How stupid is the White House?
"White House Hopes Attacks Will 'Energize' Iraqi Troops to Fight" (Jake Tapper and Karen Travers, ABC News):
Responding to the wave of explosions in Iraq today, a Senior Administration official tells ABC News that the attacks – which have killed at least 75 people -- “indicate the depths these opponents will go in their attempts to destabilize Iraq. The indiscriminate nature of the attacks -- and the blatant killing of innocent Muslims – is disconcerting.”The official adds that “at the same time, we believe these attacks will energize our Iraqi partners to continue their efforts to build Iraq.”Note the spin at the end that this will energize Iraqi troops, not scare them off – not a view held by all observers of the conflict. Since the Iraqi government took control of security earlier this year, attacks have grown more frequent and more deadly.
Repeating: How stupid is the White House?
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Wednesday, August 19, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, over 100 people are reported dead in today's violence, the US military announces a death, Denmark works overtime to eject Iraqi refugees, the US State Dept and the United Nations work overtime to embarrass themselves, and more.
Today the US military announced: "FORWARD OPERATING BASE ECHO, Iraq -- A Multi-National Division - South Soldier was killed in action August 19. Release of the identity of the Soldier is being withheld pending notification of the next of kin." When ICCC updates, that will make the total number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war 4332.
"The windows of the Foregin Ministry shattered," Harry Haydon (The Sun) quotes a Foreign Ministry worker stating, "slaughtering the people inside." "Dozens of people were killed inside by shards of flying glass," adds UK's Channel 4 News (link has text and video) which identifies the woman as "Asia." Once again, violence swept through Baghdad on a massive scale -- such a massive scale that 'worst violence since US troops withdrew from Iraqi cities' was bandied about as if it were new and hadn't been used repeatedly in the last weeks. "All these things landed on top of me. These terrorists. Many innocent people were killed," surivor Samira Hachem, who'd been in her apartment, tells Ernesto Londono (Washington Post). Caroline Alexander (Bloomberg News) notes the website of the political party of Jalal Talabani (president of Iraq) reported multiple Baghdad bombings (not "immediately clear how many bombs were detonated or where") with multiple deaths and hundreds injured: "The finance, foreign, health, education, and housing ministries were all targeted, the PUK said, without indicating which blasts caused casualties. State-owned Iraqiya television broadcast footage of the capital showing plumes of gray smoke rising over rooftops." Martin Chulov (Guardian) reports that the bombings, "at least six attacks," began at 10:30 a.m. in the morning "within minutes of each other, the largest being the one outside the Foreign Ministry". Chulov's report is text and video and that's from the video. The Economist offers, "BAGHDAD has not seen a day as violent as Wednesday August 19th for a long while. At ten in the morning, simultaneous car bombs and rocket attacks struck half a dozen ministries and the cabinet office. A lorry exploded beside the foreign ministry, destroying it and leaving a large crater outside. Nearby high-rise apartment buildings were also set ablaze. A bomb smuggled into the education ministry narrowly failed to kill the minister in his office, according to Iraqi television reports, and a mortar just missed the home of the environment minister. Rockets fell across the heavily fortified green zone, destroying parts of the parliament building and damaging a neighbouring hotel a few minutes before the prime minister, Nuri al-Maliki, was expected to visit." CNN notes the targeting of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Finance. Liz Sly and Usama Redha (Los Angeles Times) agree those were "the main targets," note mortar attacks and quote eye witness Gaith Abdulla stating, "I saw people killed and wounded on the ground and many cars were ablaze. The security forces started shooting and were firing randomly. Then another massive explosion shook the whole place." ITN (link has text and video) describes the area around the Foreign Ministry, "The site was a twisted heap of smouldering cars as firefighters fought to put out the blaze." The video shows the Parliament building -- Parliament is not in session -- during the bombings as windows/panels shook and fell and dust flew in the air. Deborah Haynes (Times of London) observes, "By targeting the Foreign Ministry and the Finance Ministry, the bombers have sent a clear signal that they are able to strike at the heart of the Government. . . . Today's bloodshed will raise questions about President Obama's strategy to pull US forces out of Iraqi cities several weeks ago leaving domestic security forces in control." Natalia Antelava (BBC News) offers this analysis, "These are unusual attacks -- in the last few weeks, we have seen explosions in Baghdad but these attacks occured in some of the supposedly safest neighbourhoods of the city. For many people, these attacks confirm their worst fears over the withdrawal of US troops from cities across Iraq at the end of June and handing over of the security situation to Iraqi forces. A lot of people before the withdrawal were saying they were very fearful that attacks would rise." Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) sums up, "At the stie of the deadliest Baghdad bombing in 18 months, Iraqi faith that their security forces could protect them lay shattered in the wreckage." Caroline Alexander reports, "It's too early to know whether the Baghdad assualts will prompt a change in U.S. tactics, and Iraqi officials haven't requested assistance under the security pact, said U.S. Marine Corps Colonel David Lapan, a spokesman for the Pentagon."
"Everybody on the street was going crazy. Everybody was just trying to get to their cars, just trying to get home -- and that's what I did," Mustapha Muhie told the BBC. BBC News offers a photo essay filled with plumes of smoke, showing the huge crater left by one bombing, the cranes used to check the Foreign Ministry for any people who might be alive and trapped in the building. Some outlets are saying car bombs, some are saying truck bombs. Adam Ashton (McClatchy Newspapers) goes with truck bombings and quotes Katheem Hanoon who was selling snacks and water by the ministry before "[s]he was buried under her goods and shelves after the bombing": "What security? Where is it? Is it borther killing brother, son killing father?" Sam Dagher (New York Times) informs, "The bombs crippled the downtown area, closed highways and two main bridges over the Tigris River and clogged hospitals with wounded."
Al Jazeera puts the death toll at 95 and the number wounded at 500 and quotes Iraqi Mar Gen Qassim Atta stating the Foreign Ministry was targeted by a truck bombing. Caroline Alexander also notes 95 dead but 563 injured and credits the count to AFP which got the numbers from the Interior Ministry. Anne Barker (Australia's ABC) adds, "Government ministry workers, journalists and security guards were among the dead." Jenny Booth (Times of London) offers a timeline of attacks in the last two years and August 10th saw 51 deaths (Mosul and Baghdad). Jane Arraf explains, "The ministry, surrounded by high concrete walls on a busy street, was near a checkpoint that had been dismantled earlier this year. As attacks in Baghdad have decreased, Iraqi authorities eager to show improvement in security and make the city livable again have started removing concrete walls and security checkpoints." Jamal Hashim (Xinhua) reports on the attitudes regarding the removal of (some) walls and quotes teacher Adel Hameed stating, "I feel like something heavy removed from my chest when they remove the walls, but I still feel in pain that my country had to pay very large amounts of money for those gray slabs to slice our city into Shiite and Suni enclaves."
Oliver August (Times of London) reminds, "Today is the sixth anniversary of a truck bombing that hit the United Nations compound in Baghdad, killing 22 people including special envoy Sergio Vieira de Mello." The link includes Sky News' video and you can see what looks like hundreds of burned out cars, some still aflame, and attempts to hose them down. Some were clearly parked (in a parking lot), others were on the road and apparently in motion when the explosions took place. Richard Spencer (Telegraph of London) explains, "Television footage showed cars smashed by falling concrete slabs and streets full of rubble and glass." August quotes a guest at the Rasheed Hotel stating, "The windows were blown out and the doors were taken out, even the door frames went. If I had been in my room at the time I would have been seriously injured or worse. Everything is locked down now. Nobody can move anywhere, nobody is getting in or out. Even our security team cannot move." The eye witness is identified as "John Tipple, a UK solicitor". Not noted is that Tipple is one of Danny Fitzsimons' attorneys -- the British contractor who could face trial in Iraq and face the death penalty. Tipple is in Iraq attempting to have Danny Fitzsimons' case transferred to England.AFP reports that Nouri al-Maliki has ordered a review of "security measures". Ahmed Rasheed, Khalid al-Ansary, Michael Christie, Mohammed Abbas and Tim Pearce (Reuters) report that Maj Gen Qassim al-Moussawi ("Baghdad's security spokesman") stated, "The operation shows negligence, and is considered a security breach for which Iraqi forces must take most of the blame." In the aftermath, a number showed up to compete for crazy. Chris Hill, US Ambassador to Iraq, denounced an undefined "they" as "psychopaths." Chip Cummins (Wall St. Journal) notes, "Iraqi security officials initially blamed Baathist loyalists and operatives associated with al Qaeda for the series of attacks, but provided no evidence for that claim. No one claimed immediate responsibility for the attacks." Apologies to Chip Cummins who was wrongly billed as "Chip Cummings" yesterday and that was my error. KUNA traces the swirling accusations identifying the head of "Baghdad security operations" as the first to accuse and to accuse "Baathis non-believer alliance". But crazy ass Jalal Talabani -- who so disgraced himself in the last years that his party performed miserably in the July Kurdistan elections -- may have won the prize for crazy (a padded cell) by insisting the bombings were the actions of a new polyblend: al Qaeda in Iraq and Ba'athists. KUNA quotes him stating, "Terrorist criminals from Al-Qaeda and Saddamists carried out Wednesday a number of criminal acts which targeted civil communities and government establishments." Now anyone could be responsible, anyone. But when you're going to toss around accusations with no proof, you might try making them plausible. And while al Qaeda in Iraq and Ba'athists teaming up could happen, it's not really the most realistic charge to instantly make. For one thing, Ba'athists are what? Secular. Anyone accuse al Qaeda in Iraq -- or al Qaeda anywhere -- of being secular? Nope. Never. Jalal hasn't looked so crazy since his trip to the US to unplug his arteries was followed by a major pig out which led to his collapsing in a Chicago bookstore. Someone might want to advise him that when he's no longer president of Iraq, he's probably not going to be flown in to the US every couple of months for the equivalent of cholesterol-lipo. Ben Lando (Time magazine) notes of the assertion of an al Qaeda and Ba'athist blend, "It is hard to asses that claim at the moment."
