at once -- the veterans hearing and the State Dept budget hearing.  "Iraq," I was told, "frankly doesn't matter to him [John Kerry] and he'll only bring it up if asked."

Looking at the roster of the Subcommittee members, it was obvious that Israel would be at least the first hour.  So I attended 90 minutes of the veterans hearing (while asking a friend at Kerry's hearing to text me if Iraq came up).

It did.  Briefly in Kerry's opening remarks:

We have kept our funding request in line with what was appropriated to the Department and USAID in Fiscal Year 2014 within our base request of 40.3 billion. And the additional part of our request for OCO, Overseas Contingency Operations, totals 5.9 billion. And with OCO funding, we support programs, as you know, in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, as we continue to right-size those commitments.

That one sentence was it for his opening remarks.

If you don't get how John Kerry ran from Iraq, notice what he had to say about the Syrian refugee crisis (and I'm using his prepared remarks that were marked up by my friend to note the changes between prepared and delivery):

For the Syrian people, for Lebanon, Turkey, for Jordan, coping with how to keep their societies running and keep extremists at bay while they host millions now of refugees, our support is critical to that. We’re the largest donor in the world. And that helps us, because it is critical to us that Lebanon and Jordan remain stable.

How do you talk about Syrian refugees and not note Iraq?

The only real mention of Iraq was from US House Rep Frank Wolf who kept mentioning the Iraq Study Group (which accomplished nothing, a fact Wolf misses) because he wants a Syrian Study Group and, get this, he wants US President Barack Obama to ask  Bully Boy Bush to head that Syrian Study Group.

US House Rep Barbara Lee doesn't give a damn about war these days.  Judging by her tired and expanding face, all she cares about is eating.  She didn't even note Ukraine.  I walked in when Barbara Fake Ass Lee was testifying (speechifying?  It wasn't questions).  I did a double take.  I don't know if she's had plastic surgery or if she had just pulled her hair back to harshly but her eye brows were up at least a half inch more than usual and it really did look like a botched face lift. If so, I'm glad she found a hobby to fill her time now that she no longer uses it to call out war.  And I'm especially glad she looks butt ugly.  In time, you do get the face you deserve and it's sitting on her neck right now.

Prior to my arrival, the topics were (going by the texts my friend sent me and his notes) Israel, Israel, Israel, that soda boycott (which Lowey did not support), Israel, Egypt, Egypt, Israel, Ukraine, Iran, Cuba, Israel, North Korea, Venezuela -- with the exception of Israel and Egypt it was basically war requests from members of the Subcommittee -- Democrats and Republicans -- to go to war on these countries.  Into that mix, Babsie Lee offered nothing on peace, just scratched herself a lot as she babbled on about Uganda (and it's LGBT issues). After I arrived?  War on Argentina because they don't fulfill their debts and even more nonsense, if you can believe it.  It's amazing how this Subcommittee thinks the answer to everyone of the petty grudges is to put US boots on the ground.

The US government does nothing to improve the lives of the Iraqi people -- despite the fact that billions of US tax dollars flow to Iraq for that supposed purpose.

So what does the State Dept work on?

They're lackeys for corporations.  The State Dept works on debt collection -- a fact John Kerry felt was worth bragging about.


Secretary of State John Kerry:  With our urging, Argentina has taken some positive steps.  In October they settled a long running investment dispute with three US companies and implemented -- in January of this year -- implemented an improved inflation index in order to address inefficiencies in its IMF reporting and so forth.  But we continue to urge them to fulfill their global, international responsibilities.

US House Rep Debbie Wasserman Schultz wants war on Venezuela and demonized their president right after Kerry said the Venezuelan government needed to stop demonizing people.  Debbie Washerwoman needs to learn to wash that ratty, oily hair.  It looks like the Exxon Valdez took a dump on her head.

Kerry pulled the little stunt he's so fond of doing since become Secretary of State -- a stunt he wouldn't have stood for as Chair of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee.

See, Secretary John is an 80s power woman in a Nolan Miller dress with bulky shoulder pads.  Secretary John is not just an 80s power woman, John's an 80s super woman, rushing here, there and everywhere.  It's like a bad movie and he really needs an overweight sidekick (Baraba Lee, you're being paged!) to pull it off his whole: I'm so busy, I can't stay for the full hearing, I'm just too important and too busy to appear before Congress for a full hearing.  In other words,  John looks like a real bitch when he pulls this.

What John forgets?


