Hump day, hump day. Close to the weekend. Thank God. :D
If you missed Marcia's "A Pig Named Obama " awhile back, go read it. It's about how Piggie Barack refused to invite women for his basketball game. He's finally issued a comment on the matter. Eamon Javers (Politico) reports:
“I think this is bunk,” Obama said. He explained that he invited the regular House of Representatives pick-up basketball players. “I don't know if there are women who— were Members of Congress who play basketball on a regular basis,” Obama said. “I don't think there are. You know, I don't think sends any kind of message or signal whatsoever.”
On that point, the president seemed to differ from his own press secretary, who took a different tack when asked about the basketball game at the White House briefing. “I would say that the point is well taken,’ said Robert Gibbs. “The President obviously is someone who, as the father of two young daughters, has an avid interest in their competing against anybody on the playing field. The President has certainly played basketball and other sports with women in the past, and I anticipate he'll do so in the future.”
Barack should be ashamed but I bet you anything his enablers won't call him out. Robin Morgan? Kim Gandy? Any of you members of the Cult of St. Barack got something to say? NO, didn't think so. That's got text and audio and so does this next thing, Jake Sherman (Politico) reports on a stunt Congressman Ed Towns pulled to keep Republicans out, change the locks on the doors:
Towns (D-N.Y.) is seething mad that the top Republican on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) tried to force a subpoena vote in the committee regarding a Countrwide Financial investigation, without Towns’ consent. Towns got even angrier when Republicans posted a video of Democrats slipping out the side door to avoid that vote last week. That left leave Republicans without the proper committee quorum, but the video did give the GOP fodder to portray Democrats as avoiding a tough vote on documents related Countrywide, which offered VIP mortgages to Democratic Sens. Chris Dodd and Kent Conrad.
That's really shameful and we would be screaming our heads off if this was a Republican committee head doing this to a Democrat. I may return to the topic tomorrow. Ruth (Ruth's Report) is doing a post tonight that I might go into tomorrow and bring back up this topic. It's about fairness and why you should be worried so check out Ruth tonight. And check out this at Politico as well.
Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"
Wednesday, October 21, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the Iraqi Parliament still has not passed an election law, the issue was raised by the US Congress today, Congress has a problem getting the Defense Department to show them a draw-down plan, and more.
"Today the Committee meets to receive testimony on the status of the US Military Redeployment From Iraq: Issues and Challenges," explained US House Armed Services Committee Chair Ike Skelton this morning. The Committee heard from the Pentagon's Michele Flournoy, Vice Admiral James Winnefeld, Alan Estevez and Lt Gen Kathleen Gainey. Chair Skelton observed, "I don't think anyone on this committee thinks this will be the last hearing on this subject. We have been involved in Iraq for a long time, and I believe we will be involved there for a long time to come." In her opening remarks, Flournoy noted that
Michele Flournoy: Examples of the kinds of excess equipment that we intend to transfer to the ISF [Iraqi Security Forces] are tool kits and sets, individual clothing and equipment items such as helmets and body armor and commercial trucks. We requested the authority to streamline the material process and transfer some non-excess equipment such as 9mm pistols, cargo trucks, airfield control and operations systems, M1114 up-armored HWMMVs and armored gun trucks. We would like thank the Committee for including this authority as it will help ensure that the ISF can fulfill their mission by the time US forces depart, an absolutely vital step toward the goal of a soverign, stable and self-reliant Iraq.
Meanwhile Vice Admiral James Winnefeld made like Fatboy Slim. The original . . .
Fatboy Slim: We've come a long, long way together
Through the hard times and the good
I have to celebrate you baby
I have to praise you like I should-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d
The pale copy . . .
Vice Admiral James Winnefeld: Meanwhile the Iraqi Security Forces
which we'll refer to as "ISF"
have come a long way
since the security agreement was signed in November 2008.
Like most people, I prefer the original; however, it should be noted that both are creative -- even if only one is recognized as such while the other is treated as 'fact' by a cowed media.
Chair Ike Skelton: Back on July 22nd, Madame Undersecretary, we asked that the Department of Defense provide our committee with a copy of Up Forward 0901 which is, so the members will remember, the order that lays out the organizations and responsibilities for various functions and how the redeployment will work. Despite repeated requests, by our staff, of the Dept of Defense, that Up Forward 0901 has not been provided nor has their been a legal reason given for not providing it for us. Now we pass legislation based upon testimony, based upon briefings, based upon documents. And all of this goes together to put us in position to receive compliments like Admiral Winnefeld just gave us on putting out good legislation. But this one piece of legislation, which is highly important on redeployment from Iraq, thus far, unless you're willing to give it to us this morning, has not been furnished.
Michele Flournoy: Sir, I am -- we are quite happy to have -- to bring that O plan over to you to have staff brief you on the details --
Chair Ike Skelton: And you will leave it with us in our classified --
Michele Flournoy: And I regret that we were not more responsive to your request earlier. But what we'd like to do is come over and-and share it with you, brief you on it and we can work out the details of how it should be handled.
Chair Ike Skelton: Well the details are not just coming over and show it to us and then walk back with it.
Michele Flournoy: I understand.
Chair Ike Skelton: We are very responsible in this committee and responsible with classified material as you know.
Michele Flournoy: I understand. Right.
Chair Ike Skelton: It's some 400 pages long --
Michele Flournoy: [Overlapping] I understand.
Chair Ike Skelton: -- and come over and give us a rough look in 400 pages is pretty difficult. And we would expect full cooperation. And really, is there some reason? We really want to know --
Michele Flournoy: There is --
Chair Ike Skelton: I'm not trying to be difficult I just really want to know.
Michele Flournoy: There is no intention to keep the information from you at all and-and we want to be responsive to your requests.
Chair Ike Skelton: But that was July 22nd?
Michele Flournoy: I understand. I think it was recently brought to my attention and we want to make sure that we are responsive to your response as quick -- as soon as possible. I don't have it physically with me today but I can promise you that we will get it to you.
Chair Ike Skelton: You'll bring it over and leave it with us in a classified manner so we will have the time to go through the 400 pages? Is that correct?
Michele Flournoy: Yes.
Requested July 22nd and three months later still not provided. Why would the administration work so hard to avoid sharing the plan with Congress? And didn't the secrecy leave with George W. Bush? ("No" on the latter.)
Iraq still hasn't passed the election law. The one that was supposed to have been passed by Parliament no later than . . . last Thursday. Jeff Mason (Reuters) reports that "Barack Obama urged Iraq on Tuesday to complete an election law so that a January poll is not delayed" and it didn't make a damn bit of difference. Iran's Press TV reports the Parliament took a pass again today and quotes Speaker of Parliament Iyad al-Samarrai, "The issue has failed and has been moved on to the Political Council for National Security." Gina Chon (Wall St. Journal) quotes al-Sammaraie stating, "Lawmakers felt they had reached a dead end and couldn't move forward any further so we are giving this to the political leaders." They are now 'planning' to vote on Monday . . . "if the council, comprising of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, President Jalal Talabani and the leaders of major political parties, make a proposal by Sunday." Laith Hammoudi and Jenan Hussein (McClatchy Newspapers) report that Dawa Party member Ali al "Adeeb told McClatchy in a phone call that the Kirkuk issue is the main problem with the new law. He added that Arab and Turkomen want to use 2004 voter records, because those after the 2005 election reflect a large increase in the province's Kurdish population. The Kurdish bloc in the parliament, however, wants the province's representation to reflect that increase, which Kurds argue merely reverses Saddam's 'Arabization' campaign." Suadad al-Salhy (Reuters) reports, "The United Nations envoy to Iraq, Ad Melkert, said further delays in passing the law may call into doubt not only the Jan. 16 election date, but also the credibility of the result." Melkert is quoted stating, "It is the collective responsibility of members of parliament to now rise to the occassion and be ready to account to the Iraqi people, who expect to exercise their right to express their preference in the upcoming elecitons." Rod Nordland (New York Times) adds, "The Iraqi Independent High Electoral Commission and United Nations elections experts have said Iraq needs at least 90 days to adequately prepare for the vote. Iraq's existing election law was declared unconstitutional by its highest court, which said it needs to be replaced or amended." Jane Arraf observes in "Discord as elections looms in Iraq" (Global Post):As Iraqi parliamentarians struggled over the past week with exactly how democratic they really want to be, it was telling that the brightest spot of democracy and certainly the savviest public relations campaign was playing out across town in Sadr City. Members of parliament for the past two weeks have been trying to pass an election law that would pave the way for national elections by the end of January, which are wanted by the voters and required by the Constitution. A vote Thursday became bogged down in a dispute over how voting would take place in Kirkuk, the city disputed by Kurds, Arabs, Turkmen and every other group that wants to lay claim to its oil and historic homelands. It stalled again on Monday.The delay has so alarmed both the U.S. and the U.N. that they've both issued statements urging parliament to get its act together and pass the law. The U.S. has been so fixated on the January elections that worry over the timing and type of elections has eclipsed the almost unspoken fear lurking in the background that elections done badly could be even more destabilizing than no vote at all.
The lack of an election law was raised during today's hearing.
Ranking Member Howard McKeon: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have this article that was written [by Oliver August] in the London Times yesterday. The title is "Violence Threatens Barack Obama's pledge to pull troops out of Iraq." And what they're basically saying is that they're threatening to move back the election from January. The election can't be held until their Parliament passes an election law. And, uh, al Qaeda doesn't want to have an election. And they want to do what they can to disrupt it. [The top US commander in Iraq] General [Ray] Odierno feels that he needs to keep his troops there thirty to sixty days after the election to ensure a peaceful transition of government. Do you have any intelligence showing that -- or any feeling that the election is going to be postponed?
Michele Flournoy: Uh, let me start by saying, you know, the draw-down plan that we have, is conditions based and it creates multiple decision points for re-evaluating and, if necessary, changing our plans based on developments on the ground. Although the government of Iraq's self-imposed deadline of October 15th for passing the elections law has passed, we judge that the COR [Council Of Representatives] still has another week or two to come to some kind of an agreement on the elections law before it will put the January date -- the early January date -- in jeopardy in terms of the election commission's ability to actually physically execute the, uh, the election. If a new law with open lists is not passed, the fall back solution for them is to return to the 2005 election law which is based on a closed list system. But that could be used for upcoming elections, the COR would simply have to vote on an election date. If that law is not passed in the next two weeks, they will be looking at slipping the date to later in January which would still be compliant with the [Iraqi] Constitution but would be later than originally planned. In that instance, M-NF-I [Multi-National Forces Iraq] would need to engage with the government of Iraq to do some contingency planning on how to secure the elections at a later date and that might well have-have implications. But I just want to reinforce, right now, on the ground in Baghdad, here in Washington, just yesterday, our focus is on trying to stick to the current election timeline. The [US] President [Barack Obama] personally impressed upon Prime Minister [Nouri al-] Maliki the importance of sticking to the Constitutionally specified timeline for the Iraqi elections and we are putting all of our diplomatic effort towards that end. That said, of course we will have contingency plans to adjust if necessary. But right now, we're using all of our diplomatic and other leverage to try to make sure the elections happen on time.
Ranking Member Howard McKeon: We won't be forcing General Odierno to withdraw our troops if they don't hold the election in a timely manner? We will still be flexible and allow him to keep the troops there? To provide the national security so they don't -- they don't put themselves at risk in trying to rush out in the couple of month period?
Michele Flournoy: The draw-down plan is not rigid. It is got -- it is conditions based, it leaves room for re-evaluation and adjustment in terms of the pace of the draw-down between now and the end of 2011 so, if need be, we will re-examine things based on conditions on the ground.