In other reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports an Anbar Province car bombing which left two security guards for Habbaniyah Police Chief Khalid al Khirbeet injured. Reuters notes a roadside bombing outside of Mosul which claimed the life of 1 Iraqi soldier and left four more injured.
Shootings?
Reuters notes an armed clash in Mosul in which 1 police officer was shot dead and three people were injured and 1 off duty police officer was shot dead in Mosul. Dropping back to Tuesday, Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 person shot dead in Kirkuk and Iraqi Christian Sabah Dawood was shot dead in Kirkuk last night. Alsumaria notes 1 more person shot dead in Mosul last night "in a separate incident."
Corpses?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports Dr. Semeer Gorgis's corpse was discovered today in Kirkuk and that the Iraqi Christian had been kidnapped yesterday.
News this week includes talk of the SOFA being put to a referendrum for Iraqis in January and of US forces entering nothern Iraq in a huge deployment where they hold hands with the peshmerga and Baghdad's own security forces who otherwise can't get along. Charles Cooper (Coop's Corner, CBS News) observes, "For some reason, this story has not received as much attention as it ought to. Turns out that United States General Ray Odierno and Iraq's leadership are at odds over the timetable for the departure of American forces. How this issue gets resolved is likely to have major implications for both countries and, perhaps, the wider region." Covering recent developments, Ben Lando explains:
And so there was political ambivalence when U.S. Commanding General Ray Odierno suggested this week that U.S. forces deploy to disputed territories in the north, a move not consistent with SOFA. Under his plan, U.S. troops would temporarily coordinate with the security forces there -- and those security forces are at odds with one another. For it is in Kurdistan that Iraq may actually fissure. The central and regional Kurdish governments have been arguing over oil, land and money for years. Recently, they would have clashed if U.S. forces had not intervened.
Unlike SOFA, the fate of Kurdistan is an issue the government is not brave enough to put to a ballot. This week Iraq announced it would postpone a national referendum on the disputed territories even though Iraq's Kurds have been demanding one since 2006. Whether or not the Iraqis take up Odierno's suggestion, the country's dilemma about the U.S. is clear: While Iraq can't live with the U.S. military presence, it will have to learn to live without it fast.
Monday Human Rights Watch released a report entitled "'They Want Us Exterminated': Murder, Torture, Sexual Orientation and Gender in Iraq." For the 67-page report [PDF format warning] click here. Iraqi Haytham shares:
A car pulled us over. About six men carrying a weapons stepped out and asked for our IDs. They were dressed in black, which is usually the sign of the Mahdi Army. I demanded, "Who are you to ask for our cards?" So they opened the door and pulled us out, humiliating us, calling us "puppies," saying, "We see you in pervert places all the time."
I tried to argue we were just friends, tried to convince them there was nothing between us. Then they pulled out a list and they started asking us about these names.
Though many have been silent, as Marcia noted last night, US House Rep Alcee L. Hastings' office issued the following statement:
The report documents the extrajudicial persecution, torture, and execution of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Iraqis. In recent months, hundreds of gay men have been tortured and murdered in Iraq in a systematic campaign of social cleansing by Shiite militiamen and extremists. Furthermore, victims and witnesses allege that Iraqi security forces have colluded and joined in the killing. "The alarming testimonies detailed in this report are undeniable evidence that the rights and safety of gay Iraqis are at risk," Hastings said. "Gay Iraqis should not have to live in fear of being tortured, mutilated, or murdered by their countrymen. International human rights law explicitly condemns torture and guarantees the right to life and the right to effective state protection. These abuses fundamentally threaten the rights and safety of all Iraqis."I urge the Iraqi government to stem this tide of violence and hate and to protect its LGBT citizens," he said. "I also commend Human Rights Watch for raising awareness of this urgent matter and for its ongoing dedication to defending and protecting human rights around the world."
Also addressing the report is Feminist Majority Foundation's Feminist Wire Daily:
Human Rights Watch released a report yesterday that indicates hundreds of Iraqi gay men have been kidnapped, tortured and murdered since the beginning of 2009. The report claims that Iraqi authorities have not acted to stop militias that are actively targeting men suspected of engaging in homosexual conduct and may be complicit in some attacks. The report cites a militia member who told a reporter in May that the spike in anti-gay violence is to combat "a serious illness in the community that has been spreading rapidly among the youth after it was brought in from the outside by American soldiers. These are not the habits of Iraq or our community and we must eliminate them.... Our aim is not to destabilize the security situation. Our aim is to help stabilize society." However, Human Rights Watch researcher Rasha Moumneh says, "Murder and torture are no way to enforce morality.... These killings point to the continuing and lethal failure of Iraq's post-occupation authorities to establish the rule of law and protect their citizens." The report includes interviews with many gay Iraqi men. One man told researchers: "They did many things to us, the Mahdi Army...They kidnapped [my partner] for six days. He will not talk about what they did to him. There were bruises on his side as if he was dragged on the street. They did things to him he can't describe, even to me.... They sent us veiled threats in text messages: 'You are on the list.' They sent him a piece of paper in an envelope, to his home: there were three bullets wrapped in plastic, of different size[s]. The note said, 'Which one do you want in your heart?'.... I want to be a regular person, lead a normal life, walk around the city, drink coffee on the street. But because of who I am, I can't. There is no way out."
Rebecca noted that last night and that "it's really shocking how little we seem to care about that in this country." "The supposedly liberated Iraq is encouraging the assaults on their own LGBT community," Trina wrote yesterday. Mike followed the same train of thought with, "It's not 'renegades' or a 'few bad apples,' it's the Interior Ministry, it's the security forces, it's anyone with a beef -- most likely imagined -- in Iraq. And they get away with it and they have gotten away with it. And no one says, 'Just one minute'." Marcia observed, ""I hope people in this country get that it could be them. It could be them because they're gay, because they're a person of color, because of their gender, because they have X kind of eye color. Bigotry isn't 'scientific'." Tying it into lynchings targeting African-Americans in the US during the last century, Ann explained, "So when I read the above and realize that Iraqi LGBTs are being targeted, I do identify. I do know what it's like to wonder, as I did when I first learned of lynchings, 'Why does someone hate me so much? What have I done to them?' Iraq's LGBT community hasn't done anything to anyone. They are being targeted because of bigotry and that's due to the fact that some people can't feel good about the day if they can't start it off hating someone else." Elaine weighed in with, "The bigotry is always about fear. Ramiz and others are being targeted not because they did anything to anyone else but because they are feared. Sometimes it's a fear that if others know about Ramiz, they might decide to live their own lives freely. Other times it's a fear that if you don't make an effort to beat up Ramiz, people may figure out that you are gay yourself." On the silence that has largely been the response to the report, Stan advised, "Picture yourself as gay and ask yourself what message you're then receiving as you go from left website to website and see nothing on the report or on the continued assault on Iraq's LGBT community." Ruth noted the silence and tied it into the lack of "people to speak out strongly on behalf of Iraq's LGBT community." As Betty pointed out, "We have nothing to lose in America by speaking out on this issue. We are protected and we are safe. And our speaking out could mean so much to a persecuted group of people. And I don't understand why we refuse to do that. If it were you being targeted, you'd want someone to speak out for you. If it were your child, you'd want someone standing up." Kat wondered, "What if that was your boyfriend? Or your girlfriend? And, on top of everything else, you couldn't publicly mourn?" The report was noted in Monday and Tuesday's snapshots.