If you pretend you have to leave, then you leave.  You don't insist that everyone be quick and that you'll reply in writing because you're in such a rush and then go on to yack  for 7 minutes straight because you didn't like a statement a member of the Subcommittee made.  He didn't like the doubts about Barack's foreign policy or Iran and felt the need to bore everyone with just how yawning inducing he can be ". . . we're helping Tunisia, we're working on Libya, I just came from a conference on Libya . . ."

Pretending, in that bitchy manner, that your time's too valuable for Congress is misguided unless you're looking to add "Bitch" to your professional title.  But what's even worse is pretending you have to go and then refusing to stop speaking.

It was during this marathon jaw boning that Kerry brought up Iraq for the second time.

Secretary John Kerry:  We have inspectors -- not as frequently as the other two but sufficiently - in Iraq in the plutonium reactor.  They are not able to complete the plutonium reactor.

Well thank goodness for that.  They're not able to complete the plutonium reactor.

Except . . .

"They" isn't Iraq.

He said "Iraq."

He meant Iran.

He didn't want to talk about Iraq and a useless Subcommittee didn't want to either.

Iraq's all over the State Dept's FY2015 budget.  Let's note some of it.  For the "Overseas Contingency Operations funding," the report notes:


In Iraq, OCO funding of $501.4 million supports operational requirements, movement security, equipment and associated Operation and Maintenance, physical and technical security, static guards, and security operations in Basrah and Erbil. The request is $4.4 million above the FY 2014 level and funded through Worldwide Security Protection, consistent with FY 2014 Congressional action.


That's a half billion right there on Iraq.  Right there.

But the useless members of the Subcommittee wanted you to instead know that they pledge alliegence to the government of Israel, that they want war on Venezuela's democratically-elected government and that the grudge-fu**ing of Cuba will never, ever end as long as they draw breath.

A half billion's a lot.  It's not all.  I told another State Dept friend I was going to review the budget and he couldn't stop laughing.  It's a fudged budget and it doesn't even add up on paper.

What?  I was confused.

He flipped to a table in the back which notes $250 million is the amount being requested for "Foreign Military Financing" for Iraq.

I was confused still.  He flipped several pages and pointed this section out to me:


The FY 2015 Foreign Military Financing (FMF) Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) request of $537 million is for Iraq and Pakistan.

Pakistan ($280 million): Given the ongoing transition in Afghanistan and continued terrorist attacks against civilian and military targets throughout Pakistan, FMF is essential to Pakistan’s efforts to increase stability in its western border region and ensure overall stability within its own borders. The $280 million Pakistan request will enhance the Pakistan Army, Frontier Corps, Air Force, and Navy’s ability to conduct counterinsurgency (COIN) and counterterrorism (CT) operations against militants throughout its borders, especially in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, improve Pakistan’s ability to deter threats emanating from those areas, and encourage continued U.S.-Pakistan military-to-military engagement. FMF will continue to focus on seven priority areas identified and agreed to with the Government of Pakistan, including precision strike; air mobility and combat search and rescue; counter-improvised explosive devise and battlefield survivability; battlefield communications; night operations; border security; and maritime security/counternarcotics in support of CT aims.

Iraq ($267 million): The $257 million requested for Iraq in FY 2015 broadly focuses on helping the Iraqis improve the capability and professionalism of their military and builds upon the efforts made since 2003 by the U.S. military, coalition forces, and Iraqi military operations and initiatives. Of the Iraq request, $7 million will fund administrative costs associated with the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq, which also supports implementation of Iraq’s own significant and ongoing purchases through the Foreign Military Sales program. FMF will help ensure that a strong U.S.-Iraq relationship is in place as Iraq continues to rely on its own fiscal resources to contribute to peace and security in the region. The program will focus on the development of enduring logistics capabilities and institutions to sustain U.S. and Iraqi post-war investments; professionalizing the security forces; and strengthening the United States' long-term strategic partnership with Iraq.



Do you get that.  The table's saying $250 million.  The text is saying $267 million.

They don't give a damn.

This is what they turned into Congress.

The figures within the report turned in can't even be reconciled within the report/request itself.


And Congress is so damn stupid that they don't even notice it.  (No, I might not have caught it on my own. But, to the relief of most Americans, I'm also not a member of Congress so it's not like it's my job to pay attention to the budget the State Dept misrepresents to Congress.)

There are 'glitches' like that throughout the report.

This is US taxpayer money and this budget demonstrates how much scorn the administration has for the American people.  They don't even care that their own figures within the report don't add up.

