Tuesday, August 11, 2015

The whore of Baghdad


Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Justice for Hillary Goose Girl Style" went up Sunday.


goosegirl


Yes, Hillary should have to endure everything she said Ed Snowden deserved.

Remember, she said "Knowingly or unknowingly."

So it doesn't matter if she didn't know that she was sending classified information out across an unsecured server.


Meanwhile read these two Tweets.

  1. Aug 9
    PM Abadi's reform measures are vague & amorphous. They can be everything or nothing at all. (1)
    12 retweets 6 favorites
  3. Aug 9
    Bold, politically dangerous move by PM Abadi to abolish senior political posts. Unclear whether pols willing to back changes.
    22 retweets 12 favorites


And that's why Jane Arraf is the whore of Baghdad.

Always whoring for whomever is in charge -- Saddam, Nouri and now Haider.



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

 
Monday, August 10, 2015.  Chaos and violence continue, Iraq's protests frighten the political elite, Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi proposes reforms, Brookings gushes while others raise cautions, and much more.




Starting with violence as Diyala Province is rocked by two bombings.  Deutsche Welle notes, "According to Reuters news agency, IS also claimed responsibility for Monday's twin attacks - one near the provincial capital of Baquba, where a suicide car bombing killed over 30 people and wounded more than 70. The second attack occurred in the village of Kanaan, where officials said another suicide attack killed 7 people and wounded 15."  Reuters counts 58 dead.
AFP adds, "The blasts targeted mostly Shiite areas and came less than a month after a massive suicide attack left at least 120 dead in Khan Bani Saad, also in the eastern province."

Throughout Iraq today, Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) counts 221 dead.

Griffis is noted at the start of Dahr Jamal's latest garbage.

Here's the link to Dahr's crap.

Ray McGovern?

That's what we're doing at this late date?

Pretending that the CIA has a place in a left movement?

Or that Barack's love slave has anything to say worth hearing?

It's 2015.

If you're going to write about Iraq and you can't go beyond Bully Boy Bush and 2008, find another topic, you're just humiliating yourself.

And again, if you're using CIA filth, you really need to sit your tired ass down.  There is no place on the left for an embrace of the CIA.  None.

While we're on stupid . . .

Bill Van Auken.

Barack Obama has wrongly presented the options as back his deal or have war with Iran.

If Bully Boy Bush had done that, we'd call it the fear mongering that it is.  But Bill's all giddy with Barack just told us what's really going on and . . .

Just go to the bathroom and remove your soiled underwear.

Honestly, you're embarrassing yourself.

That goes for Michael Whitney who argues that Donald Trump is being attacked by the press because he told some truth in Thursday's GOP debate when he said he donated money because it meant, two or so years later, he could ask politicians for favor.

No, Donald Trump is being attacked because he's a sexist pig and this is nothing new -- either for Donald Trump or for the press.

Like Bill Van Auken, Michael Whitney's allowing his own desires to color reality.

And while they jerk off to their fantasies, just like Dahr Jamail, they miss everything that's going on in Iraq today.


Such as the protests these last weeks.


In Defense of Marxism quotes Iraqi Lamia Fadhil on participating in Iraq's recent wave of protests, "For more than 10 years the government didn’t provide anything for us. No electricity, no services and no jobs. That’s it. We've had enough."


And the protests, initially hailed as a "warning sign" by Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi, have had an impact.  Sunday,  Omar al-Jawoshy and Tim Arango (New York Times) reported:


 Facing widespread protests against government corruption and poor services as well as calls for change by Shiite clerics, Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi on Sunday proposed a series of drastic reforms that could be a turning point in the dysfunctional politics of Iraq that have persisted since the U.S. invasion in 2003.
Al-Abadi’s proposals, which came as the war against Islamic State group extremists has stalled in western Anbar province, were wide ranging. They included the elimination of three vice-presidency positions, largely ceremonial jobs that come with expensive perks, and the end of sectarian and party quotas that have dominated the appointments of top officials.



Al Bawaba reports:

Iraq’s Council of Ministers on Sunday approved a package of reforms proposed by Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi ostensibly aimed at improving public services and rooting out widespread corruption.
It does away with the positions of vice-president and deputy prime minister, among other things.

The move comes following two weeks of countrywide demonstrations to protest government corruption and demand improved public services.