Meanwhile UK Gay News reports that England is threatening to deport a gay Iraqi male and MP Sarah Teather is calling for the deportation to be halted. They note the Human Rights Watch report and state, "Ms. Teather has been working on behalf of her constituent ever since the initial government decision to deport him. The news from one of the most respected human rights groups in the world that anti-gay attacks are on the rise in Iraq makes it even more certain that her constituent would face execution if he returned to Iraq." The Human Rights Watch report concludes with recommendations and among those are the need for countries to grant asylum to members of Iraq's LGBT community. Today is World Humanitarian Day as Eric Schwartz, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees and Migration, noted today at the US State Dept. He also noted the Baghdad death six years ago of the UN's Sergio Vieria de Mello. A lot of pretty words. Anything behind them? Please, more garbage -- in fact it stinks more than it did under George W. Bush. Here's candy man Eric, "In Iraq, we're working hard to assist the government there to more effectively manage the reintegration of a displaced population whose estimates have varied, but we think it's probably around 2 million people, as well as the return of refugees." That's what the US State Dept now does -- sends people back to a death camp. That's ridiculous and how shameful for the Democratic Party that even under Condi Rice and George W. Bush, the previous State Dept acknowledged the violence and wasn't so obviously cold and cruel. In Eric Schwartz's remarks the world can hear "change" -- for the worse. And who would have ever thought that was possible. He also bragged that the US ("by the end of this fiscal year") would have taken in 30,000 Iraqi refugees. Really? Because the administration promised more than that. But that's really become Barack's campaign slogan hasn't: "We promised more . . . than we delivered." Schwartz can take comfrot in the fact that UN's Dr. Naeema Al-Gasser made a bigger ass out of herself today than Schwartz. She'll whore it for Nouri till her dying day and keep claiming she's doing it to help Iraqis. Dr. Trash gave another idiotic speech and the UN plugged it, like real idiots, noting that "Iraq is steadily moving towards recovery and reconstruction." I believe today's reality just punked your lying asses. And for those late to the party, Dr. Trash got into bed with Nouri most infamously last September. That's when Iraq's yearly cholera outbreak -- due to the lack of potable water -- returned and Dr. Trash it upon herself to blame Iraqi women at a press conference for the outbreak. Those silly, silly women, failing to properly boil the water. No, that silly, silly government refusing to spend the needed money to repair Iraq's water system. But there was Dr. Trash blaming Iraqi women for the cholera outbreak. Blaming Iraqi women already under assault, already living under attack, with rates of domestic abuse soaring throughout that country. And that's how Dr. Trash decided to 'heal.'
Meanwhile, Denmark continues its efforts to evict Iraqi refugees who had been granted santuary by Brorson's Church in Norrebro before police broke into the church and drug the refugees out. The Copenhagen Post reports thousands of people turned out yesterday to show their support for the refugees while Ice News notes, "When the Copenhagen police forcibly evicted 19 Iraqi asylum seekers from a church in Norrebro, their tactics were anything but gentle. Such was the heavy-handed approach to rounding up the Iraqis from their shelter in Brorson's Church that cries of outrage are ringing out from all quarters." Monday, The Copenhagen Post reported, "Speaking with Politiken newspaper, [Andam] Farzil confirmed reports of police using batons and said the beating continued inside the police bus."
Iranians at Camp Ashraf are refugees and we see how Iraq treats them. Nouri orders an assault on them. Some may whine "terrorists" but ask yourself about those Palestinians trapped on the Iraqi border all these years later. Nouri's not done a damn thing to help them. The Chicago Tribune reports that Team Barack "downplayed international fears over the safety of Iranian dissidents living at an exile camp in Iraq as recently as mid-July, days before a raid by Iraqi security forces killed 11 of the exiles and left scores wounded. . . . In a July 15 letter to a concerned British politician [MP Robin Corbett], the State Department said U.S. officials were doing their 'utmost' to ensure the safety of up to 3,500 Iranians living at Camp Ashraf in Iraq" and they quote from the letter, "U.S. military representatives are in daily contact with Camp Ashraf residents and continue to montior their situation." Really? Then how come that July 28th assault took the White House by surprise?
Last week Tanya Snyder (Free Speech Radio News) reported on Camp Ashraf and among those she interviewed for the report were the International Committee of the Red Cross' Bernard Barrett who explained, "In particular concern is the whole principle of nonrefulment which basically means that a person cannot be forced to go back to a country where they have grounded or serious fears of persecution or ill treatment because of the ethnicity or political beliefs or religion or whatever."
Turning to the US, Cindy Sheehan (Cindy's Soapbox) writes the critique of Barack's VFW speech that should have come from The Progressive and The Nation but entering the Cult of St. Barack requires taking a vow of silence. Peace Mom Cindy explains:
As I listened to clips of Obama's speech to the VFW on August 17th, 2009, I was wondering if his speechwriters were on vacation and they just recycled an old Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Rice speech.
While the so-called left is focused on the health care debacle and is allowing the so-called right to define the debate when it should be: Medicare for all, and all for Medicare; Obama and his neocon foreign policy team are preparing for a decades long, bloody foray in Af-Pak.
As Yael T. Abouhalkah, an editorial writer for the Kansas City Star, put it:
"President Barack Obama did his best imitation of former President George Bush Monday at the VFW national convention in Phoenix.
Obama sounded downright hawkish -- and, yes, presidential -- when he addressed the issue of terrorism in front of the veteran-laden crowd…Dick Cheney could not have said it better."
This is one of the reasons I am leading protests next week on Martha's Vineyard where President Obama will be vacationing. The anti-war movement cannot allow itself to be co-opted by the Democratic Party any longer.
She notes she and others will be demonstrating on Martha's Vineyard from August 26th to 30th. And she comments on the need for the demonstrating and protesting here (we'll try to note an excerpt from that tomorrow morning).
In an update to yesterday's snapshot, an e-mail advises that War Criminal Lynndie England is being 'managed' and the book she's getting press on is not her book -- she didn't write it. The author of the book was not invited on Lynndie's 'book tour'. The e-mail's verified by a friend who knows the writer. If the writer wishes to go public or wishes to be quoted anonymously, ___ will be. But I am noting War Criminal Lynndie is a on a for-show round of sympathy and the right-wing is pushing her. Her Library of Congress appearance was a stunt and I've also heard from people at the Library of Congress questioning the claims of death threats. In which case, that was yet another stunt to build sympathy for Lynndie. By the way, the book is Tortured and it was written by Gary S. Winkler whom I am told was not invited to the Library of Congress event despite offering to appear. Lastly, independent journalist David Bacon reports on "Taft's New Community of Mixtec Farmworkers" (ImmigrationProf Blog):Taft was once a speculator's boomtown, surrounded by a forest of oil wells, hotbed the state's burgeoning petroleum industry. Today it is a divided community, home to a growing farm worker population, who work in the fields of the southern San Joaquin Valley. Hundreds of families have migrated to Taft from the town of San Pablo Tijaltepec in Oaxaca, in southern Mexico. These Mixtec migrants charge that they are not treated as welcome participants in Taft's town life. Meanwhile, families try to preserve the indigenous Mixtec culture they've brought with them, while working and sending money home to those who depend on remittances from the north to survive. David Bacon's latest book is Illegal People -- How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants (Beacon Press) which just won the CLR James Award.
iraqcaroline alexanderbloomberg newsthe los angeles timesliz slyusama redhathe times of london
deborah haynes
oliver august
the christian science monitorjane arrafthe washington posternesto londonomartin chulovmcclatchy newspapersadam ashtonthe new york timessam dagher
cnnbbc newsnatalia antelava
the telegraph of london
ben landotime magazine
sahar issa
charles coopercbs news
cindy sheehan
david bacon
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
What if it were you or your children?
I was walking in Karada in July 2006, when [men in] two BMWs stopped me,
beat me up, and put me in the trunk. There were a whole lot of men in the
cars, all armed and squashed in. It was around dusk. They took me to a
husseineya [prayer hall] in Sadr City. Everybody knows that when the Mahdi
Army arrest someone, they take them to Sadr City and kill them.