The above will shock a few. Especially those who, for example, foolishly believed Barack wanted all troops out and was promising that when he ran for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination. Barack made clear to the New York Times that everything was contingent and that he would send troops back in if there was a problem. Of course, the New York Times confused the issue with their write up of that interview (Tom Hayden got confused, for instance) and it was only if you read the transcript of the interview that you discovered what Barack was actually saying (when Hayden discovered that, he suddenly was alarmed but, like all of his alarms, it was a twenty-four hour, viral kind of alarm).
From the November 2, 2007 snapshot
Though Obama says he wants "to be clear," he refuses to answer that yes or no question and the interview is over."
So let's be clear that the 'anti-war' Obama told the paper he would send troops back into Iraq. Furthermore, when asked if he would be willing to do that unilaterally, he attempts to beg off with, "We're talking too speculatively right now for me to answer." But this is his heavily pimped September (non)plan, dusted off again, with a shiny new binder. The story is that Barack Obama will NOT bring all US troops home. Even if the illegal war ended, Obama would still keep troops stationed in Iraq (although he'd really, really love it US forces could be stationed in Kuwait exclusively), he would still use them to train (the police0 and still use them to protect the US fortress/embassy and still use them to conduct counter-terrorism actions.
You can also see Third's article and the actual transcript of the interview.
Or we could paraphrase Samantha Power (to the BBC in March of 2008) and offer that Barack can't be held, in 2011, to any promise he might make as a president in 2009 because things on the ground change. And though many work overtime to avoid that potential occurence, it was raised in the hearing today.
US House Rep Vic Synder: What if things really go badly in Iraq and President Obama who has already made the decision, he's already sent 17,000 additional troops has changed the leadership in Afghanistan and clearly is making Afghanistan a higher priority, what if he were to decide, in the Secretary's words, be flexible, we're going to have put troops back in? Uh, you say we have adequate capacity, we didn't. We didn't for six or seven years. If we had it, I don't know where they were but we didn't as a country respond to the need in Afghanistan. What assurance do we have adequate capacity should we decide that we need to return troops to Iraq.
Vice Adm James Winnefeld: I'd say right now our-our principal focus right now is to make sure that-that-that Iraq goes on the same trajectory that it's on and we don't have to confront that decision. And so far [. . .]
So far. So far. So far isn't a concrete state, now is it?
In one of the more interesting exchanges, Chair Skelton brought up an issue from the prepared statements that he found puzzling and it was interesting to watch as Flournoy fumbled and stumbled.
Chair Ike Skelton: Before I call on Mr. Hunted, Madame Under Secretary, let me add, on page six of the written [opening] statement furnished us, it says that "we have made contingent support of the Iraqi Security Forces contingent on their non-sectarian performance. Now, I suppose that means, contingent upon the Shi'ites not shooting Sunnis. How will this work? How will we make judgments on this? Have we placed any other conditions on future assistance? Tell us about it.
Michele Flournoy: Well, I think, this is something that we are in dialogue with the Iraqi government about and Iraqi commanders about on an ongoing basis. We are supporting the development of the ISF towards a certain objectives and one of those is a -- is making sure that the military is truly representative of Iraq, it's a national institution, it is not a tool that anyone individual or party or person in power can use for sectarian aims. We continue to monitor that. In many instances, we've had uh-uh many opportunities to work through specific issues and frankly the Iraqis have been very responsive over time on this point. They understand that the only way we can get the support here to support them is to demonstrate that truly are a non-sectarian institution. So we continue to bring that home at every level -- from the tactical all the way up to the headquarters to here in Washington when we have interactions.
Chair Ike Skelton: If we do see some sectarian performance, what do we do?
Michele Flournoy: Uh, generally what's happened is the ambassador [Chris Hill] and General Odierno have uh have gone -- have called the, uh, the government and the military on the issue, immediately gone in to discuss it with them and-and worked out remedial steps to either isolate a unit, to step in and deal with a situation and so forth. They've also taken very proactive initiatives such as to try to get the ISF, for example, and the [Kurdish forces] peshmerga much more closely in border areas where the two forces come up against each other. So I think that they've done both reactive steps and proactive steps but, again, we have seen -- you know, we've seen a decrease, a decline, in that kind of behavior over time, uhm, and so that is the good news. Something we need to continue to be watchful for but it's something that has been very well managed up to this point.
Chair Ike Skelton: If there is a severe sectarian act, at what point do we say, 'Sorry, we're out of here?'
Michele Flournoy: Well I, uh, again, I think, uhm, you -- you know, I don't want to speculate on what exactly could provoke that kind of thing. What-what I can say is we take it very seriously, we've taken it very seriously and
Chair Ike Skelton: Well the important thing is do they take it very seriously?
Michele Flournoy: They-they certainly understand when this is happen -- you know, in the instances this has happened, the reaction from us has been very swift and very clear and uhm it's had impact. So I don't think there's any question in the minds of the Iraqi government where our red lines are on this issue.
Let's zoom in on one section of that exchange:
Chair Ike Skelton: If there is a severe sectarian act, at what point do we say, 'Sorry, we're out of here?'
Michele Flournoy: Well I, uh, again, I think, uhm, you -- you know, I don't want to speculate on what exactly could provoke that kind of thing. What-what I can say is we take it very seriously, we've taken it very seriously and
You don't want to speculate? Interesting because I can't think of a single time when the United States government would be involved with another government known for human rights abuses and they would not stick a qualifier on it as in, "You do X and we pull our backing." Now "X" might be far after the point that I'd want the backing pulled, but there is always a line that will not be crossed and there is nothing speculative about it. So it's interesting that Flournoy wants to claim otherwise and what it really indicates is that the US government has no intention of pulling out for any reason. Her claims that, in the past, a 'scolding' led to changes is ridiculous. It was not a civil war in 2006 and 2007. I've used that term here myself and I've stated in the last twelve or so months that I was wrong on that. It was genocide. There were not two equal sides in that 2006 and 2007 conflict. There was an armed and funded side and there was the Sunni side. It was genocide, it was ethnic cleansing. And it only stopped because it 'worked' for the Shi'ites. Had it not worked, it would continue to this day. There was no desire on the part of Nouri to stop it because he was getting a scolding from the US and you really have to be in a child-like state (to put it nicely) to buy that or what Flournoy attempted to sell in that exchange.
Violence continued in Iraq today . . .
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Kirkuk bombing which claimed the life of 1 journalist (cameraman) and wounded another. Reuters notes an Iskandariya bombing which left six people injured. Xinhua reports that twelve people were wounded in the Iskandariya bombing and that it took place "at a busy marketplace".
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 adult and 1 child were shot dead in Nineveh Province. Reuters notes that 2 people (parents of a police officer) were shot dead in Mosul.
Stabbings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 Iraqi police officer was stabbed to death in Falluja.
Nouri al-Maliki continues his stay in the US. Carl Azuz (CNN Student News) reports, "Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki is visiting the U.S. this week, meeting with American leaders and taking part in a conference about his country's business opportunities. During yesterday's meeting with President Obama, the two talked about Iraq's economy, but they also discussed that nation's security situation. President Obama says he's committed to all U.S. troops leaving Iraq by the end of 2011. But both leaders are concerned about an increase in violence in Iraq and the possibility that the country's upcoming parliamentary elections could be delayed."
Two US service members have been announced dead in Iraq this week. One was Bradley Espinoza, the other was Daniel Rivera. Myrian Rivera is Daniel Rivera's mother and she tells WIVB (link has text and video), "This war has to end . . . because they're little, they're kids. He's 22, he's a kid. They're kids dying." Susan Reimer (Baltimore Sun) reports on Peg Mullern who recently passed away and fought to find out why her son Michael died while serving. Reimer traces Peg Mullen's legacy on through Cindy Sheehan (mother of Casey Sheehan) and Marty Tillman (mother of Pat Tillman). Meanwhile Lauren DeFranco (WABC -- link has text and video) reports Christal Wagenhauser gave birth to a two month premature daughter and she and the family want Cpl Kieth Wagenhouser -- currently stationed in Iraq -- home to see the baby: "If the baby's condition deteriorates, it would take Wagenhauser a week to get home. At that point, it would be too late."
In the US yesterday, a twenty-year-old Iraqi woman was run over along with her 43-year-old friend. James King (Phoenix News) reports that police are looking for the twenty-year-old's father, Faleh Hassan Almaleki, whom they supsect of running the two women down and that the alleged motive is that the daughter was "becoming too westernized." Katie Fisher (ABC 15 -- link has text and video) reports the 20-year-old woman is Noor Faleh Almaleki and her 43-year-old friend is Amal Edan Khalaf and the friend is also the mother of the twenty-year-old's boyfriend.
iraq
mcclatchy newspaperslaith hammoudi
the wall street journalgina chon
jane arraf
the new york timesrod nordland
lauren de franco
cnnreuters
oliver augustthe times of london
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Theft and Swine Flu in Iraq
Tuesday! Almost hump day, bringing us closer to the weekend. :D
Today, for the second day in a row, a US service member was killed in Iraq. Staying with Iraq, Mary Beth Sheridan (Washington Post) reports:
A former State Department program manager in Iraq has been charged with accepting tens of thousands of dollars in kickbacks in exchange for steering contracts to Iraqi construction firms, according to court documents.
It appeared to be the first time a State Department employee had been charged in federal court in connection with fraud in the multibillion-dollar U.S. reconstruction effort in Iraq, according to officials familiar with that work.
So there's some theft in Iraq story and now let's turn to the kids. Reuters reports, " Iraq will temporarily shut down thousands of schools in two provinces and some in Baghdad after discovering 36 new cases of the H1N1 flu virus, Iraqi officials said on Tuesday." Swine Flu. And f**k the pork industry, it's Swine Flu. That's what we know it is and it's what the country called it under Ford when they all had to get immunizations at schools and other places. Adults had to show up and get their shots when Gerald Ford was president. (My grandfather tells this story a lot.)
Hey, it's Afghanistan Awareness month. Did you know that? I didn't until I opened the e-mail from IVAW:
Afghanistan Awareness Month
U.S. Marine reflects on his return to Afghanistan as a civilian
As a U.S. Marine Corps Infantryman, Corporal Rick Reyes deployed to Afghanistan in 2001 to destroy Al-Qaeda's bases of operations there. On a recent trip organized by the Institute for Public Accuracy, he went back as a civilian and met with locals and NGOs to understand better what is presently happening in the country.
"Our current foreign policy is the problem, and our troops will be targeted regardless of the task they are intending to achieve, even if that task consists of peace or rebuilding...we need to look at this war differently and not from a viewpoint clouded by fear of 'terrorists.' America is suffering from an acute case of PTSD and it's time we cure ourselves and begin to have some solidarity with the people of Afghanistan." Click here to read his full statement.
Hear the views of Afghan women during National RAWA Tour
This tour is being called, "Afghan Women Resist Occupation and Fundamentalism," and features a representative from the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA) as well as Malalai Joya, outspoken exiled Afghan Parliament Member. RAWA has been around since the 1970s and has largely functioned as an underground social and political organization resisting domestic fundamentalism and foreign occupation by, among other things, providing education to girls.
Come hear the perspective of Afghan women who the U.S. claims to want to help, but whose voices are mostly left out of the discussion of what's best for Afghanistan. The tour will be stopping in California, Rhode Island, New York, Washington, D.C., Massachusetts, and Washington state. It ends on November 12. Find a tour stop near you here: Afghan Women's National Tour calendar. IVAW members who are Afghan vets will appear alongside the Afghan speakers at tour stops in California and New York City.