Per In Defense of Marxism, this is the seven-point plan Haider is proposing:
“1) Complete & instant waning of security personnel for ALL high officials, & redirecting all security personnel to the Ministry of Defense to be trained & defend the country on the forefront.
2) Rescinding all exclusivity (in terms of treatment, priority, etc.) allocated to high government positions, including retired personnel.
3) A ban on the application of a quota system on high positions in Ministries, Independent Commissions, advisors, etc. The PM will form a committee to oversee the sacking of unqualified personnel, and their replacement on the basis of merit.
4) Condensing ministries and institutions to raise qualification & efficiency standards, as well as cost reduction.
5) Dissolving the positions of Deputies to the President, and to the Prime Minister immediately.
6) Revisiting old and current corruption cases under the supervision of a High Commission to fight corruption, comprised of experts, as well as appointing judges to oversee these cases known for their untainted integrity.
7) A call to the Cabinet of Ministers, then Parliament, to approve these measures, in order for the Prime Minister to respond to the people’s demands made through the Marja’iya or High Religious Establishment’s [in Najaf].”



Though the Cabinet approves, they do not have the last word and, today in Iraq, Haider's proposals were debated.   All Iraq News notes Speaker of Parliament Saleem al-Jobouri states that the "reforms are good but not enough."  AFP reports the Speaker is calling on Haider to fire various ministers and an unnamed source tells AFP the list includes, among others, the Minister of Electricity.  In an update, AFP also notes, "Juburi also called for MPs who are absent for more than a third of the time to be removed."


Meanwhile, Iraq Times reports that former prime minister and forever thug Nouri al-Maliki is smiling publicly at the reforms but working behind the scenes to dismiss Haider al-Abadi from the Dawa political party.  There is also talk that Nouri may be attempting to leave Iraq and there may be an order in place to prevent him from flying out of Baghdad International Airport.

The possible escape is floated as Iraqis demand accountability for the eight years Nouri was prime minister, for the eight years of no improvements in public services while the billions disappeared, the lack of electricity while Nouri's previously unemployed son purchased properties throughout Europe including in London, the lack of potable water while Nouri's previously unemployed son stocked up on expensive cars.  Protesters have noted that Nouri presided over 130 billion dollars during his tenure from 2006 through 2014 and they want to know where the money went?

There are rumors that Haider al-Abadi has a list of figures who will be charged with corruption and that Nouri al-Maliki is on that list.


Were Nouri to attempt to leave Baghad and be stopped at the airport that would be fitting since he steered the nation into chaos by persecuting Sunnis including Sunnis politicians and, as soon as the bulk of US troops pulled out of Iraq in December 2011, he was stopping Sunni politicians Tareq al-Hashemi (Vice President of Iraq) and Saleh al-Mutlaq (Deputy Prime Minister) as they attempted to visit the Kurdistan Regional Government.

Alsumaria reports Nouri is again likening peaceful protesters to terrorists and insisting that the demonstrators must be supervised and controlled by security forces because they will likely turn to violence.

All Iraq News quotes Deputy Prime Minister Bahaa al-Araji declaring today, "I will put all those who accused me of corruption under my foot."  He's going to need a really big foot.

Ahmed Rasheed, Saif Hameed, Stephen Kalin and Robin Pomeroy (Reuters) report al-Araji "resigned on Monday and will be investigated for corruption, officials said, the first tangible result of Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi's push to tackle corruption in the face of mounting unrest."  al-Araji has been an elected member of Parliament since 2006 and is part of Shi'ite cleric and movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr's bloc in Parliament.

Iraq Times reports that al-Araji, in his resignation letter, stated he was resigning at the request of Moqtada while Al Mada states that the travel ban imposed on al-Araji was put in place by Moqtada.  In addition,  Alsumaria notes that Moqtada is calling for protests if the reforms are not implemented.

Iraq Times quotes Vice President Ayad Allawi stating that he has had his resignation ready for the last four months and that he believes early elections are the only answer.

Iraq is due to hold Parliamentary elections in 2018.  Early elections, if Iraq moved on this today, would most likely take at least six months (more based on past history) which would mean they would be held in early 2016.


Apparently Brookings is no longer in the business of analysis.

Instead, they've branched out into the field of gushing as evidenced by Luay al-Khatteeb's latest nonsense which includes:

 Abadi's announcement on the 9th of August to institute a series of unprecedented reforms including the cancellation of some of the most senior positions in Iraq's Federal system, in a bid to end the sectarian quota-system, marks a potential watershed in Iraq's political history and its future.
If Abadi's gamble pays off, the 9th of August 2015 may in hindsight be remembered as a momentous day in Iraq's history, to outweigh the eventful regime change of the 9th of April 2003.