They took me out in front of the mosque and beat me, and then they took me
in, to the sheikh of the mosque. They told him I was a sexual pervert and
asked, should they kill me or just punish me? I thought the Mahdi Army do
not execute people under 18. I was just 18, but I told them I was 17 when they
asked.
The Sheikh told them to burn me with coals from a narghile [water pipe].
They shaved my head and burned me with coals. And then they flogged me
90 times.
That is from a new, PDF format warning, Human Rights Watch report on how the LGBT community in Iraq is being targeted. Gay men and suspected gay men are being threatened, beaten and murdered.
In today's snapshot, C.I. points out that, in the US, the brutal murder of Matthew Shepard woke us up. And I would agree with that and point to the tireless work by his parents Judy and Dennis Shepard to not only ensure justice for their son but to change the climate and tone for all. But somehow there has been a disconnect. Somehow it appears we only concern ourselves with American LGBTs. Somehow we have other things to ponder than what's taking place in Iraq. Anything and everything else can come ahead of this targeting.
That's not right and I don't believe that's the lesson that Matthew Shepard taught us all.
"Militias target some Iraqis for being gay" (Paul Wiseman and Nadeem Majeed, USA Today):
Unable to trust the authorities — and in some cases shunned by their own families — many Iraqi gays have gone into hiding. Hassan and some gay friends say they had found refuge in a house in Karrada. But as the threat against them increased, they became afraid the police would find them. So they scattered.
Hassan says he sometimes stays at home with his brothers — their parents are dead — but he's afraid even of them, afraid they will kill him because he has brought shame to the family.
He says he wanted to move in with his sister, who lives in Abu Dhabi. She turned him away, saying she didn't want her children to know they have a gay uncle.
Unwilling to trust the police, Iraqi LGBT has set up its own safe houses for gays in Iraq. The group has struggled to raise money and had to close three safe houses in the past couple of months, leaving just one open.
Hili says five safe houses are needed, each of them housing 10 to 12 gay refugees. Rent for a 2,150-square-foot safe house is usually $600 a month. Yet other expenses pile up: security guards, food, fuel, medical bills, pots and pans, bedding.
"We desperately need to add more because we have so many urgent cases," Hili says. "We receive requests for shelter every day, but are not able to help."
Things were better for gays, Hassan says, under the dictatorial rule of Saddam Hussein.
"In the Saddam era, it wasn't like this," he says. Saddam's security forces, offended by Hassan's openly gay lifestyle, once arrested him and hauled him to court. The judge let him go, ruling that he had done nothing wrong.
"Now, you don't know who to be afraid of," he says. "Forget about freedom or democracy. We just want our safety."
The right of anyone to be safe is a basic right. Everyone should have it. And Iraq's LGBT community would benefit so much from those of us in the US who can using our voices. I don't believe that Iraqi society would openly tolerate this targeting and if the US firmly and collectively called it out, I'm sure the silent Iraqi groups and governmental figures would suddenly find a few who would speak out.
We have nothing to lose in America by speaking out on this issue. We are protected and we are safe. And our speaking out could mean so much to a persecuted group of people. And I don't understand why we refuse to do that. If it were you being targeted, you'd want someone to speak out for you. If it were your child, you'd want someone standing up.
Here's a link to Bob Somerby's latest. I enjoyed reading it today but I'm just not in the mood to go through it right now for an excerpt.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Tuesday, August 18, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, Human Rights Watch's report on the targeting of Iraq's LGBT community gets some press coverage, the SOFA's back in the news, the right-wing notices how little Iraq now matters to the so-called 'antiwar movement', and more.
This is Iraqi Mustafa sharing his story:
There is a hmam [bath] in Basra that gays frequent. I entered, but I was very careful how I looked and acted. I took a shower, and then this man approached me. He started talking about the situation in Iraq: how people should be more open, accept changes and change with them. He was very clever in his questions!
He asked if I watched satellite TV. I said yes. He asked if I watched the European channels. I denied that I did. He said, "The Internet is a good thing; it is good that it came to our country." He asked what websites I visited. I just said, various ones. He asked if I went to porn sites. I denied it. Then he asked if I used Manjam [a personals site popular among gay men]. He was very smart: that website is only known among the gays, I thought. When he said that, I trusted him; I admitted it.
He smiled for a couple of minutes, a very neutral, slick smile, just looking at me. Then he grabbed me by the hair and started beating me, shouting, "You are gays." That was how he said it: gays. He dragged me out of the shower; I begged him to let me put my clothes on, and he let me dress, but then he dragged me onto the street, shouting "You sodomite!" [Enta luti].
People gathered around us while he was hitting me, and tried to interfere. They said, "How do you know he is a sodomite? Did you see him practicing liwat?" The man said, "I have my own ways of find out!" I was begging them to help, and while they were trying to reason with him, I took advantage of the confusion and ran away. We were on a narrow, winding street; I must have run 300 meters before I reached a shop where they sell rope. I shouted dakhilak [a cry for asylum]. The owner let me hide in his shop.
He put me in the cellar, but even there I could hear the man shouting, "Where is he?" and other voices joining him. Two hours later, the owner told me he had to close the shop. He said the man was from the Mahdi Army and the militia was searching for me up and down the street. I pleaded with him to let me stay overnight, and so he shuttered the shop up and let me hide there. In the morning, after dawn prayer, he came and said it was safe and I ran away.
Mustafa is among the Iraqis sharing his story in a Human Rights Watch report entitled "'They Want Us Exterminated': Murder, Torture, Sexual Orientation and Gender in Iraq." For the 67-page report [PDF format warning] click here. We noted the report yesterday and we're noting it again today. It is news. Iraq's LGBT community is being targeted. And, with that it, all people who don't fit some theocratic thug's stereotype of what a man or a woman is. They're being terrorized and this is taking place while US troops are on the ground which really underscores that US troops need to leave Iraq. When they can't even provide protection to the at risk population, there's no reason for them to remain in the country. Human Rights Watch's report notes that the Kurdistan Regional Government does everything they can to publicly black out discussions of same-sex issues. In terms of the KRG, that's it from the report. The gangs are Shi'ites, militias. Allowed to operate and terrorize by Nouri's security forces who look the other way even as the bodies pile up. In April 2008, Mashal was kidnapped in Baghdad. He tells HRW, "There was a police patrol right next to my store when they kidnapped me; they saw everything that was happening, but they didn't intervene. Everyone believes the police [in the area] are under the control of the Mahdi Army." Nouri's security forces and Interior Ministry are accused of blackmailing gays on top of everything ("And gay men are especially easy for them to blackmail," says an Iraqi military officer). The report notes, "One young man told us a story in which official corruption and brutality intertwine. In early 2009, as the broader militia campaign was getting underway. Ministry of Interior officers kidnapped and tortured him in a murderous shakedown, to extort money because they knew he worked with an LGBT organization abroad. He paid and escaped. He says he saw the bodies of five men killed because they could not pay." Nuri was stopped by the police, a bag pulled over his head, beaten and pulled into a car which desposited him at the Interior Ministry:
Once we got there, I heard them talking on a walkie-talkie: they were telling people from the intelligence service what had happened.
They put me in a room, a regular room, took the bag off my head, and there I was with five other gay men. I didn't know them previously, but I found out we had mutual friends. They gave their female names but not their real names. Gay men in Iraq are very cautious that way.
Then two hours later, they separated us and put each in a room. After they separated us, I didn't know anything about the fate of the other five men. And then a police officer dame and said, "Do you know where you are? You are in the interrogation wing of the Ministry of Interior." He told me, 'If you have ten thousand US dollars, we will let you go."
I said I didn't have that kind of money.
The next day at 10 a.m., they cuffed by hands behind my back. Then they tied a rope around my legs, and they hung me upside down from a hook in the ceiling, from morning till sunset. I passed out. I was stripped down to my underwear while I was hung upside down. They cut me down that night, but they gave me no water or food.
In the United States, we were outraged, appalled and disgusted by the events of October 12, 1998. That was when Matthew Shepard was brutally murdered. He was beaten, tortured and left to die tied to a fence. It was outrageous and inhumane. And Matthew Shepard's brutal death galvanized the country into action and out of apathy on the issue. In Iraq today, there are multiple Matthew Shepards, targeted because they are gay or thought to be gay, targeted, threatened, beaten, murdered. And the White House has not condemned it and the United Nations has not condemned it and just attempting to get press coverage of the issue is like moving a mountain.