IVAW Office Moves from Philadelphia to New York CityUnder the leadership of new Executive Director, Jose Vasquez, IVAW has relocated to New York City. Here is our new contact info:
IVAW National Office
630 9th Avenue, Suite 807
New York, NY 10036
Tel: 646.723.0989
Fax: 646.723.0996
email: ivaw@ivaw.org
More than ever before, IVAW is relying on the financial support of individuals like you to keep our doors open. Make a donation today. Thank you,
Iraq Veterans Against the War
So there you go. Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"
Tuesday, October 20, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces another death, still no election law passed in Iraq, Nouri remains in DC, Cindy Sheehan prepares to interview Noam Chomsky, Ryan Crocker tries to talk SOFA (will the press listen) and more.
Today the US military announced: "CONTINGENCY OPERATING BASE SPEICHER, TIKRIT, Iraq - A Multi-National Division - North Soldier was killed and two were wounded when an improvised explosive device detonated near their vehicle in Ninawa province, Iraq, Oct. 19. The name of the deceased is being withhled pending notifcation of next of kin and release by the Department of Defense. The names of service members are announced through the U.S. Department of Defense official website [. . .]. The announcements are made on the Web site no earlier than 24 hours after notification of the service member's primary kin." The announcement brings to 4351 the number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war.
Before we go into other violence in Iraq, let's go to the heart of the violence: The continued war. And some people try to pretend it's over -- when it's not. And some try to pretend that SOFA means the end of the war -- when it doesn't. Golly, with even Ryan Crocker, former US Ambassador to Iraq, making it clear, you think the press will try to get it right now?
Gordon Robison (Gulf News) reports on Crocker's speech last week at Harvard's Kennedy School:
Like any international agreement the Sofa can be modified if, at some point in the future, both governments agree there is a need to do so. It is rarely said in Washington, but widely assumed, that this means the actual implementation of the withdrawal agreement is essentially situational: that is, it will go ahead only if conditions on the ground warrant it.
Despite the fact that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki has emerged as a stronger, and far more savvy, political player than almost anyone expected; and despite the fact that the existing Sofa was only grudgingly approved by the Iraqi parliament, there remains a near universal assumption in Washington that if, come 2011, Washington decides we need to stay longer, then so be it. Last May, the army chief of staff, General George Casey, acknowledged as much, telling a group of journalists and think tank specialists that his planning scenarios envision the presence of US combat troops in Iraq for another decade.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, there has been little discussion here in the United States about what 'withdrawal' really means. As Crocker emphasised last week at Harvard, the US policy has always been that it wants no permanent bases in Iraq. Crocker, however, failed to note that government officials and the general public often have starkly different definitions of "permanent base."
[. . .]
Beyond that there is the question of what 'withdrawal' actually means. The military tends to make a distinction between training or advisory troops and combat forces. The American approach to Iraq raises the very real possibility of combat forces heading home while tens of thousands of trainers, advisers and their accompanying support troops remain in place. A military professional might call such a situation 'withdrawal', but a lot of ordinary Americans and Iraqis are likely to think otherwise.
[. . .]
It is time, as Ambassador Crocker says, for a more public, more focused, discussion about what 'getting out' of Iraq really means. Americans and Iraqis alike may well be unhappy with what they hear.
The Iraq War has not ended. The SOFA does not mean -- and never did -- that the Iraq War ends. The UN mandate expired yearly. When the US operated under the UN mandate, the expiration of the mandate never meant the war ended. It only mean the US had to leave . . . if no other agreement was reached. Instead of doing the yearly renewal, the SOFA was an agreement allowing for three more years of occupation. That's all it has to mean (and that's provided neither side decides to kill it -- and killing it can be to replace it). James Circello (Party for Socialism and Liberation) addressed the realites of the illegal war this week:
The fact that dozens of bases will remain in Iraq long after the United States puts the Iraq war "behind it" clearly demonstrates that the U.S. ruling class has no intention of truly relinquishing Iraq. These bases—six of which are so-called "supersize bases" -- will continue to be filled with the boots and rifles of U.S. occupational forces. The same NY Times article notes that at least 50,000 troops will be left in Iraq through at least 2011. Soldiers, airmen and marines will continue to kill innocent Iraqis, while simultaneously building the military might of a puppet Iraqi army. The purpose of that reduction in Iraq, according to the senior commander in Iraq, General Ray Odierno, is to free up U.S. soldiers to go to Afghanistan.[. . .]
This so-called withdrawal is a continuation of using different tactics to achieve the same goal: imperialist domination and exploitation. The U.S. ruling class is invested in maintaining the occupation and due to multiple factors -- most notably the heroic resistance by the Iraqi people against its occupiers -- has now chosen to change its policies and the appearance of the occupation in Iraq. For the millions of families in Iraq and Afghanistan that have seen loved ones die while living under occupation, the nature of the experience doesn't change by simply lowering troop levels from 125,000 to 50,000. Foreign soldiers armed and under the direction of foreign governments in Iraq mean that Iraq is still occupied.
Now to some of today's violence in the continued Iraq War.
Bombings?
Jenan Hussein (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing injured three people, a Baghdad sticky bombing injured three people, a second Baghdad roadside bombing left two people wounded, a third one injured four people, a Falluja car bombing claimed the lives of 4 people with an ten more injured, a Mosul roadside bombing injured 2 Iraqi soldiers, a Mosul sticky bombing which injured two people and, dropping back to Monday, a Mosul mortar attack which left four Iraqi military recruits injured.
Shootings?
Jenan Hussein (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 person shot dead in Mosul and an armed clash in Mosul in which an Iraqi soldier was injured and 1 suspect was shot dead.
Corpses?
Jenan Hussein (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 corpses discovered in Mosul.
Last month, Lisa Holland (Sky News via Information Clearing House) reported on the damage being done to Iraqis and future generations due to toxic and deadly weapons foreign forces (which would include the US) have used (and continue to) in Iraq:
An Iraqi doctor has told Sky News the number of babies born with deformities in the heavily-bombed area of Fallujah is still on the increase. Fifteen months ago a Sky News investigation revealed growing numbers of children being born with defects in Fallujah. Concerns were that the rise in deformities may have been linked to the use of chemical weapons by US forces. We recently returned to find out the current situation and what has happened to some of the children we featured. In May last year we told the story of a three-year-old girl called Fatima Ahmed who was born with two heads. When we filmed her she seemed like a listless bundle - she lay there barely able to breathe and unable to move. Even now and having seen the pictures many times since I still feel shocked and saddened when I look at her. But the prognosis for Fatima never looked good and, as feared, she never made it to her fourth birthday. Her mother Shukriya told us about the night her daughter died. Wiping away her tears, Shukriya said she had put her daughter to bed as normal one night but woke with the dreadful sense that something was wrong. She told us she felt it was her daughter's moment to die, but of course that does not make the pain any easier.
It's a topic Dave Lindorff has covered many times before -- for example, see 2003's "America's Dirty Bombs" ran at CounterPunch. Today Lindorff revisits the topic at CounterPunch:
While the Pentagon has continued to claim, against all scientific evidence, there is no hazard posed by depleted uranium, US troops in Iraq have reportedly been instructed to avoid any sites where these weapons have been used -- destroyed Iraqi tanks, exploded bunkers, etc. Suspiciously, international health officials have been prevented from doing medical studies of DU sites. A series of articles several years ago by the Christian Science Monitor (http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0515/p01s02-woiq.html) described how reporters from that newspaper had visited such sites with Geiger-counters and had found them to be extremely "hot" with radioactivity. The big danger with DU is not as a metal, but after it has exploded and burned, when the particles of uranium oxide, which are just as radioactive as the pure isotopes, can be inhaled or injested. Even the smallest particle of uranium is both deadly poisonous as a chemical, and can cause cancer.
There are reports of a dramatic increase in the incidence of deformed babies being born in the city of Fallujah, where DU weapons were in wide use during the November 2004 assault on that city by US Marines.
While that goes on, the US-installed thug of the occupation Nouri al-Maliki visits the US. Yesterday in DC, he met with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and US Vice President Joe Biden. Kenneth R. Bazinet (New York Daily News) reports Nouri met with US President Barack Obama today and quotes al-Maliki stating, "Today Iraq has moved beyond a dictatorship and beyond the destruction, and we are trying to rebuild all our sectors of agriculture, oil sectors, tourism and so forth." Bazinet also notes, "Maliki acknowledged he understands the importance of holding the elections on time." Joseph Weber (Washington Times) reports Nouri stated, "Our relationship will no longer be confined to security cooperation."
This afternoon the Washington Post's Eugene Robinson participated in an online chat at the paper and we'll note this exchange:
Guerilla war vs. conventional army: Hi, I've wondered when republicans talk about win in Iraq, Afghanistan (or VietNam) what does that mean? What is win in a guerilla war, when anyone with a political, religious, poverty driven dispute can cause havoc? IMO there's no way to defend or win, what do you think?
Eugene Robinson: I don't know what it means to "win" this kind of conflict, and that's a big problem. We should figure that out, because this is the nature of war these days.
There is no 'win' in Iraq (or Afgahnistan, but this is the "Iraq snapshot") and there is no 'progress.' Perfect illustration of the latter, the Iraqi Parliament had the deadline of last Thursday to pass their election law and . . . they missed it. Yesterday the Iraqi Parliament decided to put off voting on the election law. Anthony Shadid and Nada Bakri (Washington Post) explain, "Lawmakers resumed negotiations into the evening, as U.N. officials and representatives of the American Embassy lingered on the sidelines. As each hour passed, confidence receded that any quick compromise would cut through a Gordian knot of issues as arcane as the number of seats in a new parliament and the way an election would be organized in Kirkuk, a city in northern Iraq contested by Kurds, Arabs and Turkmens." Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) adds: "In recent years, thousands of Kurds have moved into the area from Kurdistan, supposedly to reverse the Arabization policies of Saddam Hussein, who expelled Kurds and settled Arabs there." Oliver August (Times of London) observes, "The Iraqi parliament has failed repeatedly to pass a new election law because of arguments over whether ballot papers should give the names of candidates, or of parties only. MPs are now talking about delaying the election, planned for January 16."
What's going on in Kirkuk besides the above? US forces are doing patrols. Gabriel Gatehouse (BBC News -- link is video) reports on it:
It's early morning in the city of Kirkuk. The Americans are back. Sure the Iraqi security forces here are in charge now but they like to have American soldiers along with them -- especially on operations like this one. Together they're conducting what's called a clearing up operation, sweeping through an area of the city searching houses for weapons explosives and insurgents. The Americans are suspicious of this house here because it's got a group of younger men in it and also a car with license plates from out of town. Now they've got a list of around sixty names of people they suspect of belonging to al Qaeda or other insurgent groups. Three hours of searching produces three arrests.
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports, "Iraq's parliament failed again Tuesday to vote on legislation that would allow Iraqis to cast ballots directly for candidates in parliamentary elections scheduled for January, rather than choosing political party lists that don't name the candidates." Liz Sly reports of today, "There was certainly no sense of urgency in the halls of parliament, where several lawmakers from the Shiite Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council bloc said they believed the election commission needed only two months to prepare for the election, not three." Meanwhile, the Telegraph of London quotes the top US commander Gen Ray Odierno on the developments: "It's clear that al-Qaeda and other groups do not want the elections to occur. What I think they will try to do is discourage peopel from voting by undermining the authority of the government of Iraq with attacks, so that people lose faith in the democratic process. If the parliament doesn't pass the election law and they delay the elections, that violates their own constitution, which says they have to have elections in January."
In other election news, Sami Moubayed (Asia Times) reports that the Sunni Iraqi Accordance Front "is promising its constituency a major breakthrough in the parliamentary elections"; however, many "Iraqis believe that the Accordance Front's days in the sun are over, due to the absence of so many influential players from the Sunni coalition."