In hindsight this might be momentous!


Keep it in your pants, Luay, no one wants to see it.


Not everyone sees rainbows flowing from Haider al-Abadi's butt.  Tariq Alhomayed (Asharq Al-Awsat) offers warnings:

The concerns regarding Abadi’s decision are obvious. Iraq is drowning day-by-day in sectarian strife and tension, especially in light of the increasing marginalization of Sunnis in the country. This may lead Iraq down a path where the existing problem of Sunni and Shi’ite extremist groups becomes an even more disastrous problem. Certainly, few will mourn Nuri Al-Maliki’s departure from his position one of the country’s three vice presidents, but that does not mean that this latest move by Abadi comes armed with any specific mechanisms for its implementations or even guarantees that it will hold water. It is, then, hard to see how these measures will help abolish sectarian quotas for posts and safeguard the rights of all Iraq’s different religious and ethnic groups. This last point is especially salient since it was Abadi’s government that refused to arm Sunni tribal groups in the country fighting the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), not to mention the uncertainty still surrounding proposed plans to reinstate Iraq’s Republican Guard and the lack of trust between Abadi’s Baghdad government and the Kurds.
The truth is that everything that has happened in Iraq since the fall of Saddam Hussein points to a complete lack of trust between all of the country’s different religious and ethnic groups. Successive post-Saddam governments have all failed to properly solve the issue of sectarian quotas and cronyism, so why should Iraqis believe this latest move by Abadi will adequately address the problem? Why shouldn’t Iraqis believe that by canceling the posts Abadi is effectively turning into a new Maliki? Would Abadi ever allow a Sunni or Kurdish prime minister to form their own government in future, without him seeking to block those efforts for sectarian reasons or through an Iranian veto—as happened when the Shi’ite Nuri Al-Maliki regained his position as prime minister in 2010 despite losing the elections to Sunni candidate Iyad Allawi? In the absence of genuine political discourse and a national reconciliation process there are in truth no guarantees that Abadi is being sincere with this latest move. And, given everything that has happened recently in Iraq, it is extremely difficult to rely solely on (what may seem to be) good intentions. After all, the road to hell is paved with them, as the saying goes.  


Iraq Times reports Vice President Osama al-Nujaifi gave an interview to the BBC in which he stated that Haider was attempted to bypass and overturn the Constitution with these reforms or 'reforms' which the Constitution does not grant Haider the power to implement.

It's amazing how little attention has been given for what Haider's proposal, if implemented, means two weeks or two months on down the line.

Now it's more than worth again revisiting Ibrahim Saleh's February report for Niqash:


Recently there have been calls for major changes to the Iraqi political system, moving it from a parliamentary system to a presidential one. This would mean that rather than elected MPs in Baghdad choosing the country's President, voters would choose the President, who could then work somewhat separately from the also-elected Parliament. For example, the US is a presidential system. Iraq currently has a parliamentary system.
However politicians in Iraq are concerned that if this comes any closer to happening that it will be a way for former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to slip back into power, but this time through a legal back door. They are also concerned that while it may not be something that can happen immediately, there is potential for some changes to occur during the next elections.
The call for these changes were started by one of the Shiite Muslim militias involved in the fight against the extremist group known as the Islamic State. The group, League of the Righteous, or Asaib Ahl al-Haq in Arabic, is known to be closely linked with al-Maliki. It is also known to be one of the more hard line and extremist of the Shiite militias.

Which is why many local politicians saw this as a call to bring al-Maliki, who is currently somewhat sidelined as one of Iraq's three Vice Presidents, back to power. Al-Maliki's divisive policies and attempts to centralise power have taken a fair share of the blame for the country's current security crisis and, although his party was successful in the last elections, al-Maliki lost the post of Prime Minister to colleague, Haider al-Abadi late last year.