Steve Inskeep (NPR) observes, "The report is painful to read. It begins with the words of an Iraqi man describing the abduction, murder, and mutiliation of his partner -- and it's not clear from the description if the three-events happened in that order. Like many HRW reports it appears to be based on the specific detailed accounts of survivors and eyewitnesses. Homosexuality in Iraq is so thoroughly submerged that according to the report there is not even a commonly accepted term for it, no Iraqi equivalent of 'gay.' Nevertheless it has become a major focus for Iraqi militiamen, who have waged a 'killing campaign' to eliminate what some consider a social disease brought by the American army." Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) adds, "Among the tortures described to Human Rights Watch researchers by gays and doctors is the practice of injecting glue into men's anuses. Human Rights Watch says that according to the gays its researchers interviewed, the Mahdi Army, the militia loyal to Shiite Muslim cleric Muqtada Sadr, 'bears primary responsibility and launched the killing in early 2009'." CBC speaks with HRW's Tom Porteous who states, "One theory is in order to maintain relevance and to gain publicity, they are now taking it upon themselves to run a campaign to -- in the words of some preachers and some media commentators -- cleanse the country of depravity, which again is bieng interpreted as being brought in by the foreign invasion and occupation." Neal Broveman (The Advocate) covers the report and how "Iraqi officials allegedly knew about the murders but have done little to stop future killings." Dalila Mahdwai (Lebanon's Daily Star) explains, "Although the violence is mainly concentrated in the Iraqi capital, abuse has also been recorded in other the cities of Basra, Kirkuk and Najaf, Moumneh said. 'Murders are committed with impunity, admonitory in intent, with corpses dumped in garbage or hung as warnings on the street,' the report said." Free Speech Radio News points out, "Homosexuality is not illegal in Iraq, and according to HRW, the militia action spurred by the Mahdi Army violates the tenets of legality, proof, and privacy enshrined in Sharia law as well." Mark Memmott (NPR) includes HRW's call for Nouri al-Maliki's government to condenm the assaults while Alsumaria notes, "Iraq authorities have done nothing to stop the killing, Human Rights Watch said calling on Iraq's government to act urgently to rein in militia abuses, punish the perpetrators, and stop a new resurgence of violence that threatens all Iraqis' safety."
It matters. So does the Iraq War -- although to some it's past tense "so did." Conservative Byron York (Washington Examiner) observes:
Remember the anti-war movement? Not too long ago, the Democratic party's most loyal voters passionately opposed the war in Iraq. Democratic presidential candidates argued over who would withdraw American troops the quickest. Netroots activists regularly denounced President George W. Bush, and sometimes the U.S. military ("General Betray Us"). Cindy Sheehan, the woman whose soldier son was killed in Iraq, became a heroine when she led protests at Bush's Texas ranch.
That was then. Now, even though the United States still has roughly 130,000 troops in Iraq, and is quickly escalating the war in Afghanistan -- 68,000 troops there by the end of this year, and possibly more in 2010 -- anti-war voices on the Left have fallen silent.
He explains that at Netroots Nation (Daily Toilet Scrubbers Unite!), Stan Greenberg polled and the dead last issue for the Cult of St. Barack was "working to end U.S. involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan." Byron York's not pointing out anything that we haven't pointed out community wide; however, it's worth noting that the right-wing is now laughing at the hypocrisy of the so-called left. As they should. (York also notes Cindy Sheehan will be at Martha's Vineyard next week to protest during Barack's vacation there.) Byron York offers more honesty than 'from the left' Brian Katulis who writes at American Progress that the SOFA creates "an unconditional withdrawal of U.S. forces on a three-year timeline" -- it does no such thing. What a load of crap and what a way to flaunt ignorance. No link to trash (or government propaganda -- US Institute of Peace). I'm real damn sorry that little Katulis felt the need to talk about something he knows nothing about but for those who actually have signed contracts -- and for those of us who have been able to legally break those contracts -- we're damn well aware of what a contract does and doesn't do. The SOFA replaced the UN mandate for the occupation. The US didn't want to renew it because the US government already wasn't living up to legal obligations under it. Nouri didn't want to renew it because under the UN mandate he had less ability to manuever. The SOFA was a way to continue the Iraq War. It was not about ending it. It is a three year treaty and, at the end of it, it can be extended. That's why Nouri floated that idea on his DC visit last month. If you've never signed a contract and/or you have no background in contract law, maybe it's time you just found something else to talk about it because you only embarrass yourself as you attempt to misinform others.
On the SOFA, Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) reports that Nouri al-Maliki is now backing a referendum on the US remaining in Iraq. For those who have forgotten, even with the US and Nouri strong-arming the Iraqi Parliament last November, even with many fleeing to avoid voting on the treaty masquerading as a Status Of Forces Agreement, in order to barely squeak by with the votes needed, it was promised that, in July, a referendum would be held on the SOFA. July came and went without a vote. Nouri's proposing the referendum being part of the January vote (national elections are scheduled for January -- postponed from December). Parliament doesn't come back until September. Nouri's announcement appears to be another in his many efforts to woo voters. If January 2010 the voters decided to reject the SOFA, that would mean after Iraq's government notified the US that they were rejecting it, the SOFA would end one year from that date. Londono says January 2011. That's optimistic. Adam Ashton (McClatchy Newspapers) says a vote would mean that US troops would leave "by the end of 2010 instead of 2011." What?From the SOFA:
Article 30The Period for which the Agreement is Effective1. This Agreement shall be effective for a period of three years, unless terminated sooner by either Party pursuant to paragraph 3 of this Article.2. This Agreement shall be amended only with the official agreement of the Parties in writing and in accordance with the constitutional procedures in effect in both countries.3. This Agreement shall terminate one year after a Party provides written notification to the other Party to that effect.4. This Agreement shall enter into force on January 1, 2009, following an exchange of diplomatic notes confirming that the actions by the Parties necessary to bring the Agreement into force in accordance with each Party's respective constitutional procedures have been completed.
The one that applies is "3. This Agreement shall terminate one year after a Party provides written notification to the other Party to that effect." If the SOFA is followed, a January vote -- even if the count was instant and it was certified on the day of the vote and swearing in and all other official acts all took place on the same voting day -- would not mean a December 2010 departure. Is counting really that hard?Back to our main point, it takes a minimum of approximately nine days for Iraq to get an official count of a vote. It could be February before a vote was official. And from that point, the Iraqi government (not the voters) have to formally notify the US government that they are ending the SOFA. According to the SOFA's outlines, it would expire one year after the official notification was made to the US government. A minimum of nine days and national elections, Londono notes, are supposed to take place January 16th. That would be January 26th at the earliest. And it would likely be February. If Parliament approves and it goes through. Londono notes that the basic framework needed for the January national elections have still not taken place.
In addition to the referendum on the SOFA in July, Daniel Atzmon (Foreign Policy In Focus) points out that another thing was offered to push the SOFA through the Iraqi Parliament, "The Reform Document addressed concerns about Maliki's growing clout and authoritarian tendencies by calling for more equitable power sharing in the government and security forces." Atzmon explains that the Reform Document has been largely forgotten and sketches out reality for Iraq today:
In the chaos that came with the insurgency in Iraq, it has become all too easy to label and detain innocent individuals as insurgents for political reasons. Maliki and his inner circle have garnered disturbing control over Iraqi security forces, using them to crack down on political threats. In his capacity as commander-in-chief, Maliki has assumed direct command of two army units and the elite Baghdad Brigade. He is also using U.S.-trained Iraqi Special Forces and the counterterrorism taskforce, both of which report directly to him, to advance his personal agenda.
Furthermore, Maliki is able to directly appoint military leaders without parliamentary approval. Some are concerned that the military's loyalty will be to Maliki, not Iraq. In addition to his command of military resources, Maliki controls his own intelligence service through the ministry of national security, run by a close ally.
Maliki is wielding his power to ensure support from local leaders, based on a system of fear and rewards. Some tribal leaders toe Maliki's Dawa party line in fear of arrest and indefinite detention, while others have their support paid for through control of reconstruction funds and government appointments. Lured by positions of power and control of the purse strings, Maliki is effectively bribing his way to reelection.
Through his authoritarian policies, Maliki is creating a centralized state based on a patchwork of arrangements with local leaders. This is a very precarious policy with huge risks, as maintenance of these relationships depends on how local leaders see their future in Iraq. Things could change dramatically if a shift in power relations causes one or more groups to feel threatened or marginalized. If Maliki's web of alliances were to break, Iraq could again be plunged into violent upheaval.