And they know Congress will spread or bend over (to each their own desired position) and just holler "Yes!" in an orgasmic orgy of spending -- of wasting -- the tax payers money.

Can you image a business -- a legitimate one -- turning in a budget that didn't add up, whose figures said one thing in one section and another thing in another?

(If you want to crunch numbers, PDF format warning, you can find the budget online here.  You'll find many interesting tidbits such as 1.4 million for Iraq's "International Military Education and Training," 11 million for "International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement" and 22.5 million "Economic Support Fund.")

One thing to remember, something the Subcommittee members all seemed to forget, this was billed as a "budget" hearing.  But outside of two Democrats whining on behalf of the farmers in their communities, no one felt the need to even acknowledge the money issues.






















Wednesday, March 12, 2014

No, Barack's not funny

Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Nouri The Child Molester" went up earlier today:




Nouri al-Maliki is trying to lower the marriage age for Iraqi girls to 9-years-old.

That's outrageous.

This piece of scum has cozied up to Bully Boy Bush and Barack.  Both men disgraced the US and Iraq by making nice with Nouri.

Barack's the ongoing disgrace, isn't he?  Did you catch Cedric and Wally's joint-post today:



They're taking on the nonsense of Barack doing Funny or Die.


Gayle Fee (Boston Herald) reports:


“It’s not funny but it’s on ‘Funny or Die,’” said Roger Friedman on Showbiz 411, calling Obama’s appearance “less presidential than Richard Nixon saying ‘Sock it to me’ on ‘Laugh In.’”
“Obama should not quit his day job,” he added.
And the White House press corps grilled the prez’s press secretary about the skit yesterday, with ABC’s Jim Avila questioning whether the presidency had been “damaged” by the Fernfest.
“How much discussion was there in the White House about the dignity of the office?” Avila asked.


No wonder Barack can't create jobs, he's always too busy trying to be a celebrity.

And dignity?  Barack has turned the presidency into something akin to TV game show host.


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

 
Tuesday, March 11, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, Nouri's assault on Anbar continues, Moqtada al-Sadr supporters continue to protest Nouri, NPR continues to ignore the protests in Iraq, everyone but Human Rights Watch appears to be silent on Nouri's latest assault on Iraqi females, and much more.



Why can't, in the US, grown ups have a conversation without a bunch of partisan b.s.?

Maybe because the media refuses to inform.

Alice Fordham's joined NPR (a free lancer who worked previously for The Times of London, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times and Christian Science Monitor among other outlets during the Iraq War). Between her nonsense and David Green's idiotic introduction on Morning Edition (NPR) to Fordham's bad report, it's hard to know which is worse.

Both operate under the premise that the assault on Anbar Province is appropriate.

International law and treaties beg to differ.

But not only does NPR ignore the law -- including the long established Geneva Conventions -- they also refuse to talk about how things got so bad in Anbar.

If you're a community member or regular or even semi-reader of the Iraq snapshots, you do know what's going on.  But if you read through the comments -- the ones they allowed -- to Fordham's bad 'report,' you know a lot of people have no idea what's going on but they are so quick to offer 'insight' -- and it's all connected to Bully Boy Bush.

If you depend on NPR's 'reporting' on Iraq, you're dazed and confused.  In fact, we'll be honoring one of NPR's biggest moment of lying about Iraq in the next few weeks.  We called them out real time.  No one else bothered.  They aired a report that undermined democracy and violated every ethical journalistic principle.  It also didn't get the facts accurate.

Here's the closest they got to honest on Morning Edition today:


FORDHAM:  Zaid Al-Ali, who recently published a book, "The Struggle for Iraq's Future," says that the problems are broader than that. In Sunni-dominated places like Anbar, they won't be solved by security measures alone. He thinks that chronic unemployment also needs to be addressed and, more importantly, entrenched sectarian practices by the security forces. Detention without charge and torture are far more common in places like Anbar, he says, which feeds hatred of the government.


ZAID AL-ALI: It's been a major issue because there is a lot of abuse of detainees in Iraq. And there are a lot of cases - everyone knows about this, this is not a secret - there are a lot of cases of people being detained for no reason and for very long periods of time, without access to attorneys, without access to judges, without access to any type of recourse. And that really needs to change extremely urgently.


Wow.

That's enough to make people take to the streets and protest.

Oh, wait, it did.

Since December 21, 2012, protests have been ongoing in Iraq.

Why are they protesting?