As noted earlier, Megan McCloskey (Stars and Stripes) reported on the findings of a [PDF format warning] military investigation into health policy in the wake of a violent incident last May, "The report, released late Friday, was prompted by a shooting at a Baghdad combat stress clinic last May that left four soldiers and a sailor dead." The incident took place May 11th at 2:00 pm (Iraq time) on Camp Liberty base, five US service members were shot dead. John Russell is the accused. Nishant Dahiya (NPR -- text only) adds, "The findings of the report (pg. 302 onwards) are critical of the operational tools and training aimed at preventing such tragedies as occurred at Camp Liberty. The findings show that policies were unclear; those that existed are improperly implemented; and soldiers were unsure of how to deal with fellow soldiers who have behavioral health problems. The findings highlight lapses in dealing with the situation, on or before the day of the incident, right from the soldier's unit, to the Combat Stress Clinic, to the Military Police." From some of the conclusions (page 303):After abruptly leaving his session with (b)(3)(b)(6) and asking the MPs to take him in, (b)(3)(b)(60 tossed a knife to the ground. The 54th EN BN has no template for setting a unit watch, and neither did any of the unit leaders we interviewed in the course of this investigation. There is no standard for escorts, how many, how senior, and what type of escort should be assigned to a troubled Soldier, a suicidal Soldier or a homicidal Soldier. Additionally, at the unit level, there is no real conception of when to Command refer Soldiers for assistance. (b)(3)(b)(6) unit encouraged him to self-refer for 3 appointments within 3 days. Access to care is not an issue. On the fourth day, the Behavioral Health clinic asked the 54th, to make it a "Command referral." Granted our Commands want to reduce the stigma associated with ill health, but there is a lack of emphasis upon Command involvement and responsibility for behavioral problems. There is no message, SITREP, or verbal notification required for Soldiers with suicidal ideations. The Commander, 54th EN BN, was never notified that his subordinates had removed (b)(3)(b)(6) bolt from his weapon. Correspondingly, when his bolt was removed, (b)(3)(b)(6) was not put on buddy or unit watch. Unit Commanding Officers at the 03-05 level need more than awareness training, they require precise instruction in effective suicide and behavioral problem remediation measures to effectively support our Behavioral Health professionals.
Rod Nordland (New York Times) notes the investigation found "a lack of any guidelines for how to handle his case allowed it to get out of control".
Cindy Sheehan notes that her show this Sunday features Noam Chomsky and she's requesting that you e-mail the questions you would like to ask Chomsky:
This upcoming Sunday (October 25, 2PM Pacific on the website or 3PM Central at 1360am Rational Radio, Dallas, Tx), Professor Noam Chomsky will be on the Soapbox.
This is your chance to ask the author of Venezuela's President, Hugo Chavez' favorite book,
Hegemony or Survival (I like it too!)
the question you've always wanted to ask the good Professor.
Please submit your questions (with your name and city) to:Cindy@CindySheehansSoapbox.com
I will do my best to ask Professor Chomsky as many of your questions as I can!
The Bills for the Soapbox are coming due soon! (Studio, engineer, asst. producer)
Please make a donation to support this fantastic progressive radio show that is totally listener supported!
And we'll close with this from Sherwood Ross' "AN APPEAL: TIME TO OPPOSE MILITARY RECRUITING" (Grant Lawrence):From every appearance, President Obama intends to step up the war in Afghanistan. Even though the American people voted for peace last November and would prefer to devote themselves to the ways of peace -- working a full-time job if they can find one, educating their children, providing essential services in their communities, etc., Obama plans to remain in Afghanistan, squandering billions more on a war that the latest poll shows 57% of the American people oppose. Obama also has given no signal that he will withdraw the remaining U.S. troops from Iraq and is providing the Pakistanis with the money, means, and encouragement to expand President Bush's criminal wars' into yet a third nation.We need to ask ourselves: who is better off for all these wars? Are Americans better off today than nine years ago? What of our 30,000 wounded? What of our 5,000 dead? (Contractors are human beings, too, so I count them.) What of the 1-million slaughtered Iraqis? What of the millions of Iraqi civilians wounded and/or driven from their homes? What of the ruined Iraq infrastructure and economy? What of millions of motorists and homeowners world-wide who have seen oil prices escalate? What of the homeless and malnourished Iraqi children? The only ones who appear to be better off from the Bush-Obama wars are the arms manufacturers and various public officials vegetating on the government payrolls in Washington. From steel mills to banks and from airlines to automobiles, the rest of American industry is suffering. Long ago, Count Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy (1828-1910), the author of "War and Peace," wrote these harsh words about Russia: "The truth is that the state is a conspiracy designed not only to exploit, but above all to corrupt its citizens." It takes little imagination to divine what the good Count would have said about America today and its serial wars of aggression centered upon the Middle East oil fields and the proposed pipeline access routes to and from them. Face it: USA today is corrupting its people, turning its children into killers, and sending them out to fight and die in wrong wars half way around the world. "Only one thing remains," Count Tolstoy wrote: "to fight the government with weapons of thought, word and way of life, not making any concessions to it, not joining its ranks, not increasing its powers oneself. That's the one thing needful and it will probably be successful. And this is what God wants and this is what Christ taught." What was true of Russia under the tsars---of a state that corrupted its children---unfortunately happens to be true of America in 2009. America's No. 1 cash crop today is armaments and our military-industrial complex is making big bucks peddling 68% of total arms' sold! Fifty-two cents out of every tax dollar is being chewed up by the Pentagon, busy night-and-day turning out ever more horrific killing machines to destroy people. The Pentagon has covered the globe with 1,000 military bases for "defense" and is busy devising ingenious ways to attack the earth from space, develop germ warfare and threaten and control any and every other country with its 11 mobile nuclear navies.
iraqthe los angeles timesliz slythe washington postanthony shadidnada bakrioliver augustthe times of londonthe telegraph of london
mcclatchy newspaperssahar issa
cindy sheehan
stars and stripesmegan mccloskeynprnishant dahiya
rod nordland
james circello
bbc newsgabriel gatehouse
sherwood ross
Today, for the second day in a row, a US service member was killed in Iraq. Staying with Iraq, Mary Beth Sheridan (Washington Post) reports:
A former State Department program manager in Iraq has been charged with accepting tens of thousands of dollars in kickbacks in exchange for steering contracts to Iraqi construction firms, according to court documents.
It appeared to be the first time a State Department employee had been charged in federal court in connection with fraud in the multibillion-dollar U.S. reconstruction effort in Iraq, according to officials familiar with that work.
So there's some theft in Iraq story and now let's turn to the kids. Reuters reports, " Iraq will temporarily shut down thousands of schools in two provinces and some in Baghdad after discovering 36 new cases of the H1N1 flu virus, Iraqi officials said on Tuesday." Swine Flu. And f**k the pork industry, it's Swine Flu. That's what we know it is and it's what the country called it under Ford when they all had to get immunizations at schools and other places. Adults had to show up and get their shots when Gerald Ford was president. (My grandfather tells this story a lot.)
Hey, it's Afghanistan Awareness month. Did you know that? I didn't until I opened the e-mail from IVAW:
Afghanistan Awareness Month
U.S. Marine reflects on his return to Afghanistan as a civilian
As a U.S. Marine Corps Infantryman, Corporal Rick Reyes deployed to Afghanistan in 2001 to destroy Al-Qaeda's bases of operations there. On a recent trip organized by the Institute for Public Accuracy, he went back as a civilian and met with locals and NGOs to understand better what is presently happening in the country.
"Our current foreign policy is the problem, and our troops will be targeted regardless of the task they are intending to achieve, even if that task consists of peace or rebuilding...we need to look at this war differently and not from a viewpoint clouded by fear of 'terrorists.' America is suffering from an acute case of PTSD and it's time we cure ourselves and begin to have some solidarity with the people of Afghanistan." Click here to read his full statement.
Hear the views of Afghan women during National RAWA Tour
This tour is being called, "Afghan Women Resist Occupation and Fundamentalism," and features a representative from the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA) as well as Malalai Joya, outspoken exiled Afghan Parliament Member. RAWA has been around since the 1970s and has largely functioned as an underground social and political organization resisting domestic fundamentalism and foreign occupation by, among other things, providing education to girls.
Come hear the perspective of Afghan women who the U.S. claims to want to help, but whose voices are mostly left out of the discussion of what's best for Afghanistan. The tour will be stopping in California, Rhode Island, New York, Washington, D.C., Massachusetts, and Washington state. It ends on November 12. Find a tour stop near you here: Afghan Women's National Tour calendar. IVAW members who are Afghan vets will appear alongside the Afghan speakers at tour stops in California and New York City.
IVAW Office Moves from Philadelphia to New York CityUnder the leadership of new Executive Director, Jose Vasquez, IVAW has relocated to New York City. Here is our new contact info:
IVAW National Office
630 9th Avenue, Suite 807
New York, NY 10036
Tel: 646.723.0989
Fax: 646.723.0996
email: ivaw@ivaw.org
More than ever before, IVAW is relying on the financial support of individuals like you to keep our doors open. Make a donation today. Thank you,
Iraq Veterans Against the War
So there you go. Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"
Tuesday, October 20, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces another death, still no election law passed in Iraq, Nouri remains in DC, Cindy Sheehan prepares to interview Noam Chomsky, Ryan Crocker tries to talk SOFA (will the press listen) and more.
Today the US military announced: "CONTINGENCY OPERATING BASE SPEICHER, TIKRIT, Iraq - A Multi-National Division - North Soldier was killed and two were wounded when an improvised explosive device detonated near their vehicle in Ninawa province, Iraq, Oct. 19. The name of the deceased is being withhled pending notifcation of next of kin and release by the Department of Defense. The names of service members are announced through the U.S. Department of Defense official website [. . .]. The announcements are made on the Web site no earlier than 24 hours after notification of the service member's primary kin." The announcement brings to 4351 the number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war.
Before we go into other violence in Iraq, let's go to the heart of the violence: The continued war. And some people try to pretend it's over -- when it's not. And some try to pretend that SOFA means the end of the war -- when it doesn't. Golly, with even Ryan Crocker, former US Ambassador to Iraq, making it clear, you think the press will try to get it right now?
Gordon Robison (Gulf News) reports on Crocker's speech last week at Harvard's Kennedy School:
Like any international agreement the Sofa can be modified if, at some point in the future, both governments agree there is a need to do so. It is rarely said in Washington, but widely assumed, that this means the actual implementation of the withdrawal agreement is essentially situational: that is, it will go ahead only if conditions on the ground warrant it.
Despite the fact that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki has emerged as a stronger, and far more savvy, political player than almost anyone expected; and despite the fact that the existing Sofa was only grudgingly approved by the Iraqi parliament, there remains a near universal assumption in Washington that if, come 2011, Washington decides we need to stay longer, then so be it. Last May, the army chief of staff, General George Casey, acknowledged as much, telling a group of journalists and think tank specialists that his planning scenarios envision the presence of US combat troops in Iraq for another decade.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, there has been little discussion here in the United States about what 'withdrawal' really means. As Crocker emphasised last week at Harvard, the US policy has always been that it wants no permanent bases in Iraq. Crocker, however, failed to note that government officials and the general public often have starkly different definitions of "permanent base."
[. . .]
Beyond that there is the question of what 'withdrawal' actually means. The military tends to make a distinction between training or advisory troops and combat forces. The American approach to Iraq raises the very real possibility of combat forces heading home while tens of thousands of trainers, advisers and their accompanying support troops remain in place. A military professional might call such a situation 'withdrawal', but a lot of ordinary Americans and Iraqis are likely to think otherwise.
[. . .]
It is time, as Ambassador Crocker says, for a more public, more focused, discussion about what 'getting out' of Iraq really means. Americans and Iraqis alike may well be unhappy with what they hear.