Yesterday Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) was reporting on a new plan to send more US troops into nothern Iraq. That's due to the fact that the Kurdish Regional Government and the central government out of Baghdad have 'tensions' and these tensions have been identified by many in the US military and government as the next big conflict wave to potentially hit Iraq -- on those fears, see Larry Kaplow's Newsweek article here. Today Chip Cummings (Wall St. Journal) reports, "The proposal to deploy fresh forces in the north undrescores a growing worry among U.S. commanders over violence there after the June 30 withdrawal of U.S. troops from all Iraqi cities." Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) quotes Gen Ray Odierno stating of the proposed flooding of US forces into Nineveh Province this September, "It won't be full-on if we do it. It will just be to build confidence, then we will slowly pull ourselves out. As we deliberately withdraw our forces, you will see that there will be less forces withdrawn from the north than any other place. It's a recognition of where we think the bigger problem areas are." She also speaks with US Institute of Peace's Sam Parker who gets at the potential problems which is the US is in the middle and, if the central government in Baghdad and the KRG are still in conflict (a good bet is they will be), their presence will be taking sides. (Taking Nouri's side.) And, as Aljazeera explains, the plan, US "forces would start in Ninevah province, which includes Mosul, and then extend to Kirkuk and to Diyala province north of the capital." NPR's Deborah Amos (All Things Considered -- link has text and audio) reports on the development and Odierno tells her, "Unfortunately, they are killing a lot of innocent civilians, and so that is not acceptable to the Iraqi government, and it's not acceptable to us. So we are trying to come up with solutions to solve this problem." And the problem with the targeting of Iraq's LGBT community? Those killings? Oh, apparently only some lives have meaning.
Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing which claimed 2 lives and left fifteen people injured, a Mosul roadside bombing which wounded an Iraqi Col's guard, a Mosul bombing which wounded four people (including two police officers) and a Tikrit bombing which injured three police officers. Reuters notes a Mosul roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 Iraqi truck driver, a Mosul car bombing left an Iraqi soldier wounded and -- dropping back to Monday night -- a Mosul car bombing claimed the life of 1 civilian.
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 police officer shot dead in Mosul.
"They gave me a gun" he said
"They gave me a mission
For the power and the glory --
Propaganda -- piss on 'em
There's a war zone inside me --
I can feel things exploding --
I can't even hear the f**king music playing
For the beat of -- the beat of black wings."
[. . .]
"They want you -- they need you --
They train you to kill --
To be a pin on some map --
Some vicarious thrill --
The old hate the young
That's the whole heartless thing
The old pick the wars
We die in 'em
To the beat of -- the beat of black wings"
-- "The Beat of Black Wings," words and music by Joni Mitchell, first appears on her Chalk Mark In A Rainstorm.
Danny Fitzsimons is facing a trial in Iraq and could be sentenced to death. He served in the British military for eight years and was stationed in Afghanistan and Kosovo. He is accused of being the shooter in a Green Zone incident this month in which 1 British contractor, Paul McGuigan, and 1 Australian contractor, Darren Hoare, died and one Iraqi, Arkhan Madhi, was injured. Eric and Liz Fitzsimons spoke to the BBC (link has video) and noted that they are not asking for Danny to 'walk.' They stated that he has to take responsibility. But they want a fair trial and do not believe that is possible in Iraq. His legal defense team doesn't believe he can get a fair trial either stating today that the British military's presence in Iraq during the war means that Fitzsimons will be used as scapegoat. First, a few e-mails came in on the SOFA today. Glad you read it. The SOFA does give Iraq control over contractors. That has nothing to do with Danny Fitzsimons and whether or not he can be tried in England as his attorneys and family desire. The Status Of Forces Agreement is a treaty the US and Iraq entered into. It has nothing to do with England. If that's not clear to you, England had to move there remaining forces into Kuwait last month. Why? Because the Iraqi Parliament had not approved the agreement between England and Iraq. With no agreement, England can't operate there. The SOFA does not cover England. Danny Fitzsimons is not covered by the SOFA. The SOFA applies only to the US and Iraq -- no other countries. Hussein Al-alak (Palestine Chronicle) covers Danny Fitzsimons as well as a protest suicide which has received very little media attention:
Both his father and step-mother admitted to the British media that they weren't even aware he had gone back to Iraq, that coupled with his addiction to alcohol and substances, the failure of the security company to carry out proper medical checks and with many independent witness reports stating that Daniel had been incredibly disturbed back home, it appears that the intelligence of the two Manchester based teachers may outweigh that of the Ministry of Defence, when they stated, "He patently should not have been allowed to go to Iraq. He is extremely poorly."
So why on earth was he sent back? The fact that bad publicity surrounding this case has only now forced many uncomfortable questions to be raised in the parliament of unelected Prime Minister and Tony Blair's financier Gordon Brown, when less than one month before the case of Daniel Fitzsimmons hit the front pages across Great Britain, 25 year old Andrew Watson threw himself off the top of a tower block in London, having saluted in front of the television, the returning bodies of eight soldiers who were brought back from Afghanistan.
When serving in Basra, Watson witnessed the deaths of two of his friends from a landmine and on a separate occasion had to carry out the bodies of dead babies from a bombed out building. According to his mother Glynis Watson, psychologically Andrew Watson "was dead when he came back from Iraq and we were desperately trying to get him the help he needed."
The family also believe that his suicide, which took place at 5 AM in July 2009 coincided with his Army roll-call time and whilst his mother recalled her son "crying in my arms and saying, "I know I'm really, really ill", hit out at the Ministry of Defence for failing to provide him with the emotional support he needed.
It's painful to write about Lynndie England because it's very obvious that she's never been all there in the head. But that doesn't excuse her and she refuses to go away. She refuses to find the rock under which to hide. We're going to drop back to June 30th for the set up on the Charles In Charge look-alike's latest stunts, that's when AP's P.J. Dickersched and Vicki Smith interviewed the War Criminal who was minimizing her actions with statements like "People don't realize I was just in a photo for a split second in time." Lynddie's the criminal who didn't just torture, she thought you went to Iraq to sleep around. And that's how she got pregnant in Iraq. And how she ended up with "It's never my fault! It's all the fault of the man I loved!" She disgraced herself and created an image that female service members have to live down. Lynndie should be hanging her head in shame instead of rushing around on a book tour. Yes, orders for the torutre came from higher up and yes, Charles Graner was selected because of his past history. The guilt doesn't end with Lynndie and Charles. It goes all the way up. But that doesn't absolve them of guilt either. But Lynndie wasn't having any of that. She was harmed, she wanted the world to know. She can't escape her infamy. Boo-hoo. She tells you she tried dying her hair (she did) and that she tried gaining weight (false, she gained it because she ate too much and she was no longer living a physically active life). It's so awful, she insists, because she's recognized.
But she didn't try to change her name. She claims her face is so famous that it wouldn't make any difference. Lynndie's confusing scandal with fame. And if she really wanted to start over, she'd have changed her name and then gone on to reply, "I get that a lot," if anyone did say, "You look like that criminal." Lynndie didn't change her name because she wants the shame she mistakes for fame. That's why she's doing the interview now and prepping for, yes, her book tour. The AP article told you that Lynnide "said she's paid her dues and repeatedly apologized." Did you hear that apology? Not only is it not in the article but anyone who's followed her press (including while she was in prison) is damn well aware that she never apologized and always pushed responsibility for her own actions off on others. She continues to minimize as she attempts to pimp her War Crimes to rake in a buck. Last Thursday, Mark Memmott (NPR) reported she told the BBC that the Abu Ghraib War Crimes were "nothing . . . compared to what they would do to us" and went on to compare it to college initiation ceremonies. By the way, that's why ALL the photos need to be released so that it makes it that much harder for LYING WAR CRIMINALS like Lynndie England to minimize what they did. Her ass should still be in prison and I loved to see the psych consult (which should have been done) that allowed the pregant in prison torturer to raise a child without state supervision. Last week a 'speaking engagement' (shouldn't that be grunting?) of Lynndie's was cancelled. AP reported the Library of Congress engagement was cancelled because the promoter was getting death threats. Lynndie should never have been invited to speak at the Library of Congress to begin with. As for the alleged death threats? Grow the hell up. If they did exist, grow up. You can't do anything without a few death threats. Most of us learned long ago to ignore them. If you don't ignore them, if you freak out and cave in to them, don't whine in public for sympathy. (To be clear, Lynndie is not the one whining and I seriously doubt that any death threat would ever stop her from speaking anywhere.) Frank James (NPR) quotes an employee at the Library of Congress objecting to Lynndie's using the landmark to promote herself:
She is a convicted criminal who was dishonorably discharged, but she's out of prison and on stage at the Library of Congress. You may recall many of the memorable pictures of the glowing Private England during her tour in Iraq, including the one of her standing next to an Iraqi prisoner, a cigarette dangling from her lip, as she points at the Iraqi prisoner's genitals as he stands there naked with a sack over his head as he's forced to masturbate in the presence of GI England and several other nude men. It sure looked like she was enjoying some good times in the picture, so maybe she'll give more behind the scenes details during her lecture on Friday as she expounds on how she's a victim who is deprived of veteran's benefits because of her dishonorable discharge. As she said in an interview published in the West Virginia Metro News on Monday: "Yeah, I was in some pictures, but that's all it was ... I just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time." That has to be comforting to those who died because of the wave of anger her snapshots ignited in the Middle East, like the family of Nick Berg who was slaughtered in front of a video camera in retaliation for Abu Ghraib, according to his murderers. America as a whole still pays the price for Private England's "wrong place -- wrong time" misadventure, but that won't stop the Library of Congress from opening its doors and handing her the mike.