The issues are numerous.  In February 2013, Layla Anwar (An Arab Woman Blues) summed up the primary issues as follows:

- End of Sectarian Shia rule
- the re-writing of the Iraqi constitution (drafted by the Americans and Iranians)
- the end to arbitrary killings and detention, rape and torture of all detainees on basis of sect alone and their release
- the end of discriminatory policies in employment, education, etc based on sect
- the provision of government services to all
- the end of corruption
- no division between Shias and Sunnis, a one Islam for all Iraqi Muslims and a one Iraq for all Iraqis.


Still not getting why Alice Fordham, if she's going to report on Anbar, needs to mention the protests?

Let's go to Human Rights Watch, "Government security forces had withdrawn from Anbar province after provoking a tribal uprising when they raided a Sunni protest camp in Ramadi on December 30, killing 17 people."  This is how the assault on Anbar begins.

If Alice Fordham and NPR want to report on the assault, they're required to note how it started.

Are their terrorists in Anbar?

I'm sure there are just as many terrorists in Anbar as there is anywhere -- including in the NPR newsroom.

But what made people wearing masks (or at least scarves covering the lower half of their faces) go out into the streets of Anbar?

Nouri's assault on the protesters.

That was only one assault, there have been so many more.

Let's again note Sunil Patel's strong piece at Fair Observer which includes:


As violence in Fallujah escalates to near-unprecedented levels, the entire narrative of the fighting seems to evade a number of key points. Namely, this fighting was not precipitated by the capture of Sunni strongholds by al-Qaeda or the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIS).
The precursor to the fighting between Iraqi government forces and Sunni tribesmen of Anbar was a result of a ruthless policy of repression, aimed at nationwide protest camps opposing government measures on public services, counterterrorism, illegal house raids and a perpetuation of sectarian violence, as well as a number of other policies that continue to marginalize Sunni communities.
The Ramadi protest camps in al-Anbar have been at the center of demonstrations for the past year. It was on December 30  — a week after Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki had threatened to "burn down" the camps — that special forces (SWAT) and the army descended upon the Ezz and Karama Square to crush protests, which had gained momentum after the arrest of Sunni MP Ahmed al-Alwani and the murder of his brother and five of his security guards.
Two witnesses reported to Human Rights Watch that SWAT and the army had arrived in a procession of military Humvees, pick-up trucks, and armored vehicles to clear the squares. All this just seven hours after Defense Minister Saadoun al-Dulaimi had negotiated the release of Alwani on the condition that the camps were to be cleared within 48 hours.
This is not the first attempt by government forces to clear protest camps. In April 2013, SWAT and the army opened fire on more than a thousand protestors in Hawija, south of Kirkut, killing 50 people and leaving 110 injured. The event passed without as much as a whimper in the press, let alone widespread condemnation.


An e-mail noted that the link on "protestors in Hawija" is "worthless and goes to a 2005 report."

Take it up with Fair Observer, I don't edit people's links for them.

But we have covered it in real time so I'll provide those links.   January 7th, Nouri's forces assaulted four protesters in Mosul,  January 24th,  Nouri's forces sent two protesters (and one reporter) to the hospital,  and March 8th, Nouri's force fired on protesters in Mosul killing three.


All of that and more appeared to be a trial run for what was coming, the April 23rd massacre of a peaceful sit-in in Hawija which resulted from  Nouri's federal forces storming in.  Alsumaria noted Kirkuk's Department of Health (Hawija is in Kirkuk)  announced 50 activists have died and 110 were injured in the assault.   AFP reported the death toll rose to 53 dead.  UNICEF noted that the dead included 8 children (twelve more were injured).


In February 2013, Nouri put on a show about 'listening' to the protesters.

He never did.

The ridiculous press trumped his statements as facts.

How stupid is the press today?

Even 30 years ago, his remarks would have been treated as words and the press would have taken a wait-and-see posture.  Instead, they hollered "End of story!"  When it wasn't.

Nouri's refusal to meet the demands of the protesters, his desire to attack them physically and with words (he's called them "terrorists" since 2011).

Now his failed promises are just stripped of the story by the likes of Alice Fordham.

This isn't reporting.

This isn't even bad reporting.

It's misinformation.

Drama Queen Ta-Nehsi Coates at the war mongering Atlantic magazine offers "As Though Iraq Never Happened."  Yeah, for those us paying attention, which does not include Coates, is does seem like it never happened.  But what may be more insulting is that Coates thought he had the information to write an article.  He uses "Iraq" hoping for clicks as he attacks Condoleezza Rice.


To put it mildly, we're not fans here of No-One-Could-Have-Guessed Condi Rice.