The Iraq War has not ended. The SOFA does not mean -- and never did -- that the Iraq War ends. The UN mandate expired yearly. When the US operated under the UN mandate, the expiration of the mandate never meant the war ended. It only mean the US had to leave . . . if no other agreement was reached. Instead of doing the yearly renewal, the SOFA was an agreement allowing for three more years of occupation. That's all it has to mean (and that's provided neither side decides to kill it -- and killing it can be to replace it). James Circello (Party for Socialism and Liberation) addressed the realites of the illegal war this week:
The fact that dozens of bases will remain in Iraq long after the United States puts the Iraq war "behind it" clearly demonstrates that the U.S. ruling class has no intention of truly relinquishing Iraq. These bases—six of which are so-called "supersize bases" -- will continue to be filled with the boots and rifles of U.S. occupational forces. The same NY Times article notes that at least 50,000 troops will be left in Iraq through at least 2011. Soldiers, airmen and marines will continue to kill innocent Iraqis, while simultaneously building the military might of a puppet Iraqi army. The purpose of that reduction in Iraq, according to the senior commander in Iraq, General Ray Odierno, is to free up U.S. soldiers to go to Afghanistan.[. . .]
This so-called withdrawal is a continuation of using different tactics to achieve the same goal: imperialist domination and exploitation. The U.S. ruling class is invested in maintaining the occupation and due to multiple factors -- most notably the heroic resistance by the Iraqi people against its occupiers -- has now chosen to change its policies and the appearance of the occupation in Iraq. For the millions of families in Iraq and Afghanistan that have seen loved ones die while living under occupation, the nature of the experience doesn't change by simply lowering troop levels from 125,000 to 50,000. Foreign soldiers armed and under the direction of foreign governments in Iraq mean that Iraq is still occupied.
Now to some of today's violence in the continued Iraq War.
Bombings?
Jenan Hussein (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing injured three people, a Baghdad sticky bombing injured three people, a second Baghdad roadside bombing left two people wounded, a third one injured four people, a Falluja car bombing claimed the lives of 4 people with an ten more injured, a Mosul roadside bombing injured 2 Iraqi soldiers, a Mosul sticky bombing which injured two people and, dropping back to Monday, a Mosul mortar attack which left four Iraqi military recruits injured.
Shootings?
Jenan Hussein (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 person shot dead in Mosul and an armed clash in Mosul in which an Iraqi soldier was injured and 1 suspect was shot dead.
Corpses?
Jenan Hussein (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 3 corpses discovered in Mosul.
Last month, Lisa Holland (Sky News via Information Clearing House) reported on the damage being done to Iraqis and future generations due to toxic and deadly weapons foreign forces (which would include the US) have used (and continue to) in Iraq:
An Iraqi doctor has told Sky News the number of babies born with deformities in the heavily-bombed area of Fallujah is still on the increase. Fifteen months ago a Sky News investigation revealed growing numbers of children being born with defects in Fallujah. Concerns were that the rise in deformities may have been linked to the use of chemical weapons by US forces. We recently returned to find out the current situation and what has happened to some of the children we featured. In May last year we told the story of a three-year-old girl called Fatima Ahmed who was born with two heads. When we filmed her she seemed like a listless bundle - she lay there barely able to breathe and unable to move. Even now and having seen the pictures many times since I still feel shocked and saddened when I look at her. But the prognosis for Fatima never looked good and, as feared, she never made it to her fourth birthday. Her mother Shukriya told us about the night her daughter died. Wiping away her tears, Shukriya said she had put her daughter to bed as normal one night but woke with the dreadful sense that something was wrong. She told us she felt it was her daughter's moment to die, but of course that does not make the pain any easier.
It's a topic Dave Lindorff has covered many times before -- for example, see 2003's "America's Dirty Bombs" ran at CounterPunch. Today Lindorff revisits the topic at CounterPunch:
While the Pentagon has continued to claim, against all scientific evidence, there is no hazard posed by depleted uranium, US troops in Iraq have reportedly been instructed to avoid any sites where these weapons have been used -- destroyed Iraqi tanks, exploded bunkers, etc. Suspiciously, international health officials have been prevented from doing medical studies of DU sites. A series of articles several years ago by the Christian Science Monitor (http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0515/p01s02-woiq.html) described how reporters from that newspaper had visited such sites with Geiger-counters and had found them to be extremely "hot" with radioactivity. The big danger with DU is not as a metal, but after it has exploded and burned, when the particles of uranium oxide, which are just as radioactive as the pure isotopes, can be inhaled or injested. Even the smallest particle of uranium is both deadly poisonous as a chemical, and can cause cancer.
There are reports of a dramatic increase in the incidence of deformed babies being born in the city of Fallujah, where DU weapons were in wide use during the November 2004 assault on that city by US Marines.
While that goes on, the US-installed thug of the occupation Nouri al-Maliki visits the US. Yesterday in DC, he met with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and US Vice President Joe Biden. Kenneth R. Bazinet (New York Daily News) reports Nouri met with US President Barack Obama today and quotes al-Maliki stating, "Today Iraq has moved beyond a dictatorship and beyond the destruction, and we are trying to rebuild all our sectors of agriculture, oil sectors, tourism and so forth." Bazinet also notes, "Maliki acknowledged he understands the importance of holding the elections on time." Joseph Weber (Washington Times) reports Nouri stated, "Our relationship will no longer be confined to security cooperation."
This afternoon the Washington Post's Eugene Robinson participated in an online chat at the paper and we'll note this exchange:
Guerilla war vs. conventional army: Hi, I've wondered when republicans talk about win in Iraq, Afghanistan (or VietNam) what does that mean? What is win in a guerilla war, when anyone with a political, religious, poverty driven dispute can cause havoc? IMO there's no way to defend or win, what do you think?
Eugene Robinson: I don't know what it means to "win" this kind of conflict, and that's a big problem. We should figure that out, because this is the nature of war these days.
There is no 'win' in Iraq (or Afgahnistan, but this is the "Iraq snapshot") and there is no 'progress.' Perfect illustration of the latter, the Iraqi Parliament had the deadline of last Thursday to pass their election law and . . . they missed it. Yesterday the Iraqi Parliament decided to put off voting on the election law. Anthony Shadid and Nada Bakri (Washington Post) explain, "Lawmakers resumed negotiations into the evening, as U.N. officials and representatives of the American Embassy lingered on the sidelines. As each hour passed, confidence receded that any quick compromise would cut through a Gordian knot of issues as arcane as the number of seats in a new parliament and the way an election would be organized in Kirkuk, a city in northern Iraq contested by Kurds, Arabs and Turkmens." Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) adds: "In recent years, thousands of Kurds have moved into the area from Kurdistan, supposedly to reverse the Arabization policies of Saddam Hussein, who expelled Kurds and settled Arabs there." Oliver August (Times of London) observes, "The Iraqi parliament has failed repeatedly to pass a new election law because of arguments over whether ballot papers should give the names of candidates, or of parties only. MPs are now talking about delaying the election, planned for January 16."
What's going on in Kirkuk besides the above? US forces are doing patrols. Gabriel Gatehouse (BBC News -- link is video) reports on it:
It's early morning in the city of Kirkuk. The Americans are back. Sure the Iraqi security forces here are in charge now but they like to have American soldiers along with them -- especially on operations like this one. Together they're conducting what's called a clearing up operation, sweeping through an area of the city searching houses for weapons explosives and insurgents. The Americans are suspicious of this house here because it's got a group of younger men in it and also a car with license plates from out of town. Now they've got a list of around sixty names of people they suspect of belonging to al Qaeda or other insurgent groups. Three hours of searching produces three arrests.
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports, "Iraq's parliament failed again Tuesday to vote on legislation that would allow Iraqis to cast ballots directly for candidates in parliamentary elections scheduled for January, rather than choosing political party lists that don't name the candidates." Liz Sly reports of today, "There was certainly no sense of urgency in the halls of parliament, where several lawmakers from the Shiite Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council bloc said they believed the election commission needed only two months to prepare for the election, not three." Meanwhile, the Telegraph of London quotes the top US commander Gen Ray Odierno on the developments: "It's clear that al-Qaeda and other groups do not want the elections to occur. What I think they will try to do is discourage peopel from voting by undermining the authority of the government of Iraq with attacks, so that people lose faith in the democratic process. If the parliament doesn't pass the election law and they delay the elections, that violates their own constitution, which says they have to have elections in January."
In other election news, Sami Moubayed (Asia Times) reports that the Sunni Iraqi Accordance Front "is promising its constituency a major breakthrough in the parliamentary elections"; however, many "Iraqis believe that the Accordance Front's days in the sun are over, due to the absence of so many influential players from the Sunni coalition."
As noted earlier, Megan McCloskey (Stars and Stripes) reported on the findings of a [PDF format warning] military investigation into health policy in the wake of a violent incident last May, "The report, released late Friday, was prompted by a shooting at a Baghdad combat stress clinic last May that left four soldiers and a sailor dead." The incident took place May 11th at 2:00 pm (Iraq time) on Camp Liberty base, five US service members were shot dead. John Russell is the accused. Nishant Dahiya (NPR -- text only) adds, "The findings of the report (pg. 302 onwards) are critical of the operational tools and training aimed at preventing such tragedies as occurred at Camp Liberty. The findings show that policies were unclear; those that existed are improperly implemented; and soldiers were unsure of how to deal with fellow soldiers who have behavioral health problems. The findings highlight lapses in dealing with the situation, on or before the day of the incident, right from the soldier's unit, to the Combat Stress Clinic, to the Military Police." From some of the conclusions (page 303):After abruptly leaving his session with (b)(3)(b)(6) and asking the MPs to take him in, (b)(3)(b)(60 tossed a knife to the ground. The 54th EN BN has no template for setting a unit watch, and neither did any of the unit leaders we interviewed in the course of this investigation. There is no standard for escorts, how many, how senior, and what type of escort should be assigned to a troubled Soldier, a suicidal Soldier or a homicidal Soldier. Additionally, at the unit level, there is no real conception of when to Command refer Soldiers for assistance. (b)(3)(b)(6) unit encouraged him to self-refer for 3 appointments within 3 days. Access to care is not an issue. On the fourth day, the Behavioral Health clinic asked the 54th, to make it a "Command referral." Granted our Commands want to reduce the stigma associated with ill health, but there is a lack of emphasis upon Command involvement and responsibility for behavioral problems. There is no message, SITREP, or verbal notification required for Soldiers with suicidal ideations. The Commander, 54th EN BN, was never notified that his subordinates had removed (b)(3)(b)(6) bolt from his weapon. Correspondingly, when his bolt was removed, (b)(3)(b)(6) was not put on buddy or unit watch. Unit Commanding Officers at the 03-05 level need more than awareness training, they require precise instruction in effective suicide and behavioral problem remediation measures to effectively support our Behavioral Health professionals.
Rod Nordland (New York Times) notes the investigation found "a lack of any guidelines for how to handle his case allowed it to get out of control".
Cindy Sheehan notes that her show this Sunday features Noam Chomsky and she's requesting that you e-mail the questions you would like to ask Chomsky:
This upcoming Sunday (October 25, 2PM Pacific on the website or 3PM Central at 1360am Rational Radio, Dallas, Tx), Professor Noam Chomsky will be on the Soapbox.
This is your chance to ask the author of Venezuela's President, Hugo Chavez' favorite book,
Hegemony or Survival (I like it too!)
the question you've always wanted to ask the good Professor.
Please submit your questions (with your name and city) to:Cindy@CindySheehansSoapbox.com
I will do my best to ask Professor Chomsky as many of your questions as I can!
The Bills for the Soapbox are coming due soon! (Studio, engineer, asst. producer)
Please make a donation to support this fantastic progressive radio show that is totally listener supported!