Meanwhile Shelby Baker (Sweetwater, Tennessee channel 6) reports that Joy Oakes is thrilled her brother Raymond Girouard is getting out of prison. Girouard was found guilty of negligent homicides and of obstruction of justice and cospiracy in the deaths of three Iraqis. In March of 2007, when he was sentenced, Channel Six was reporting that he admitted to "lying about the killings" and they also said Girouard would "be up for parole in three to four years." Three to four? It's barely two years. For any wondering, the Iraqis he had imprisoned and was found guilty in the homicides of? They're still dead. Again, only some lives have meaning, apparently.
iraqhomophobia
the los angeles timesliz slyalsumariacbcnprmark memmottthe advocateneil brovermanfree speech radio newsdalila mahdawi
the wall street journalchip cummingsthe washington posternesto londonothe los angeles timesliz slymcclatchy newspapers
adam ashtoncindy sheehan
newsweeklarry kaplow
joni mitchell
beat me up, and put me in the trunk. There were a whole lot of men in the
cars, all armed and squashed in. It was around dusk. They took me to a
husseineya [prayer hall] in Sadr City. Everybody knows that when the Mahdi
Army arrest someone, they take them to Sadr City and kill them.
They took me out in front of the mosque and beat me, and then they took me
in, to the sheikh of the mosque. They told him I was a sexual pervert and
asked, should they kill me or just punish me? I thought the Mahdi Army do
not execute people under 18. I was just 18, but I told them I was 17 when they
asked.
The Sheikh told them to burn me with coals from a narghile [water pipe].
They shaved my head and burned me with coals. And then they flogged me
90 times.
That is from a new, PDF format warning, Human Rights Watch report on how the LGBT community in Iraq is being targeted. Gay men and suspected gay men are being threatened, beaten and murdered.
In today's snapshot, C.I. points out that, in the US, the brutal murder of Matthew Shepard woke us up. And I would agree with that and point to the tireless work by his parents Judy and Dennis Shepard to not only ensure justice for their son but to change the climate and tone for all. But somehow there has been a disconnect. Somehow it appears we only concern ourselves with American LGBTs. Somehow we have other things to ponder than what's taking place in Iraq. Anything and everything else can come ahead of this targeting.
That's not right and I don't believe that's the lesson that Matthew Shepard taught us all.
"Militias target some Iraqis for being gay" (Paul Wiseman and Nadeem Majeed, USA Today):
Unable to trust the authorities — and in some cases shunned by their own families — many Iraqi gays have gone into hiding. Hassan and some gay friends say they had found refuge in a house in Karrada. But as the threat against them increased, they became afraid the police would find them. So they scattered.
Hassan says he sometimes stays at home with his brothers — their parents are dead — but he's afraid even of them, afraid they will kill him because he has brought shame to the family.
He says he wanted to move in with his sister, who lives in Abu Dhabi. She turned him away, saying she didn't want her children to know they have a gay uncle.
Unwilling to trust the police, Iraqi LGBT has set up its own safe houses for gays in Iraq. The group has struggled to raise money and had to close three safe houses in the past couple of months, leaving just one open.
Hili says five safe houses are needed, each of them housing 10 to 12 gay refugees. Rent for a 2,150-square-foot safe house is usually $600 a month. Yet other expenses pile up: security guards, food, fuel, medical bills, pots and pans, bedding.
"We desperately need to add more because we have so many urgent cases," Hili says. "We receive requests for shelter every day, but are not able to help."
Things were better for gays, Hassan says, under the dictatorial rule of Saddam Hussein.
"In the Saddam era, it wasn't like this," he says. Saddam's security forces, offended by Hassan's openly gay lifestyle, once arrested him and hauled him to court. The judge let him go, ruling that he had done nothing wrong.
"Now, you don't know who to be afraid of," he says. "Forget about freedom or democracy. We just want our safety."
The right of anyone to be safe is a basic right. Everyone should have it. And Iraq's LGBT community would benefit so much from those of us in the US who can using our voices. I don't believe that Iraqi society would openly tolerate this targeting and if the US firmly and collectively called it out, I'm sure the silent Iraqi groups and governmental figures would suddenly find a few who would speak out.
We have nothing to lose in America by speaking out on this issue. We are protected and we are safe. And our speaking out could mean so much to a persecuted group of people. And I don't understand why we refuse to do that. If it were you being targeted, you'd want someone to speak out for you. If it were your child, you'd want someone standing up.
Here's a link to Bob Somerby's latest. I enjoyed reading it today but I'm just not in the mood to go through it right now for an excerpt.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Tuesday, August 18, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, Human Rights Watch's report on the targeting of Iraq's LGBT community gets some press coverage, the SOFA's back in the news, the right-wing notices how little Iraq now matters to the so-called 'antiwar movement', and more.
This is Iraqi Mustafa sharing his story:
There is a hmam [bath] in Basra that gays frequent. I entered, but I was very careful how I looked and acted. I took a shower, and then this man approached me. He started talking about the situation in Iraq: how people should be more open, accept changes and change with them. He was very clever in his questions!
He asked if I watched satellite TV. I said yes. He asked if I watched the European channels. I denied that I did. He said, "The Internet is a good thing; it is good that it came to our country." He asked what websites I visited. I just said, various ones. He asked if I went to porn sites. I denied it. Then he asked if I used Manjam [a personals site popular among gay men]. He was very smart: that website is only known among the gays, I thought. When he said that, I trusted him; I admitted it.
He smiled for a couple of minutes, a very neutral, slick smile, just looking at me. Then he grabbed me by the hair and started beating me, shouting, "You are gays." That was how he said it: gays. He dragged me out of the shower; I begged him to let me put my clothes on, and he let me dress, but then he dragged me onto the street, shouting "You sodomite!" [Enta luti].
People gathered around us while he was hitting me, and tried to interfere. They said, "How do you know he is a sodomite? Did you see him practicing liwat?" The man said, "I have my own ways of find out!" I was begging them to help, and while they were trying to reason with him, I took advantage of the confusion and ran away. We were on a narrow, winding street; I must have run 300 meters before I reached a shop where they sell rope. I shouted dakhilak [a cry for asylum]. The owner let me hide in his shop.
He put me in the cellar, but even there I could hear the man shouting, "Where is he?" and other voices joining him. Two hours later, the owner told me he had to close the shop. He said the man was from the Mahdi Army and the militia was searching for me up and down the street. I pleaded with him to let me stay overnight, and so he shuttered the shop up and let me hide there. In the morning, after dawn prayer, he came and said it was safe and I ran away.
Mustafa is among the Iraqis sharing his story in a Human Rights Watch report entitled "'They Want Us Exterminated': Murder, Torture, Sexual Orientation and Gender in Iraq." For the 67-page report [PDF format warning] click here. We noted the report yesterday and we're noting it again today. It is news. Iraq's LGBT community is being targeted. And, with that it, all people who don't fit some theocratic thug's stereotype of what a man or a woman is. They're being terrorized and this is taking place while US troops are on the ground which really underscores that US troops need to leave Iraq. When they can't even provide protection to the at risk population, there's no reason for them to remain in the country. Human Rights Watch's report notes that the Kurdistan Regional Government does everything they can to publicly black out discussions of same-sex issues. In terms of the KRG, that's it from the report. The gangs are Shi'ites, militias. Allowed to operate and terrorize by Nouri's security forces who look the other way even as the bodies pile up. In April 2008, Mashal was kidnapped in Baghdad. He tells HRW, "There was a police patrol right next to my store when they kidnapped me; they saw everything that was happening, but they didn't intervene. Everyone believes the police [in the area] are under the control of the Mahdi Army." Nouri's security forces and Interior Ministry are accused of blackmailing gays on top of everything ("And gay men are especially easy for them to blackmail," says an Iraqi military officer). The report notes, "One young man told us a story in which official corruption and brutality intertwine. In early 2009, as the broader militia campaign was getting underway. Ministry of Interior officers kidnapped and tortured him in a murderous shakedown, to extort money because they knew he worked with an LGBT organization abroad. He paid and escaped. He says he saw the bodies of five men killed because they could not pay." Nuri was stopped by the police, a bag pulled over his head, beaten and pulled into a car which desposited him at the Interior Ministry:
Once we got there, I heard them talking on a walkie-talkie: they were telling people from the intelligence service what had happened.