At today's State Dept press briefing, spokesperson John Kirby moderated a bit on Iraq which mainly (see first exchange) revealed how little the press is paying attention to Iraq.
QUESTION: Iraq?
MR KIRBY: Yes.
QUESTION: So about Prime Minister Abadi’s reform initiatives, he has removed two of his deputies and two vice presidents, including former Prime Minister Maliki, from power. What is the U.S. take on that? Is it good for the country at a time when it’s fighting the Islamic State?
MR KIRBY: Prime Minister Abadi has presented a proposal to streamline the Iraqi Government. We note that these measures were unanimously approved by the Council of Ministers. This is an internal Iraqi matter, but we do commend Prime Minister Abadi’s initiative to promote improved government services and transparency.
Please.
QUESTION: So one more thing about – inside Iraq but inside, actually, the Kurdistan region.
MR KIRBY: Say again?
QUESTION: Inside the Kurdistan region in Iraq, there is another crisis going on nowadays. And according to the experts, this crisis over the presidency of Kurdistan has reached a particularly dangerous level with the opposition parties stressing that president should not seek a third term, and he’s not willing, apparently, to not seek a third term. And --
MR KIRBY: You’re talking about President Barzani?
QUESTION: President Barzani, yes. So isn’t that – like aren’t you worried that this region, which is very important in your fight against Islamic State, might destabilize as a result of this internal leadership crisis?
MR KIRBY: Well, I’m not going to – as I said to your first question, I’m not going to talk about internal political matters inside Iraq. I think broadly speaking, Iraqi political leadership understands the threat that ISIL poses to them and to the Iraqi people, and we’re going to continue to work with the Government of Iraq to deal with the threat that they face. So I think I’d leave it there.
QUESTION: Has the United States – I know Mr. Brett McGurk was in Kurdistan, I think yesterday. Has the United States been in touch with the Kurdish officials over this specific issue, the crisis over the presidency?
MR KIRBY: We don’t ever talk about the details of diplomatic conversations. Ambassador McGurk is in Iraq to have a wide range of meetings and discussions with Iraqi leaders about how we can all work together to combat and to degrade and defeat ISIL inside Iraq.
QUESTION: Just one more, John. Sorry. Today, actually, there are media reports that the ruling party, which is the KDP, has – had moved its armored vehicles and its armed forces inside the capital Erbil, as basically a deliberate attempt to show muscle inside the capital at a time when the region is facing this leadership crisis. Aren’t you worried while you’re arming, of course, the Peshmerga, which is an effective force against ISIS in the ground, that this – what these weapons might – might be used in domestic struggles by the Kurds?
MR KIRBY: Well, I’m not aware of the events that you’re detailing there. I’d just go back to what I said before. I think we’re certainly comfortable that leaders in Iraq share the same sense of urgency and purpose that we do about the threat ISIL poses internally to Iraq and the Iraqi people but also regionally, and frankly, they’ve got aspirations beyond the region. I think everybody has that same shared sense of purpose, and that our – that we are as a coalition directing our energies, our efforts, our resources, against that threat. And everybody understands that that’s the threat that’s most important right now.
QUESTION: Thank you.
QUESTION: Could I have a quick follow-up, please?
MR KIRBY: Sure.
QUESTION: On the Iraqi reform package by Prime Minister Abadi, I know you don’t want to talk about the Iraqi internal issues, but from this building you have said many times that the problem of ISIS and the Iraqi issue is not only security, it is also the problem of governance that led to the ISIS unfolding.
MR KIRBY: Right.
QUESTION: And also even President Obama said that --
MR KIRBY: Right.
QUESTION: -- several times. So do you think this reform package is part of the plan that you are hoping that Prime Minister Abadi will fix the governance problem, or this is something else, you don’t support it?
MR KIRBY: I applaud you for a very deft attempt to try to get me to actually go ahead and comment on internal Iraqi politics. (Laughter.) It was a very well-constructed question – (laughter) – that I am going to not answer. (Laughter.)
Look, these are internal Iraqi matters. But as I said at my outset, we certainly commend Prime Minister Abadi for the initiative that he’s taking to promote government – to promote improved government services and transparency. I mean, he has really moved with alacrity to try to get at better governance inside Iraq, to be more inclusive, to be more responsive to the Iraqi people. And nothing changes about what we’ve said before about the importance of good governance in Iraq and, frankly, in Syria with respect to permanently being able to sustain a defeat of ISIL.
QUESTION: Okay, one more on Kurdistan. I just want to follow up on what Namo said. Actually, Ambassador McGurk and Ambassador Jones, they were meeting with the Kurdish officials over the weekend, specifically on Saturday, and they have discussed, actually, the issue related to the President Barzani. I do have a response from Ambassador McGurk’s office about that, but I just want to have a clear answer about that, if there is something United States want to favor in – to say in the favor of President Barzani that he – that they want to stay – President Barzani to stay because of the ISIS effort, or this is something you don’t want to talk about it?
MR KIRBY: I’m not going to get into the details of conversations. I mean, these are internal Iraqi political issues that the United States is not going to insert ourselves into. But you’re right; Ambassador McGurk did meet with President Barzani and other leaders there. He reaffirmed the U.S. commitment to continued cooperation with Iraqi Kurdish forces in the fight against ISIL, and he commended KRG officials for their coordination with the Government of Iraq and coalition members in that same fight, and he praised the contribution of Peshmerga forces.
QUESTION: One last on Iraq and Iran. On the – over the weekend and also that other – last week, I think, also, that Iranian, I don’t know, spy, whatever, intelligence, tried to assassinate one of the Iranian Kurdish opposition leaders in Iraq. And two days ago, one of the Iranian spy also was captured by the Iranian opposition leaders in Sulaymaniyah that he was trying to plant 20 kilograms of TNT in their headquarters where there are civilians also living there.