And we'll close with this from Sherwood Ross' "AN APPEAL: TIME TO OPPOSE MILITARY RECRUITING" (Grant Lawrence):From every appearance, President Obama intends to step up the war in Afghanistan. Even though the American people voted for peace last November and would prefer to devote themselves to the ways of peace -- working a full-time job if they can find one, educating their children, providing essential services in their communities, etc., Obama plans to remain in Afghanistan, squandering billions more on a war that the latest poll shows 57% of the American people oppose. Obama also has given no signal that he will withdraw the remaining U.S. troops from Iraq and is providing the Pakistanis with the money, means, and encouragement to expand President Bush's criminal wars' into yet a third nation.We need to ask ourselves: who is better off for all these wars? Are Americans better off today than nine years ago? What of our 30,000 wounded? What of our 5,000 dead? (Contractors are human beings, too, so I count them.) What of the 1-million slaughtered Iraqis? What of the millions of Iraqi civilians wounded and/or driven from their homes? What of the ruined Iraq infrastructure and economy? What of millions of motorists and homeowners world-wide who have seen oil prices escalate? What of the homeless and malnourished Iraqi children? The only ones who appear to be better off from the Bush-Obama wars are the arms manufacturers and various public officials vegetating on the government payrolls in Washington. From steel mills to banks and from airlines to automobiles, the rest of American industry is suffering. Long ago, Count Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy (1828-1910), the author of "War and Peace," wrote these harsh words about Russia: "The truth is that the state is a conspiracy designed not only to exploit, but above all to corrupt its citizens." It takes little imagination to divine what the good Count would have said about America today and its serial wars of aggression centered upon the Middle East oil fields and the proposed pipeline access routes to and from them. Face it: USA today is corrupting its people, turning its children into killers, and sending them out to fight and die in wrong wars half way around the world. "Only one thing remains," Count Tolstoy wrote: "to fight the government with weapons of thought, word and way of life, not making any concessions to it, not joining its ranks, not increasing its powers oneself. That's the one thing needful and it will probably be successful. And this is what God wants and this is what Christ taught." What was true of Russia under the tsars---of a state that corrupted its children---unfortunately happens to be true of America in 2009. America's No. 1 cash crop today is armaments and our military-industrial complex is making big bucks peddling 68% of total arms' sold! Fifty-two cents out of every tax dollar is being chewed up by the Pentagon, busy night-and-day turning out ever more horrific killing machines to destroy people. The Pentagon has covered the globe with 1,000 military bases for "defense" and is busy devising ingenious ways to attack the earth from space, develop germ warfare and threaten and control any and every other country with its 11 mobile nuclear navies.
iraqthe los angeles timesliz slythe washington postanthony shadidnada bakrioliver augustthe times of londonthe telegraph of london
mcclatchy newspaperssahar issa
cindy sheehan
stars and stripesmegan mccloskeynprnishant dahiya
rod nordland
james circello
bbc newsgabriel gatehouse
sherwood ross
Monday, October 19, 2009
Isaiah, Dave Zirin, Third, Iraq
Monday. Monday. Uh no. :D I need a laugh. Do you need a laugh? Let's go to Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "White House On Attack" from last night.
Now for Dave Zirin. I really don't go out of my way to rag on my friend Dave Zirin. I've always thought it great that he breezes through and reads me. But sometimes Dave just steps in. Here he is from ZNet: "Let's be absolutely clear: there is nothing in the 1st amendment which covers the right to own an NFL team. Owners have the right to protect their brand and Rush needs to deal with the fact that in 21st century America, he is a liability and not an asset." Now I don't diagree with that. But I'll add there's nothing in the 1st amendment that says Van Jones has right to be in any administration nor is there anything in the Constitution that says terrorist William Ayers (terrorist and small pricked Willie Ayers) has any right not to be called a terrorist. You blow things up -- including a judge's home -- you get dubbed a terrorist. And noting your crimes? Not a witch hunt.
But Dave and Rush's problems are a little deeper than the above. Dave lied about him. This is from "Whatever happened to the facts?:"
Last week, Rush Limbaugh's dreams of being a part-owner of an NFL football team went up in smoke. We didn't lose any sleep over it.
But we did find it interesting to watch as the usual hairy-backed loons (hello, David Zirin!) worked themselves into a tizzy. You know, the same low-lifes who were screaming "Not fair!" when the right-wing media focused on Van Jones. That was wrong, they insisted then. But using the same techniques on Limbaugh? Okay with them.
Well not the same techniques. Van Jones' own words and actions were used to ease him out of the administration. A job, it should be remembered, that the tax payers fork over the salary for. But with Rush Limbaugh? Turns out the hairy-backed crowd invented a few quotations. In other words, they flat out lied.
Confronted with his using a false quote, Zirin insists it's not his fault: "For all the dittoheads out there, here is how we came up with the quote: it was in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the Detroit Free Press, the Washington Post, and in the book 101 People Who Are Really Screwing America by Jack Huberman. It has been out in the ether for years. "First, Hairy Back Boi, when you're using a false quote probably not a good idea to write "here is how we came up with" it. English, like personal grooming, has yet to be mastered by Hairy Back Boi.
If the quote has really "been out in the ether for years," one wonders, why are all of Zirin's links to October 2009 pieces?
We're having trouble finding the quote in the Detroit Free Press article (Zirin links to USA Today republication) but maybe that's explained at the top of the article with this: "Editor's note: A quote that has been widely attributed to Rush Limbaugh has been removed from the original version of this column after Limbaugh denied saying it. USA TODAY could not verify the accuracy of the quote."
When insisting you're in the right, probably not a good idea to use as a source a publication that has pulled the quote and stated they "could not verify the accuracy of the quote."
At The Washington Post link, Mike Freeman does not reveal where the quote came from. He either attempts to mislead or doesn't know how to link because he does provide a link but it goes to an AP report that does not contain the quote. What of St. Louis Post-Dispatch?
A quote in Bryan Burwell's column Oct. 7 attributed to Rush Limbaugh about the merits of slavery in the United States cannot be verified, and its use did not meet the Post-Dispatch's standards for sourcing. Limbaugh said he did not make the statement. Burwell's column did not identify the source of the quote, which was Jack Huberman's 2006 book "101 People Who Are Really Screwing America." The book provided no details about the origin of the quote. When contacted by the Post-Dispatch, Huberman said that he had a source for the quote but declined to reveal it on advice of counsel. The book's publisher, Nation Books, did not return calls to the Post-Dispatch.
So that link is no good either. And any high school student learns citation and grasps that citing secondary sources all using the same primary source is frowned upon.
So what we're left with is Dave Zirin providing four 'sources' for the lie he repeated -- which he has not retracted nor apologized for and is still claiming to possibly be accurate -- and it is most likely one source being cited by three people. We know it's one source cited by two. And two of his three cited newspapers have retracted the quote -- stated they cannot stand by it.
But silly Dave Zirin continues to do so.
Whatever happened to facts?
A good question. And the link to Dave Zirin's article where he 'backs up' his claims? Huffington Post which has gone back to their 2006 article on that book and removed the quote and stated they can't verify it either.
The latest edition. Nightmare. Dallas and the following worked on it:
The Third Estate Sunday Review's Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess, and Ava,
Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude,
Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man,
C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review,
Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills),
Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix,
Mike of Mikey Likes It!,
Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz),
Trina of Trina's Kitchen,
Ruth of Ruth's Report,
Wally of The Daily Jot,
Marcia of SICKOFITRDLZ,
Stan of Oh Boy It Never Ends
and Ann of Ann's Mega Dub.
And what did we come up with?
-- This is something we all worked on and it had a major edit. Which is good and it made it better.
Now for Dave Zirin. I really don't go out of my way to rag on my friend Dave Zirin. I've always thought it great that he breezes through and reads me. But sometimes Dave just steps in. Here he is from ZNet: "Let's be absolutely clear: there is nothing in the 1st amendment which covers the right to own an NFL team. Owners have the right to protect their brand and Rush needs to deal with the fact that in 21st century America, he is a liability and not an asset." Now I don't diagree with that. But I'll add there's nothing in the 1st amendment that says Van Jones has right to be in any administration nor is there anything in the Constitution that says terrorist William Ayers (terrorist and small pricked Willie Ayers) has any right not to be called a terrorist. You blow things up -- including a judge's home -- you get dubbed a terrorist. And noting your crimes? Not a witch hunt.
But Dave and Rush's problems are a little deeper than the above. Dave lied about him. This is from "Whatever happened to the facts?:"
Last week, Rush Limbaugh's dreams of being a part-owner of an NFL football team went up in smoke. We didn't lose any sleep over it.
But we did find it interesting to watch as the usual hairy-backed loons (hello, David Zirin!) worked themselves into a tizzy. You know, the same low-lifes who were screaming "Not fair!" when the right-wing media focused on Van Jones. That was wrong, they insisted then. But using the same techniques on Limbaugh? Okay with them.
Well not the same techniques. Van Jones' own words and actions were used to ease him out of the administration. A job, it should be remembered, that the tax payers fork over the salary for. But with Rush Limbaugh? Turns out the hairy-backed crowd invented a few quotations. In other words, they flat out lied.
Confronted with his using a false quote, Zirin insists it's not his fault: "For all the dittoheads out there, here is how we came up with the quote: it was in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the Detroit Free Press, the Washington Post, and in the book 101 People Who Are Really Screwing America by Jack Huberman. It has been out in the ether for years. "First, Hairy Back Boi, when you're using a false quote probably not a good idea to write "here is how we came up with" it. English, like personal grooming, has yet to be mastered by Hairy Back Boi.
If the quote has really "been out in the ether for years," one wonders, why are all of Zirin's links to October 2009 pieces?
We're having trouble finding the quote in the Detroit Free Press article (Zirin links to USA Today republication) but maybe that's explained at the top of the article with this: "Editor's note: A quote that has been widely attributed to Rush Limbaugh has been removed from the original version of this column after Limbaugh denied saying it. USA TODAY could not verify the accuracy of the quote."
When insisting you're in the right, probably not a good idea to use as a source a publication that has pulled the quote and stated they "could not verify the accuracy of the quote."
At The Washington Post link, Mike Freeman does not reveal where the quote came from. He either attempts to mislead or doesn't know how to link because he does provide a link but it goes to an AP report that does not contain the quote. What of St. Louis Post-Dispatch?
A quote in Bryan Burwell's column Oct. 7 attributed to Rush Limbaugh about the merits of slavery in the United States cannot be verified, and its use did not meet the Post-Dispatch's standards for sourcing. Limbaugh said he did not make the statement. Burwell's column did not identify the source of the quote, which was Jack Huberman's 2006 book "101 People Who Are Really Screwing America." The book provided no details about the origin of the quote. When contacted by the Post-Dispatch, Huberman said that he had a source for the quote but declined to reveal it on advice of counsel. The book's publisher, Nation Books, did not return calls to the Post-Dispatch.
So that link is no good either. And any high school student learns citation and grasps that citing secondary sources all using the same primary source is frowned upon.
So what we're left with is Dave Zirin providing four 'sources' for the lie he repeated -- which he has not retracted nor apologized for and is still claiming to possibly be accurate -- and it is most likely one source being cited by three people. We know it's one source cited by two. And two of his three cited newspapers have retracted the quote -- stated they cannot stand by it.
But silly Dave Zirin continues to do so.
Whatever happened to facts?
A good question. And the link to Dave Zirin's article where he 'backs up' his claims? Huffington Post which has gone back to their 2006 article on that book and removed the quote and stated they can't verify it either.
The latest edition. Nightmare. Dallas and the following worked on it:
The Third Estate Sunday Review's Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess, and Ava,
Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude,
Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man,
C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review,
Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills),
Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix,
Mike of Mikey Likes It!,
Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz),
Trina of Trina's Kitchen,
Ruth of Ruth's Report,
Wally of The Daily Jot,
Marcia of SICKOFITRDLZ,
Stan of Oh Boy It Never Ends
and Ann of Ann's Mega Dub.
And what did we come up with?