But we're also not stupid.  We've repeatedly called her out on Iraq by noting she held no expertise on the topic, we suggested she stick to topics that she knows something about.

Ta-Nehsi Coates calls her out for weighing in on Ukraine.  Guess what?

Russia is Condi's area of expertise.

Doesn't mean she's right in her opinions, but it is the area she was trained in.

If you've got an issue with her interpretation or take, by all means call her out on it and use any tone you wish.

But you look pretty stupid slamming her for weighing in on the topic without even grasping that this actually is a topic she studied.  At great length.

Iraq is on fire and has been since it became clear Nouri wasn't going to honor the White House brokered Erbil Agreement of 2010.  If you're going to mention Iraq today, how about making it about something current?

How about you find something more productive than Bush hatred and Bush bashing?  And how about you stop pretending you care about Iraq when you've said nothing about the attacks on the protesters or anything else that's happened in the last 12 months?

You're ignorant of Iraq and your ignorance fuels the public's ignorance.  So stop pretending you're writing about Iraq when you're not.


I also find the high horse Coates is on to be ridiculous.  Condi Rice sold the Iraq War.  I don't dispute it.  But if she's unqualified to speak on topics because of that, I guess that means The Atlantic will be shutting down since it also sold the illegal war?

When people could lie and whore freely, outlets like The Atlantic 'covered' the Iraq War.

Now they have no interest except to mislead -- in other words, they've circled back to 2002.

It's really sad that the best The Atlantic can offer on Iraq is Coates' nonsense.  Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Nouri The Child Molester" went up earlier today.  He's a cartoonist but he can take on Nouri pushing a bill that would drop the age of marriage for girls to nine-years-old.

Isaiah can do that.  Why can't The Atlantic?

Why can't Ms. magazine?

Why can't Women's Media Center?

The leader of a country is putting his weigh behind a bill that (a) lowers the age for girls to marry to nine-years-old and (b) that strips mothers of their custodial rights and hands all custodial rights over to the father.

This isn't some stray bill in the US Congress from some member you've never heard of.  This is a bill that passed Nouri's Cabinet of Members and that Nouri has now forwarded to the Parliament.

This is not unimportant.

Alice Fordman and NPR can continue to ignore it, that won't make it unimportant.

Brett McGurk can refuse to call it out.

It doesn't change that this is a dangerous bill and, by not publicly calling it out, the world is not tolerating it, it's encouraging it.

I don't get these little War Whore Drama Queens forever advocating war here, there and everywhere.  They can scream for bombs and killing.  But the same gasbags in the press can't say a word -- we're just asking for words here -- to condemn a move to lower the age of marriage for Iraqi girls to nine-years-old.

You're a worthless outlet, a worthless gas bag, a worthless journalist, a worthless government if you're unable to condemn Nouri's bill.



Who has any guts?  Turns out Human Rights Watch does:

(Baghdad) – Iraq’s Council of Ministers should withdraw a new draft Personal Status Law and ensure that Iraq’s legal framework protects women and girls in line with its international obligations. The pending legislation would restrict women’s rights in matters of inheritance and parental and other rights after divorce, make it easier for men to take multiple wives, and allow girls to be married from age nine.
The draft law, called the Jaafari Personal Status Law, is based on the principles of the Jaafari school of Shia religious jurisprudence, founded by Imam Jaafar al-Sadiq, the sixth Shia imam. Approved by the Council of Ministers on February 25, 2014, it must now be approved by the parliament to become law.
“Passage of the Jaafari law would be a disastrous and discriminatory step backward for Iraq’s women and girls,” said Joe Stork, deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. “This personal status law would only entrench Iraq’s divisions while the government claims to support equal rights for all.”



It would be a disaster.  Today and yesterday, I was pressing State Dept friends on this and they are of the opinion that, "It'll never pass Parliament, nothing does!"  So it's okay to ignore it.

This only passed the Dabinet because of Nouri.  Do we grasp that?

Less than 30 voted on this.

How is that possible?

The Kurds and Iraqiya walked for good reasons.  They walked long ago.

This is on Nouri and his supporters.  It passed with his a-okay and he then forwarded it to the Parliament.

Whether it dies or not, it needs to be condemned.  To ignore it is to embrace it.