Moving to the topic of Iran, Vets Against The Deal has released a video opposing Barack's proposed deal.  The video features Iraq War veteran Staff Sgt Robert Bartlett.






Josh Rogin (Bloomberg) covers the group here and notes:

Retired Gen. Mike Flynn, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency during Obama’s first term, is an adviser to the group. He said soldiers by and large weren’t advocates of the war in Iraq, but were simply called on to serve and did their duty. But now, many of those individuals are veterans, and they want to have a say.
"They have a right and a responsibility to speak up,” Flynn said.






 al jazeera

Posted by at

Sunday, August 09, 2015

Oh right because the only reason I listened to you before we broke up was for sex.

Last week's Beauty and the Beast (The CW) dealt with the fall out from Cat's decision to walk away from saving the world.

Everything, as Vincent knew it would, went to crap.

The terrorist with all the powers is using his assassins to drain the blood of those with powers from the serum as well as those injected with the serum who no longer had powers.

This led to the attack on JT.

By then, Cat realized that she and Vincent had to take on the bad guys and that this was their destiny (which even Cat's sister Heather realized finally).

JT and Tess remain apart.  But she had the best line of the episode when JT was at the bar whining he didn't feel he could bother her with his problems since they've broken up.

Tess: Oh, right.  Because the only reason I listened to you before we broke up was for sex.

:D



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


 
Saturday, August 8, 2015.  Chaos and violence continue, protests continue in Iraq, Haider al-Abadi's chance to demonstrate 'change' appears to have passed, the one year anniversary of Barack's plan or 'plan' reveals no real progress, and much more.



Starting with news of awards, Nick Vivarelli (Variety) reports, " Iraqi-French director Abbas Fahdel’s docu “Homeland (Iraq Year Zero) is the winner of the Doc Alliance Selection Award, given by a group of seven prominent European festivals dedicated to docus, and presented for the first time this year at the Locarno Film Festival."


Here's the trailer for the documentary.





At his website, the following is noted:


Abbas Fahde is an Iraqi-French film director, screenwriter and film critic, born in Babylon, Iraq.
Based in France since the age of 18 years, he studied cinema at the Sorbonne University until Ph.D. In January 2002, he returned to Iraq with a French passport and filmed a documentary film, Back to Babylon (film), in which he asked himself: “What have my childhood friends become? How have their lives changed? What would my life have been like if I hadn’t chosen to build my destiny elsewhere?” The country’s dramatic situation is the background of this introspective investigation.
One year later, in February 2003, when a new war seems imminent, Abbas Fahdel returned to Iraq with the intention of filming his family and friends, and the superstitious hope of protecting them against the dangers threatening them. When the war started, he returned to France and lost all contact with his family. Two months later, he again returned to Iraq and discovered a country shaken by violence, the nightmare of dictatorship replaced by chaos, but a country where, nonetheless, everything remains possible: the best or the worse. This historical moment is the theme of his second documentary film, We Iraqis.
In 2008, he directed the feature film Dawn of the World, a war-drama in which he gives an unexpected account of the multiple impacts of the Gulf Wars and how they have dramatically damaged an area known to be the geographic location of the biblical Garden of Eden.

In 2015, his new film Homeland (Iraq Year Zero), a monumental documentary of 334 minutes, is presented in “World Première” at Visions du réel International Film Festival.