- Truest statement of the week
-- this one and the next were from Justin Raimondo, "Code Yellow: The selling-out of the antiwar movement" (Antiwar.com) and Dallas suggested it. We had all missed it which is why I'm not just saying "Justin Raimondo" but including the title and the link. - Truest statment of the week II
- -- I believe Raimondo is the first person to ever have two truests in one week.
- A note to our readers
- -- Jim breaks down the edition. And it was a crazy one. I couldn't believe it.
-- This is something we all worked on and it had a major edit. Which is good and it made it better.
- TV: Piss Queens
- -- Ava and C.I. and aren't they amazing? They did this as a bonus because the entire edition is falling apart. It's not just a bonus, it's the best thing about the entire edition. I love this. My mother loves it, my father loves it, read and you'll love it. They take on the faux peace queens and yet again break down the realities of counter-insurgency.
- TV: The Homophobic Show
- -- This is nothing to sneeze at either. I didn't watch The Beautiful Life. I was surprised it ended up cancelled so quickly (after two episodes) because I'd seen it advertised everywhere. I assumed it would be one of those CW shows I never watched the lasted forever. Reading their review, I'm real glad audiences rejected.
- Whatever happened to the facts?
- -- The edition was a nightmare. Jim's note explains Jess came up with this from various articles we wrote. Those articles weren't working. Most of what we wrote didn't work. Jess noted a theme in some of the articles: We were catching people in errors. So he pulled that out of various articles and made it into one and Ava and C.I. smoothed it over with some writing.
- Roundtable
- -- The gang did this as a last minute thing after they sent us off to sleep. This was not planned and they rushed to do it quickly. I think they did a fine job.
- Iraq
- -- Highlights. They weren't in the mood for any more. I don't blame them.
- Simon Assaf's 'Violence continues in Iraq'
- -- Repost of Simon Assaf's Socialist Worker (Great Britain) article.
- Over 1,164 US troops may have been exposed to Sodi...
- -- DPC statement on exposure.
- Highlights
- -- Rebecca, Betty, Wally, Cedric, Stan, Ann, Marcia, Ruth, Kat, Elaine and I wrote this.
In the snapshot today, C.I. notes Nouri's visit to the US and to that, I'll add this from Alsumaria, "The delegation accompanying Al Maliki includes ministers of Foreign affairs, Finances, Oil, Electricity and head of the national commission for investment as well as a number of lawmakers and investors. Iraqi Prime Minister will meet with US President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and White House officials to discuss the latest political and security development in the country as well as upcoming elections and enhancing the bilateral strategic agreement. " Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"
Monday, October 19, 2009. Chaos and violence, the US military announces another death, bridge bombings continued over the weekend, Nouri visits the US, there is still no election law for the 'intended' elections to be held in Iraq in January, and more.
Today the US military announced: "CONTINGENY OPERATION BASE SPEICHER, TIKRIT, Iraq -- a Multi-National Division - North Soldier was killed and two were injured in a vehicle accident approximately five miles west of Mosul, Iraq, Oct. 18. The name of the deceased is being withheld pending notification of next of kin and release by the Department of Defense. The names of service members are announced through the U.S. Department of Defense official website [. . .]. The announcements are made on the Web site no earlier than 24 hours after notification of the service member's primary next of kin. The incident is under investigation." The announcement brings to 4350 the number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war.
As always, violence continued in Iraq today.
Bombings?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad diner bombing claimed 1 life and left ten people injured, a Baghdad bus bombing claimed 1 life and left eight people injured, a Baghdad roadside bombing wounded three people, a Diyala Province roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 person, a Faulluja suicide bombing claimed the life of the bomber and the lives of 2 police officers (four more injured) while there were two assassination attempts by bombings: In Kirkuk, Qais Amer Naji, Head of Criminal Investigation Bureau, survived a sticky bombing and, in Salahuddin Province, Abdulrahman Khalid (District Commissioner) was targeted with an assassination attempt via bombing but survived. Reuters notes a Mosul mortar attack which resulted in four people being injured, a Mosul car bombing claimed the life of "a former army officer, who heads a small political party" and a Garma car bombing which left four police officers injured.
Shootings?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports the Head of the Bureau of Tribal Affairs Thenoon Younis was assassinated in Mosul today and two by-standers were injured. Reuters notes 1 person shot dead in Mosul.
Still with the violence, Friday Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reported "a pontoon bridge in Ameriyah" was blown up leaving the "area which is now completely isolated." As noted in Friday's snapshot, "Those who remember the 2006 bridge bombings and the violence that followed, should take into account that this could be step-one of a multi-violence attack that follows." The bridge bombings are back. Uthman al-Mokhtar (Washington Post) reported Saturday, "Insurgents detonated a truck loaded with five tons of explosives Saturday on a bridge here that links western Iraq to Jordan and Syria, pulverizing part of the overpass and paralyzing traffic for hours. Another, smaller bridge was also destroyed in Fallujah, where a roadside bomb struck an Iraqi military patrol on the highway, killing four soldiers and wounding 14 others, said Sulaiman al-Dulaimi, a spokesman for the Fallujah General Hospital." Iran's Press TV notes, "'A truck was driven over the bridge on a highway in Ramadi at around 4:00 am (0100 GMT) and subsequently exploded,' police Major Imad Abboud told AFP, adding that the highway is used heavily by the departing US military to transport equipment out of the country. It is also being used by local civilians."
Meanwhile Thomas Grove, Shamal Aqrawi and Janet Lawrence (Reuters) report that today eight members of the PKK would cross the border into Turkey (from Iraq) and turn themselves over "to Turkish military forces [. . .] in a gesture of support for Turkey's Kurdish initiative". AP says it is 34 turning themselves over but only 8 of the 34 "are rebels". Hurriyet Daily News reports this took place at 4:00 pm: "The group comprised 26 people, including nine women and four children, from the Mahmur camp in northern Iraq and eight PKK members from the Kandil Mountains. The group is coming 'not to surrender but to open the way for peace,' DTP co-leader Ahmet Türk said earlier Monday at a press conference in Silopi, on the Turkish side of the border. NTV television reported that they would be taken in by Turkish authorities for questioning once they're in the country." BBC News adds, "As Kurdish Turks gathered in Istanbul, thousands of supporters waving PKK flags were waiting in Silopi to greet the 34 Kurds as they crossed the border. Some had come from a refugee camp in Makhmour, south of Mosul in Iraq." Deutsche Welle quotes Turkish government spokesperson Ibrahim Kalin Allen stating, "It is a very good sign, it is one first fruit of the democratic initiative."
Last Tuesday's snapshot included the news that England was attempting to forcibly deport Iraqis back to Iraq. Over the weekend, BBC reported that approximately 30 refugees are "being refused re-entry to Iraqi" allowing the UK to 'only' unload ten of them Thursday. Even so, the inhumane UK Border Agency announces it will be sending even more back. Coalition illegal war of choice partner Italy's Aire Italy provided the flight to Baghdad. Rod Nordland and John F. Burns (New York Times) numbered the forced deported at 50 with Iraq only accepting 9 of them. Amnesty International's London office issued "Asylum removals to Iraq put lives in danger, says Amnesty:"Reacting to news reports that a plane carrying refused Iraqi asylum-seekers from the UK arrived in Baghdad yesterday (15 October), Amnesty International stressed that removals to southern and central Iraq are not safe and should not take place.An Amnesty International spokesperson said: 'Given the reports of killings, bombings and other human rights abuses that continue to come out of Baghdad, it is hard to comprehend that the UK government considers it a safe place to return people. 'As far as we are concerned, removing someone to Baghdad, or elsewhere in central or southern Iraq, is likely to put their life in danger. Amnesty is opposed to all forcible returns to southern and central Iraq. 'Until the situation improves and it is safe to return to Iraq, these people should be offered some form of protection in the UK.' Reports have stated that the plane carrying the refused Iraqi asylum-seekers was turned around upon arrival and returned to the UK with the people still on board.
Owen Bowcott and Alan Travis (Guardian) report the Iternational Federation of Iraqi Refugees state it was one "Iraqi army officer" who allowed the others on board the plane not to depart and that he told them, "Those of you who want to come back, you get off, the rest stay where you are." Richard Ford and Mary Bowers (Times of London) observe, "The [UK] Home Office refused to give any explanation for the debacle at Baghdad, referring all inquiries to the Iraqi Government. A Home Office spokesman said: 'We are not giving a running commentary on this'." Those who returned? Last night, Owen Bowcott reported that they they are reporting "they were beaten by British security guards and that no Arabic translator accompanied them. Refugee Kawa Ali Azada tells Bowcott:
It was like a kidnapping. We had no food for 12 hours. We were kept out of sight at the airport then put on an Italian charter flight. We we arrived in Baghdad, there was an Iraqi officer with sunglasses and eagle decorations on his shoulders. [The British immigration official] started to talk to him but his English was not good so I went to help translate. The British officials didn't have an Arabic translator. [The airport commander] said he had received a message from his boss there was an Italian flight but was never told it was transporting deported Iraqis -- otherwise he would not have let it land. He said to the immigration official he had two hours to refuel the plane and leave or he would take further action. He would not take responsibility for the Iraqis because of the danger of kidnapping and bombs. The immigration officer asked what 'further action' meant and he said would burn the plane with all the people on board if it didn't leave."
Traveling this week is Nouri al-Maliki. But first he had to grandstand. Alsumaria reports that US-installed thug of the occupation Nouri al-Maliki spent Saturday bloviating and puffing his chest about how the 'evil-doers' would be brought to 'justice' as he appeared at Baghdad's Al Rashid Hotel to grand stand on the two month anniversary of Black Wednesday or Bloody Wednesday or Gory Wednesday. That was August 19th and yesterday was August 17th but apparently a photo-op was needed for Nouri. Try to remember a two-month 'anniversary' 9-11 photo-op by Bully Boy Bush. There wasn't one. But Nouri's damn determined to milk Black Wednesday for all it's worth. As he grand stands on a pile of corpses, remember the US installed him in 2006 and US forces have been trapped in Iraq attempting to prop up the exile's illegitimate regime. That was Saturday. Now Nouri's on the move.
At the US State Dept today, spokesperson Ian Kelly noted, "First of all, you've seen that the Secretary [of State Hillary Clinton] has a meeting with Prime Minister Maliki. That's in about 40 minutes. There'll be a camera spray before the meeting and then I expect the Secretary will make some brief remarks as well. There will be, of course, a discussion of bilateral issues, but I think one of the more important items on the agenda for the meeting will be tomorrow's US-Iraq business and investment conference. This conference we see as a stepping stone to greater private sector involvement and investment in the Iraqi economy. And, of course, we have had very intensive government-to-government relations, but we think that the next step is greater involvement of the private sector. So this conference is intended to encourage business-to-business connections and partner our respective business communities."
At the US State Dept, Hillary and al-Maliki greeted reporters (click here for text and video)
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton: Today, the prime minister and I discussed a range of issues, and we agreed to establish a diplomatic joint coordinating committee under the Strategic Framework Agreement. In that committee, we will discuss all Chapter 7 issues that need to be resolved. Tomorrow's U.S-Iraq Business and Investment Conference will be a very important priority for both of us. By bringing together business and government leaders from both countries, we hope to pave the way for greater international investment in Iraq and closer economic ties between us. As Iraq emerges from conflict, the stability that is occurring will drive greater prosperity, which will help create a lasting peace and bring jobs that will lift families' income and give Iraqis a greater opportunity to chart their own futures. I want to thank Prime Minister Maliki and the other Iraqi leaders who are here today for their leadership on this important conference and the issue, and I want to express our pleasure at seeing the recent amendments to Iraq's national investment law. We also discussed the upcoming national elections which are critical to Iraq's future. Obviously, we are supporting the efforts to ensure that the elections are credible and legitimate, and that a new government is formed in a timely way to continue the peaceful stability and economic growth that is so important. And finally, Mr. Prime Minister, I really salute the Iraqi people. They have withstood the challenges of sectarianism, violence, and terrorism. They have made tremendous sacrifices and have achieved the right for a secure and peaceful future of progress and prosperity. The United States remains committed to Iraq and the people of Iraq.