Back to Human Rights Watch:

The draft law would cover Iraq’s Shia citizens and residents, a majority of the population of 36 million. It includes provisions that prohibit Muslim men from marrying non-Muslims, legalizes marital rape by stating that a husband is entitled to have sex with his wife regardless of her consent, and prevents women from leaving the house without permission from their husbands. The law would automatically grant custody over any child age two or older to the father in divorce cases, lower the marriage age to nine for girls and fifteen for boys, and even allow girls younger than nine to be married with a parent’s approval.
Justice Minister Hassan al-Shimmari introduced the draft law to the Council of Ministers on October 27, 2013. In December, the council said it would postpone considering the draft until after legislative elections scheduled for April 30, 2014, and after the supreme Shia religious authority (marji’iya) approved the draft, which it has not yet done. But the council went ahead and approved it on February 25 despite strong opposition from rights advocates and some religious leaders.


Saturday, Iraqi women protested in Baghdad. They had to do that in 2005 as the Constitution was written because the US government was happy to sell Iraqi women down the river.  Apparently, that's still the case today.  Iraqi women have shown far more courage and strengthen then US government officials could ever dream of.

Back to Human Rights Watch:


Iraq’s current Personal Status Law (Law 188 of 1959), which applies to all Iraqis regardless of sect, sets the legal age for marriage at 18, but allows for a judge to permit girls as young as 15 to be married in “urgent” cases. In December 2012, the Lebanese news outlet Al-Safir reported that rates of early marriage of girls had risen drastically in Iraq in the previous decade. In 2013, the Population Reference Bureau, an international organization, reported that “the decline in early marriage has stopped in … Iraq,” citing its own statistics that 25 percent of girls marry before age 18 and 6 percent before age 15. The draft law’s provisions would legalize, rather than try to reverse, Iraq’s growing child marriage problem, Human Rights Watch said.
The draft law violates the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), which Iraq ratified in 1986, by giving fewer rights to women and girls on the basis of their gender. It also violates the Convention on Rights of the Child, which Iraq ratified in 1994, by legalizing child marriage, putting girls at risk of forced and early marriage and susceptible to sexual abuse, and not requiring decisions about children in divorce cases to be made in the best interests of the child.
The draft law ignores article 2 of the Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women by legalizing marital rape, Human Rights Watch said. The CEDAW committee, the body of international experts who review state compliance with the convention, in its February 28, 2014 review of Iraq’s reports, urged the government to “immediately withdraw the draft Jaafari personal status law.” The law also appears to violate the International Covenants on Civil and Political Rights and on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights by granting fewer rights to certain individuals on the basis of their religion.
The draft law also starkly contrasts article 14 of Iraq’s constitution, which prohibits “discrimination and distinction between Iraqis” and guarantees the equality of all Iraqis “without distinction to religion, faith, nationality, sex, opinion, economic or social status.”  Article 13 of Iraq’s constitution stipulates that it is the “supreme law” in Iraq and that “no law that contradicts this Constitution shall be enacted.”



Hey, get that, Nouri's bill violates the law repeatedly but it also violates the Iraqi Constitution.

Nouri who fancies himself a Constitutional expert.  Just Saturday, France24 was broadcasting their interview with Nouri.  Excerpt.


Nouri al-Maliki: What Sadr says doesn't deserve to be commented [on].  Let's talk about something else. It's an individual who is a newcomer to politics.  He doesn't know the basic rules of politics.  The Constitution doesn't mean a thing for a Sadr.  He doesn't know what it means: 'Constitution.' Abide by the Constitution for a Sadr?  And those around him?  Seems awkward.


Who's the newcomer?  What experience in politics did Nouri have before the US invaded Iraq?  None.

By the way, cleric and movment leader Moqtada al-Sadr's followers?  All Iraq News notes they continued their protest today -- protests over Nouri's insults of Moqtada.

We'll note this from Human Rights Watch's alert:



A broad spectrum of Iraqi rights activists, Sunni and Shia religious leaders, and judges have criticized the draft law as discriminatory, violating religious texts, and, because the law would single out one sect, entrenching sectarian divisions in law. The Iraqi Women’s Network, an association of women’s rights groups, held protests on March 8, International Women’s Day, calling it a day of mourning in Iraq.
“Iraq is in conflict and undergoing a breakdown of the rule of law,” Basma al-Khateeb, a women’s rights activist, told Human Rights Watch. “The passage of the Jaafari law sets the ground for legalized inequality.”



I'm wondering why the Iraqi women are yet again let down by America?  Why news outlets still won't cover them or their issues?  Why a protest took place in Baghdad on Saturday, Iraqi feminists protested, and American feminists and feminist groups and feminist outlets can't say one damn word to help the Iraqi women?

Good for Human Rights Watch and we've said that a lot in the last few years.

They've stepped up to the plate on so many Iraqi issues.