Moving over to activism, protests continue in Iraq.  As with last weekend, protests continued.  Friday, Alsumaria reported that Shi'ite cleric and movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr issued   instructions Thursday for his followers which included that they take part in peaceful actions and not damage private property, that they not wear military uniforms while protesting and that they not carry photos/placards/banners with photos of any political or religious official.





    • In the image above, the top right is Moqtada al-Sadr and below him is Ammar al-Hakim.  Ammar is the leader of the Islamic Supreme Council in Iraq.  If he's now supporting the protesters, that would be a big switch from his remarks earlier this week.


    From Thursday:


     Last weekend saw protests across Iraq.  Abdul Latif al-Saadoun (MEM) observes today:


    "If we cannot provide enough electric power for the Iraqis, why don't the families buy private generators?" asked an Iraqi official during a recent press interview. It was similar to the quotation misattributed to French Queen Marie Antoinette two hundred years ago; if the people don't have bread, "Then let them eat cake."
    Again, like the French, the Iraqis revolted by igniting the uprising in Basra. This spread around the country and this time the Iraqi leaders could not blame the Yazidis, which they had done in the past when there was activity in Iraq's western cities. Those who gathered in Iraq's Tahrir and other Squares did not belong to a specific sect, race or party. They gathered as Iraqis and expressed their anger at their rulers who have subjected them to decades of failure, with neither justice nor anything as mundane as new building projects. Instead, the leaders conspired in the name of religion to loot the country's wealth and used its resources to satisfy their evil desires and feed their obsession for money and power.

    al-Saadoun goes on to note how the Iraqi government went on to blame the Islamic State with Ammar al-Hakim (leader of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq) insisting that the protesters themselves were members of the Islamic State.  How very sad events have been for al-Hakim.  His relationship with the US has soured.  He's not moved forward or higher in the political hierarchy of Iraq.  And now he's attacking the people in a manner that recalls Nouri al-Maliki's ridiculous attacks on the protesters.



    So if Ammar is now supporting the protesters, that would actually be major news.
    Regardless of whether Ammar supports them or not, the protesters were out in full force:






























    • The protests address corruption and lack of services.


    For massive protests, there had to be that and more.  The more for many Sunnis include the continued targeting of the Sunni population.



















    • Nothing has changed under Haider's leadership.

    He is, thus far, an abject failure.



    National Iraqi News Agency reports:

    Speaker of the House of Representatives Saleem al-Jubouri announced on Friday that he will be assigned the next session of parliament to discuss the demands of the demonstrators and set time limits for their achievement, stressing the importance of ending the existence of the corrupt who have squandered the money of the Iraqi people.
    Al-Jubouri said in a speech addressed to the demonstrators: that the House of Representatives will allocate the next meeting to discuss the demands of the demonstrators and to identify time ceilings for their implementation," adding, that the demonstrators demands are legitimate and can not be ignored, it is necessary to end the presence of the corrupt who have squandered and stole the bounties of the country."


    All Iraq News reports:

     “All of you together to the court, all of you are thieves,” chanted protesters gathered at Tahrir Square and carrying Iraqi flags. “Friday after Friday, we’ll get the corrupt out.”
    Protesters also turned out in Nasiriyah, Diwaniah, Najaf, Samawah, Karbala and Babel provinces to air similar grievances, the reporter of AIN said.
    Baghdad and other cities have seen weeks of protests against the poor quality of services, especially power cuts that leave Iraqis with only a few hours of electricity per day as temperatures top 50C.



    Last Saturday, Iraq's prime minister dubbed the protests a "warning sign."  He faced more warning signs on Friday. All Iraq News reported, "The Supreme Religious Authority said that Prime Minister, Haider al-Abadi, has to avoid the partisan confesionalism and uncover those who hinder reforms."  And they noted, "The Supreme Religious Authority called Prime Minister, Haider al-Abadi, to cancel all former and current key officials' privileges."  Sputinik added, "Earlier this day, the country’s leading Shiite clergyman Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani released a statement through his aide addressed to Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi, stressing that he should immediately start reforming the government and strike those who steal people’s money with an 'iron fist'."

    And Haider's reaction?   Reuters quotes him from Facebook writing, "I promise to announce a comprehensive reform plan ... and I call on the political forces to cooperate with me to implement the reform program."

    Help me out.

    What was happening in February 2011?

    Oh, right: Protests.


    And what did then-prime minister and forever thug Nouri al-Maliki do?

    He declared give him 100 days and he would end corruption, create jobs and blah blah blah.