Installed Thug Nouri al-Maliki: In the name of God, peace be upon you. In this occasion, I take the opportunity to express my happiness and pleasure to be here inaugurating the investment conference between Iraq and America. We have met Mrs. Clinton, the Secretary of State, and it was the second meeting with Mrs. Clinton. The first one was in July this year. We had talks, and our talks, in fact, concentrated on the importance of activating the strategic agreement -- framework agreement between Iraq and America. This conference, which will be held tomorrow, and the strategic agreement between Iraq and America means that the relationship between Iraq are no more on the militant level. In fact, it moved to the economic level and other horizons. Iraq, in fact, attempts to inaugurate an extensive and comprehensive investment process, especially after the stability achieved in the country. In addition, and besides the task of reconstruction, in fact, Iraq seeks and attempts to find revenues to find new ways for increasing and promoting its revenues to cover the cost of reconstruction. In fact, we have waited to carry out or to make amendments on the investment laws in Iraq. And this conference is -- will be held after achieving these amendments. The governors and the representative of provincial councils will stay in the United States of America to coordinate and to strengthen the ties and relationships between the Iraqi governors and the American governors. The meeting with Mrs. Clinton, in fact, was fruitful and very important. We have talked and tackled different issues related to Iraq and to different -- to many issues, especially the problem of the Chapter 7. And we, in fact, discussed to get Iraq out of this chapter eventually. In fact, we have the same points of view and we have the same ambitions. And our ambitions for future are sure and as addressed. In fact, this means that we have succeeded in confronting and defeating terrorism, but we have another task, which is creating new opportunities, to create welfare and economic development. The next meeting, I hope it will be in Baghdad. Thank you very much.
Also meeting Nouri was US Vice President Joe Biden. Xinhua quotes the vice president's office stating, "The Vice president also encouraged the Iraqi Council of Representatives to act expeditiously on an election law that will set the terms for transparent political participation in the upcoming Iraqi national elections." This is the election law which was supposed to be passed no later than last Thursday. Needless to say, it was not passed. It wasnt passed over the weekened either. Today? Xinhua explains the Parliament decided not to consider the law today but may pick it up tomorrow. Which appears to be Scarlett O'Hara Rules of Order: "Oh fiddle-dee-dee, I'll think about it tomorrow." Who knew Turner Classic Movies (TCM) was so popular in Baghdad?
The Center for American Progress' Lawrence J. Korb (Reagan-ite) is in Iraq, and blogging about it for CAP, and he notes, "A real but often overlooked danger of the upcoming Iraqi election in January 2010 is whether Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki will go quietly if his party loses and he does not stay in power. History tells us that only when there is a peaceful transfer of power can a country be considered a democracy."
The latest Inside Iraq (Al Jazeera) began airing Friday and Jasim Azawi spoke with former CIA asset and Iraq's former Prime Minister Ayad Allawi on a number of topics and we'll excerpt a section on the elections.
Jasim Azawi: The former Iraqi interim prime miniters Ayad Allawi has been living in a political wilderness for more than four years but now he's banking on returning to power in the upcoming parliamentary election next January. Yet so far he has failed to build a powerful political bloc to challenge either the coalition headed by his chief nemesis, the current Iraqi prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki or the Iraqi National Alliance headed by Amar al-Hakim. Ayad Allawi has few friends in neighboring Iran due to his constant accusations of Iranian interference in Iraq. His critics -- and even some of his supporters -- say his style of rule is authoritarian and it is bound to harm him and his cause. And now I'm joined from Baghdad by Dr. Ayad Allawi, Iraq's former interim prime minister. Dr. Allawi, welcome to Inside Iraq, let us start with the latest
Ayad Allawi: Thank you.
Jasim Azawi: and that is the Iraqi Parliament has just postponed a vote on a new election bill until Monday and this constant delay and postponement definitely is helping somebody because what is at stake is an open list vis a vis a closed list. To explain to our international viewers, an open list is where a group, they list every single candidate running for office, for parliament. While a closed list -- just like happened in 2005 -- you really don't know who you are voting for. So I'm asking you who is scheming behind this postponement?
Ayad Allawi: In fact this is another failure by the Iraqi Parliament to produce a strategic law that would -- hopefully would be cementing democracy. But unfortunately that's not the case. Likewise, the Parliament has failed in producing a law for the parties -- to say where the funding for these parties are coming from, what they are, who they are, are they national, are they sectarian, are they secular. So there are no laws -- no laws of election. Indeed, the Iraqi people are disenchanted with the so-called closed list because usually it's either voting for the sect or voting for the -- for the leader of the list.
Jasim Azawi: Who will benefit from this? I understand you are for the open list.
Ayad Allawi: Yes, absolutely.
Jasim Azawi: Many other politicians are for the open list including the prime minister and he said we will not accept any postponement of the elections under any circumstances. So tell me, if everyone says 'we are with the open list,' who is delaying it?
Ayad Allawi: Well frankly we -- we are -- we have been lobbying for an open list. But it is the government, it is the sectarian forces that have been lobbying in the government --
Jasim Azawi: Are you alluding to the Iraqi National Alliance headed by Amar Hakim?
Ayad Allawi: I am alluding to most of the sectarian groups in the Parliament because they were in control of Parliament -- last Parliament -- in the first elections and they decided that they should go on the closed list not the open list. And this remains the case until now. Although there are very strong calls and lobbying from other forces in Iraq, that we need to have an open list rather than a closed list.
Jasim Azawi: Since you mention sectarian parties and sectarian blocs, perhaps some of them are affiliated with Iran? One thing I know for sure, over the past several years, you've been attacking Iran for its interferences in Iraq and there is almost like a veto by Iran against you. Is that true? Are you and Iran on the out?
Ayad Allawi: No [. . .], I've always -- I've been calling for a stable region where the trade links and economic links are the predominant feature. Where there is a kind of security and kind of dialogue between our regional forces. I think this remains a must in the region and there is no way really to go into stability in this region without talking to each other. That's why I personally was behind the first Sharm el-Sheikh [International Conference held in Egypy which included ministers and secretaries from twenty countries as well as then UN Secretary-General Kofia Annan, November 22nd to 24th, 2004] where original forces met under the umbrella of the UN and the presence of the Gulf Cooperation Council and the Arab League. Unfortunately this conference was not followed through by successive governments who came after me.
Jasim Azawi: We will talk about that and your relationship with the current prime minister Nouri al-Maliki. But, please, put to the rest -- to put to rest a rumor that it has been circulating as a matter of fact it was mentioned in one of the PanArab newspapers that says Ayad Allawi had a secret trip to Iran to get the green light from Iran's Revolutionary Force to run as the sole candidate for the Iraqi National Alliance. Is that true? Did you visit Iran secretly?
Ayad Allawi: Wll it is not true, Jasim, because it is very difficult for me to travel secretly. I can't be hiding in a suitcase. I am a known figure. It's difficult to travel. I don't travel alone usually. With a -- with a secretaries, I travel with body guards. So really this is not the case. I haven't been to Iran. I don't have an invitation to go to Iran. And my schedule, in the future, I don't have visit to Iran. So this is all fabrication --
Jasim Azawi: I'm glad we put this to rest, this fabrication at least. The newspaper perhaps will retract this information. Iraqi politicians are at a frenzy to create coalition alliances.
Meanwhile the US Boob to Iraq, Chris Hill is in the news. Mohammed Jamjoom (CNN) reports he told them Friday that the delay in the election law (still not passed -- supposed to have been passed no later than Thursday) was no big deal: "Would we like them [to] kind of get this over with early rather than late? We would, but sometimes in this country there's a tendency to do things at the last minute. So we'll see." If you were supposed to be explaining the need for political movement to the puppet government and you had FAILED you would no doubt make similar statements. The Boob is also reported on by Roy Gutman (McClatchy Newspapers) who reveals that Chris Hill went to Basra and told the business leaders "to project positive energy instead of complaining about all the things that are wrong with Iraq." Deception lessons from the Boob. As for withdrawal, Chris Hill is quoted stating, "as long as your people want us here, we will be here."
We'll note the opening of a new piece by Debra Sweet (World Can't Wait):
Tuesday I was on Anti-war Radio with Scott Horton and Angela Keaton. As an announcement for the show read, "Debra Sweet, Director of World Can't Wait, discusses the post-Obama antiwar movement collapse, the strange confluence of The Feminist Majority and the Bush administration in selling the War in Afghanistan, the laughable notion that the Pentagon can be used to secure human rights, Afghan warlords allied with the Karzai government whose human rights records are no better than the Taliban's and how activists can make their voices heard on antiwar issues."
Listen here.
In an early evening edition of the San Francisco Chronicle Thursday, coverage of the Obama fundraiser there included: "Mike Dean of San Francisco , with the left-wing group World Can't Wait, paid tribute to Obama's Nobel Peace Prize with a huge poster showing the president wearing a medallion inscribed 'Orwell War Is Peace 2009'."
Peace Mom Cindy Sheehan has a must read column entitled "Hopeless?" and we'll note this from it:
Not only have we collectively marched millions of miles and signed millions of petitions and made millions of phone calls to our elected officials, but many people also put all of their hope eggs in the basket of another war-monger and where has that gotten us? Nowhere except deeper into quagmires and please don't tell me that Obama wants peace when he is a pawn of the Machine that I have been trying so hard to stop.
Since my son was killed, I have thrown everything I have at the machine. Every penny I have, every ounce of energy, every relationship and even my health have been sacrificed to end the wars and five years later there is very little to show for such a profound investment and the even sadder part is that I am not the only one in the struggle. Multiply these sacrifices by thousands of us and there's a whole lot of heartache for zippity-do-dah.
As evidenced by poor showings at anti-war marches and rallies all over the country since the Democrats came back into power in 2006, I am growing more convinced that very few people care at all about the wars and the killing and those of that do are growing weary and teary.
Americans care about issues when those issues directly affect Americans. I believe that one thing that will get people out into the streets is a forced military conscription, or draft. But even with the threats of sending tens of thousands of more troops to the war zone, the economy is swelling the ranks of the military and for the first time in six years, recruitment is meeting its quotas. So forced conscription is unnecessary. Obama's "job's plan" turned out to be enlistment in the military. Who knew?
Read the entire thing if you're able. I think we'll probably try to do something on it at Third on Sunday, Cindy's covering a lot of ground and she's offered the thought piece for the year. Lastly, community member Dallas, after he read Ava and my TV piece on the faux peace activists mentioned Justin Raimondo, "Code Yellow: The selling-out of the antiwar movement" (Antiwar.com) which we'd all missed last week (except for Dallas) so please make a point to check that out and here's a sample:
A political whore isn't "born again," as it were, on account of a single visit to Afghanistan and a talking to by the "minister of women" -- this lady has been operating the political equivalent of a house of ill repute at least since 2004.
iraqthe new york timesrod nordlandjohn f. burns
the guardian
alan travis
the times of londonrichard ford
thomas groveshamal aqrawijanet lawrencereutershurriyet daily news
the washington postuthman al-mokhtar
mcclatchy newspaperssahar issa
cnnmohammed jamjoomroy gutman
cindy sheehan
debra sweet
the common illsthe third estate sunday reviewlike maria said pazkats kornersex and politics and screeds and attitudetrinas kitchenthe daily jotcedrics big mixmikey likes itthomas friedman is a great manruths reportsickofitradlzoh boy it never endsthe world today just nutsiraqiraq
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)