Nouri insulted them in the interview, just FYI., "Well, unluckily, the international organization for the human rights are never talking about what you said at the beginning.  They never say a word about the thousands of monthly casualties to the streets of Iraq. We never hear that organization criticize the terrorist organizations and name them as terrorists."


If you were a cheap thug like Nouri, you'd insult anyone who exposed the truth about you as well.  If you were human garbage like Nouri al-Maliki, you'd also lie.

And he is lying.  We don't have the space or the time to repeatedly demonstrate how much he lied about Human Rights Watch so we'll just address his little claim that violence is never called out (unless it's Nouri's violence).  Just last month, HRW issued a statement on the killing of Nouri's SWAT forces:

Feb 5, 2014

The execution-style killing of four members of Iraq’s SWAT forces, apparently by the ISIS armed group, is the latest atrocity in a campaign of widespread and systematic murder that amounts to crimes against humanity.

Use the link to read it in full.  HRW notes the victims in report after report, they also do issue statements on the continued killings.

For all that Nouri ignores, you can visit HRW's Iraq page.

Also on human rights, All Iraq News notes, "The International Human Rights Committee announced the nomination of the former Iraqi Premier, Ayad Allawi, as the Co-President for its Intergovernmental Relations Council. "  Allawi is the Iraqi Al Gore.  He won the 2010 election but Nouri, Barack Obama and the government of Iran refused to let Allawi become the prime minister.


And if you're not getting how useless the US news media is, let's  revisit John Barry's "'The Engame' Is A Well Researched, Highly Critical Look at U.S. Policy in Iraq" (Daily Beast):



Washington has little political and no military influence over these developments [in Iraq]. As Michael Gordon and Bernard Trainor charge in their ambitious new history of the Iraq war, The Endgame, Obama's administration sacrificed political influence by failing in 2010 to insist that the results of Iraq’s first proper election be honored: "When the Obama administration acquiesced in the questionable judicial opinion that prevented Ayad Allawi's bloc, after it had won the most seats in 2010, from the first attempt at forming a new government, it undermined the prospects, however slim, for a compromise that might have led to a genuinely inclusive and cross-sectarian government."


Barry wrote about it.  Few others did.  Not only didn't it get print or text coverage online, the famous author Michael R. Gordon (who's far from perfect and we've called him out many times) suddenly vanished from the TV dial.  He'd been on Charlie Rose so often, for example, he was practically a set fixture.  But this book?  No.  Charlie Rose wasn't interested.  After the book was published (and sold pretty well),  Ava and I noted the strange disappearing of Michael R. Gordon from the public affairs programs:

Equally curious is who you don't see.  Gwen Ifill doesn't know a damn thing about foreign policy so asking her to moderate the segment was laughable.  Equally laughable was not going with a NewsHour foreign policy guest for the segment.
In fact, we're thinking of one in particular: Michael R. Gordon of The New York Times.
Gordon's appeared multiple times on The NewsHour.  Strangely, he wasn't booked for the segment on foreign policy last week.
Why would that be?
If you're wondering, he's not suddenly press shy.  To the contrary, he has a new book to sell, one he co-wrote with Bernard E. Trainor, The Endgame: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Iraq, from George W. Bush to Barack Obama. The book came out Tuesday.
Generally, that means you can expect to see and hear Gordon all over PBS and NPR. Strangely, that has not been the case.  No NPR coverage last week of the book.  No come on The NewsHour for a discussion.  Frontline loved to have him on in the past but now now.  Charlie Rose?  He has appeared 12 times in the last ten years on Rose's PBS and Coca Cola program.  But he was no where to be found last week.
Did Gordon show up at the PBS office party loaded on booze with little Gordon hanging out of his fly?
No, he did something far worse than that.
He dared to criticize Barack -- the ultimate media faux pas.



If you're still not getting how awful the US news media is, let's look at 6 Tweets.  One is from an online operation run on a shoe string (I don't mean that as an insult, I mean they've got no real budget and depend on donations) and one is from a conglomerate with billions to spare.  Notice who focuses on what matters and who doesn't.




              
  1. As long as Maliki is the "Leader" of , will never see light.
  2. I'm choked! Laws against women in Irak! Where is the equaliy of Rights? Iraq: Don’t Legalize Marriage for 9-Year-Olds
  3. Jaafari Personal Status draft law in Iraq is shameful-Iraq's international 'partners' should press govt to rescind it
  4. Seems clear that there's no good reason to listen to Dick Cheney or any of his minions from the Bush era. Why, in 1 word: Iraq.