    And so Moqtada called for his followers to leave the streets and stop protesting.

    As we noted June 4, 2011:


    Among the things Nouri was supposed to be addressing in the 100 Days (called in an attempt to defocus attention on the protests and to buy time for Nouri) was the lack of jobs. Al Mada notes that while the official unemployment rates is 15% (a high number itself), the actual unemployment number is probably 30%. Mohammed Tawfeeq and Chelsea J. Carter (CNN) report on the impending end of the 100 Days and note what's taking place as the end arrives:

    But activists and a leading human rights group accused al-Maliki's government of a campaign of intimidation against protest organizers ahead of the deadline, even as an Iraqi government spokesman announced a news conference to showcase improvements.
    Hundreds of demonstrators gathered Friday in Baghdad's Tahrir Square to demand the release of four protest organizers -- Jihad Jalil, Ali al-Jaf, Mouyed Faisal and Ahmed Al-Baghdadi -- who were detained during a protest at the same location a week earlier.
    Carrying banners that featured pictures of the four organizers, demonstrators chanted: "Oh Maliki, don't muzzle the voice of the people/oh Maliki, release the four immediately."

    The 100 Days were also supposed to see an improvement in the security situation. That didn't take place either. Alsumaria TV reports, "Iraqi Parliament Speaker Ousama Al Nujaifi believes that the recurrence of bombings in Iraq without control is a clear sign on the failure to manage security in the country and an indicator on the major downfall in the performance of security forces."  



    But 100 days came and went and Nouri didn't end a thing.  From the June 7, 2011 snapshot:


     The 100 Days is over. Al Rafidayn reports Nouri's press conference yesterday in Baghdad found Nouri expressing his hope that "the citizens will treat us kindly in the measuring our accomplishments and that they will be objective." He announced that meetings would take place today on evaluations. New Sabah quotes State Of Law's Khaled al-Asadi stating that Nouri will make assessments through tonight and that the 100 Days was in order to evaluate the performances and that "no sane person would assume a government only four years old could accomplish improvement in one hundred days." Oh, how they try to lower the expectations now. The 100 Days?  Al Jazeera gets it right, "Maliki gave his cabinet a 100-day deadline to improve basic services after a string of anti-government protests across Iraq in February.  He promised to assess their progress at the end of that period, and warned that 'changes will be made' at failing ministries.  That deadline expired on Tuesday -- and Maliki largely retreated from his threat, instead asking for patience and more time to solve problems." Fakhri Karim (Al Mada) observes that the 100 Days has done little to instill strength in the belief that Nouri has the "ability to manage the Cabinet" and the duties of the office of prime minister. Karim notes that Nouri's inability to govern, his failure at it, led to the protests and that they were for the basic services which are "the most basic necessities" of our time.


    Iraqi politicians are known for playing kick-the-can and insisting, given time, they will solve something while apparently all they're hoping for is that, in the delay, people will forget.  Even Nouri appears to hope that the protesters have forgotten 2011.  Mustafa Salim and Liz Sly (Washington Post) reports:

    The protesters included a sizable number of supporters of former prime minister Nouri al-Maliki, who suppressed similar demonstrations against the corruption of his government four years ago by detaining and intimidating organizers. Maliki, who has not attempted to hide his hope of returning to power, issued a statement calling on Abadi “to hit corrupt officials financially and politically.”
    Many demonstrators said they had turned out only to demand what Lamia Fadhil, 29, called “a decent life.”

    “For more than 10 years the government didn’t provide anything for us. No electricity, no services and no jobs,” she said. “That’s it. We’ve had enough.”




    Reuters reports:

    In Basra on Friday, one sign depicted the city as a bony "milking cow" -- a reference to complaints that Baghdad has benefited from the region's oil while neglecting basic services like power and water.
    "I call for fighting any corrupt official," said government employee Muntadhar Hatam, 55. "They are more dangerous than Daesh (Islamic State). They are the terrorists."  


    The same charges were made against Nouri al-Maliki.

    Is that any real surprise?

    Nouri al-Maliki is head of the Dawa political party.

    Haider al-Abadi is in the Dawa political party.

    Ahead of the 2010 elections, Nouri refused to run with Dawa and created the political coalition State of Law.

    Haider al-Abadi is a member of the State of Law coalition.

    There were any number of Shi'ite politicians US President Barack Obama could have backed for prime minister this time last year.

    He could have gone with, for example, anyone from the National Alliance or ISCI.  He could have backed Moqtada (though he never would, the US government has spent 12 years demonizing Moqtada).

    Instead, for 'change,' he backed someone who was friends with Nouri, who served in Nouri's political coalition and was a member of the same political party.

    And then Barack wanted to pretend 'change' was possible in Iraq.

    Nouri pulled the country to the edge of destruction.

    For those not paying attention, the Iraqi people kicked him out in the 2010 elections but Barack used a contract (The Erbil Agreement) to give Nouri a second term as prime minister.  That agreement was supposed to ensure a power-sharing government and Barack personally called Ayad Allawi (whose Iraqiya won the election) to insist that the contract had the full backing of the White House.

    But Nouri refused to implement the power-sharing government.

    So Iraqi leaders began demanding he do so in the summer of 2011 -- Ayad Allawi, Moqtada al-Sadr, Osama al-Nujaifi, Massoud Barzani and more -- Shi'ites, Sunnis, Kurds, all demanding Nouri honor the contract.

    He refused to do so.

    So, in the spring of 2012, they moved towards a no-confidence vote in Parliament to strip Nouri of his office.

    Moqtada repeatedly stated publicly that the effort could be killed at any time by Nouri agreeing to implement the power-sharing government he promised in The Erbil Agreement (promised in order to get a second term after losing the 2010 election).

    They gathered the signatures, as the Constitution demanded.  They then handed them over to the president of Iraq, Jalal Talabani.

    Talabani refused to obey the Constitution and forward the petition to Parliament.

    He instead announced he had checked the signatures and some of the MPs -- he never identified them -- said they wouldn't sign the petition if it was put before them today.

    Too damn bad.

    Not only was this not Jalal's role but there's also the fact that you make your decision when you sign.  You don't get to remove your name after you signed (and maybe they wanted to or maybe Jalal just lied).

    If they wanted to change their mind, they could do so during the actual vote.

    But, under pressure from the White House, Jalal pretended he had the right to kill the petition and that's what he did.

    Then like the grotesque fat ass coward that he is, he announced he was leaving for Germany because he needed to have surgery -- it was surgery necessary for his continued living.

    Turns out he was having knee surgery.

    Karma bit the liar in the ass and months later he'd have a stroke.

    But after he killed the petition, the Iraqi people took to the streets.

    They had tried to vote Nouri out.

    They had tried to have their elected officials remove him.

    All they had left was protests.

    And Nouri called them terrorists, had reporters covering the protests kidnapped by the police, tortured by the police and he had the protesters followed home, had them arrested, had them killed -- yes, had them killed (especially in Anbar Province) and then he began attacking them at peaceful protests.

    The Iraqi people could not take a third term of Nouri -- Nouri who'd promised in 2011 that he would not seek a third term.

    The point of forcing Nouri out, as Barack did, was to calm the crises in Iraq.

    The point was to provide a re-set.

    And the new prime minister -- whomever he or she was -- would work quickly to demonstrate a difference with Nouri, to end the persecution, to end the corruption, to provide public services, to end the illegal detention of Sunnis, the beatings and rapes of Sunni women falsely arrested, and so much more.

    He couldn't even stop the illegal bombings of residential neighborhoods in Falluja.

    September 13, 2014, he noted these bombings were wrong (they are illegal, they meet the legal definition of War Crimes).

    He said they had ended.  He had ordered their end.

    September 14th, the very next day, they continued and have ever since.

    Haider's provided no change and the Iraqi people are registering that after a year.


    The violence continues (even increases) under Haider. Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) counts 109 violent deaths across Iraq on Friday.



    We spent the bulk of the July 18th snapshot noting the failure that is Barack's plan or 'plan' with regards to combating the Islamic State in Iraq.  Today, Trevor Timm (Guardian) observes the failures:

    This Saturday marks one full year since the US military began its still-undeclared war against Islamic State that the government officials openly acknowledge will last indefinitely. What do we have to show for it? So far, billions of dollars have been spent, thousands of bombs have been dropped, hundreds of civilians have been killed and Isis is no weaker than it was last August, when the airstrikes began.
    But don’t take it from me – that’s the conclusion of the US intelligence community itself. As the Associated Press reported a few days ago, the consensus view of the US intelligence agencies is that Isis is just as powerful as it was a year ago, and they can replace fighters faster than they are getting killed.















     al jazeera

    Posted by at
    Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)