The first four deal with real issues.  Antiwar.com deals with a real issue.

Then comes MSNBC's Joy Reid.  She wants to talk Iraq?

No, she wants to play partisan bulls**t.

Joy's so brave, isn't she, calling out Dick Cheney in 2014.  What a brave little fountain of strength she is.


This is why MSNBC is worthless.

Joy, who isn't an idiot or an MSNBC hag, is capable of so much more and she could be amplifying this threat against Iraqi girls and Iraqi mothers (again, it strips custody rights from mothers).

But instead of helping, Joy thinks she's a comedian.  Well, now that is funny.

Who gives a damn about Dick Cheney?

Joy Reid, who would rather use her voice to note him than take the time to amplify the needs of Iraqi women.

Again, the American media -- whether NPR, the talk shows of MSNBC or what have you -- is failing the people.  It's failing the world.

For those who insist, "We can call out Condi and Dick Cheney and have time to cover what's happening in Iraq," then why haven't you?  You seem to think you're tired and useless (stolen) observations about events from a decade ago are needed or wanted.  No wonder your ratings are so low.

And what do you do when your flaws are pointed out?

Refuse to allow the criticism to be seen.  Around 3:00 pm EST, Ann left a comment on the hideous Morning Edition 'report' and they refused to post it.





So NPR publishes Alice Fordham who covered the Iraq War for Rupert Murdoch and the comments are all about Bush?
How typical and self-righteous as well as uninformed.
I consider Bush a War Criminal.
What's going on right now isn't about him. I'm not surprised Fordham plays the terrorist card, she learned it well under Murdoch.
But, fellow Americans, if you could take a moment to stop babbling about Bush, go over to Human Rights Watch and read their reports on Anbar.
Nouri al-Maliki is using collective punishment -- a War Crime. The Common Ills has pointed this out since the assault on Anbar began at the end of December.
Nouri's forces are killing innocents including children and they're bombing hospitals.
You may think you look really informed when you grumble about Bush in this story.
Maybe to an echo chamber you do.
But I'm a Green and you just look like people who want to talk but don't want to take the time required to learn the facts.
This isn't 2004.
There's a reason Senator Robert Menendez didn't want to arm Nouri and it took weeks of strong-arming him by the current White House for Nouri to get the Hellfire missiles he's now using on the people of Anbar.
It is true that War Criminal Bush appointed Nouri in 2006.
It's also true he lost the 2010 elections.
For 8 months he refused to step down and with the support of the US and Iran, he didn't have to.
Barack Obama is the one who ordered US officials to broker The Erbil Agreement which gives -- as The Common Ills points out repeatedly -- Nouri a second term by going around the Iraqi Constitution, concpets of democracy and the will of the Iraqi people.
That contract was signed because there was no government for 8 months following the election. The contract dictated a power-sharing government. But after Nouri signed it, he refused to honor it and the White House that had promised the Kurds a power-sharing agreement, President Barack Obama who had personally called Ayad Allawi to go back into Parliament on its first meeting in months (November 2010)? They suddenly ignored their promises.
NPR didn't report it accurately in real time. It's no surprise they're offering nonsense now.


If you ever doubted Nouri al-Maliki's ability to lead, it's on full display right now.  Tomorrow is the big terrorism conference that Brett McGurk's endlessly praised Nouri for.  The State Dept's Brett has praised this effort to bring the region's countries together to address the issue.

But today comes the news that two won't be participating.  NINA reports Qatar and Saudi Arabia have decided not to participate.  This decision comes after Saturday's broadcast of Nouri al-Maliki's interview where he slammed Qatar and Saudi Arabia repeatedly.  (See Saturday's "Nouri 'celebrates' International Women's Day" and "Iraq snapshot.")

He couldn't even keep his big mouth shut until after the conference.



Violence continued today in Iraq.

National Iraqi News Agency reports 2 people were shot dead in Mosul, a Mosul roadside bombing injured five bodyguards of Hussein Juma'a ("Adviser of the head of Hajj and Umrah"), 2 suicide bombers took their own lives in Mosul and the lives of 3 police members with four more police left injured, Joint Operations Command announced they killed 4 suspects outside Falluja, an Anbar incident left Major General Ali Ghazi al-Hashemi "shot in his left foot," a battle in Mosul left 1 fighter dead, another injured and 1 federal police member dead, security forces in Ramadi say they killed 4 suspects and wounded six more, and a Sadr City roadside bombing left 2 people dead and four more injured.