They put me in a room, a regular room, took the bag off my head, and there I was with five other gay men. I didn't know them previously, but I found out we had mutual friends. They gave their female names but not their real names. Gay men in Iraq are very cautious that way.
Then two hours later, they separated us and put each in a room. After they separated us, I didn't know anything about the fate of the other five men. And then a police officer dame and said, "Do you know where you are? You are in the interrogation wing of the Ministry of Interior." He told me, 'If you have ten thousand US dollars, we will let you go."
I said I didn't have that kind of money.
The next day at 10 a.m., they cuffed by hands behind my back. Then they tied a rope around my legs, and they hung me upside down from a hook in the ceiling, from morning till sunset. I passed out. I was stripped down to my underwear while I was hung upside down. They cut me down that night, but they gave me no water or food.
In the United States, we were outraged, appalled and disgusted by the events of October 12, 1998. That was when Matthew Shepard was brutally murdered. He was beaten, tortured and left to die tied to a fence. It was outrageous and inhumane. And Matthew Shepard's brutal death galvanized the country into action and out of apathy on the issue. In Iraq today, there are multiple Matthew Shepards, targeted because they are gay or thought to be gay, targeted, threatened, beaten, murdered. And the White House has not condemned it and the United Nations has not condemned it and just attempting to get press coverage of the issue is like moving a mountain.
Steve Inskeep (NPR) observes, "The report is painful to read. It begins with the words of an Iraqi man describing the abduction, murder, and mutiliation of his partner -- and it's not clear from the description if the three-events happened in that order. Like many HRW reports it appears to be based on the specific detailed accounts of survivors and eyewitnesses. Homosexuality in Iraq is so thoroughly submerged that according to the report there is not even a commonly accepted term for it, no Iraqi equivalent of 'gay.' Nevertheless it has become a major focus for Iraqi militiamen, who have waged a 'killing campaign' to eliminate what some consider a social disease brought by the American army." Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) adds, "Among the tortures described to Human Rights Watch researchers by gays and doctors is the practice of injecting glue into men's anuses. Human Rights Watch says that according to the gays its researchers interviewed, the Mahdi Army, the militia loyal to Shiite Muslim cleric Muqtada Sadr, 'bears primary responsibility and launched the killing in early 2009'." CBC speaks with HRW's Tom Porteous who states, "One theory is in order to maintain relevance and to gain publicity, they are now taking it upon themselves to run a campaign to -- in the words of some preachers and some media commentators -- cleanse the country of depravity, which again is bieng interpreted as being brought in by the foreign invasion and occupation." Neal Broveman (The Advocate) covers the report and how "Iraqi officials allegedly knew about the murders but have done little to stop future killings." Dalila Mahdwai (Lebanon's Daily Star) explains, "Although the violence is mainly concentrated in the Iraqi capital, abuse has also been recorded in other the cities of Basra, Kirkuk and Najaf, Moumneh said. 'Murders are committed with impunity, admonitory in intent, with corpses dumped in garbage or hung as warnings on the street,' the report said." Free Speech Radio News points out, "Homosexuality is not illegal in Iraq, and according to HRW, the militia action spurred by the Mahdi Army violates the tenets of legality, proof, and privacy enshrined in Sharia law as well." Mark Memmott (NPR) includes HRW's call for Nouri al-Maliki's government to condenm the assaults while Alsumaria notes, "Iraq authorities have done nothing to stop the killing, Human Rights Watch said calling on Iraq's government to act urgently to rein in militia abuses, punish the perpetrators, and stop a new resurgence of violence that threatens all Iraqis' safety."
It matters. So does the Iraq War -- although to some it's past tense "so did." Conservative Byron York (Washington Examiner) observes:
Remember the anti-war movement? Not too long ago, the Democratic party's most loyal voters passionately opposed the war in Iraq. Democratic presidential candidates argued over who would withdraw American troops the quickest. Netroots activists regularly denounced President George W. Bush, and sometimes the U.S. military ("General Betray Us"). Cindy Sheehan, the woman whose soldier son was killed in Iraq, became a heroine when she led protests at Bush's Texas ranch.
That was then. Now, even though the United States still has roughly 130,000 troops in Iraq, and is quickly escalating the war in Afghanistan -- 68,000 troops there by the end of this year, and possibly more in 2010 -- anti-war voices on the Left have fallen silent.
He explains that at Netroots Nation (Daily Toilet Scrubbers Unite!), Stan Greenberg polled and the dead last issue for the Cult of St. Barack was "working to end U.S. involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan." Byron York's not pointing out anything that we haven't pointed out community wide; however, it's worth noting that the right-wing is now laughing at the hypocrisy of the so-called left. As they should. (York also notes Cindy Sheehan will be at Martha's Vineyard next week to protest during Barack's vacation there.) Byron York offers more honesty than 'from the left' Brian Katulis who writes at American Progress that the SOFA creates "an unconditional withdrawal of U.S. forces on a three-year timeline" -- it does no such thing. What a load of crap and what a way to flaunt ignorance. No link to trash (or government propaganda -- US Institute of Peace). I'm real damn sorry that little Katulis felt the need to talk about something he knows nothing about but for those who actually have signed contracts -- and for those of us who have been able to legally break those contracts -- we're damn well aware of what a contract does and doesn't do. The SOFA replaced the UN mandate for the occupation. The US didn't want to renew it because the US government already wasn't living up to legal obligations under it. Nouri didn't want to renew it because under the UN mandate he had less ability to manuever. The SOFA was a way to continue the Iraq War. It was not about ending it. It is a three year treaty and, at the end of it, it can be extended. That's why Nouri floated that idea on his DC visit last month. If you've never signed a contract and/or you have no background in contract law, maybe it's time you just found something else to talk about it because you only embarrass yourself as you attempt to misinform others.
On the SOFA, Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) reports that Nouri al-Maliki is now backing a referendum on the US remaining in Iraq. For those who have forgotten, even with the US and Nouri strong-arming the Iraqi Parliament last November, even with many fleeing to avoid voting on the treaty masquerading as a Status Of Forces Agreement, in order to barely squeak by with the votes needed, it was promised that, in July, a referendum would be held on the SOFA. July came and went without a vote. Nouri's proposing the referendum being part of the January vote (national elections are scheduled for January -- postponed from December). Parliament doesn't come back until September. Nouri's announcement appears to be another in his many efforts to woo voters. If January 2010 the voters decided to reject the SOFA, that would mean after Iraq's government notified the US that they were rejecting it, the SOFA would end one year from that date. Londono says January 2011. That's optimistic. Adam Ashton (McClatchy Newspapers) says a vote would mean that US troops would leave "by the end of 2010 instead of 2011." What?From the SOFA:
Article 30The Period for which the Agreement is Effective1. This Agreement shall be effective for a period of three years, unless terminated sooner by either Party pursuant to paragraph 3 of this Article.2. This Agreement shall be amended only with the official agreement of the Parties in writing and in accordance with the constitutional procedures in effect in both countries.3. This Agreement shall terminate one year after a Party provides written notification to the other Party to that effect.4. This Agreement shall enter into force on January 1, 2009, following an exchange of diplomatic notes confirming that the actions by the Parties necessary to bring the Agreement into force in accordance with each Party's respective constitutional procedures have been completed.
The one that applies is "3. This Agreement shall terminate one year after a Party provides written notification to the other Party to that effect." If the SOFA is followed, a January vote -- even if the count was instant and it was certified on the day of the vote and swearing in and all other official acts all took place on the same voting day -- would not mean a December 2010 departure. Is counting really that hard?Back to our main point, it takes a minimum of approximately nine days for Iraq to get an official count of a vote. It could be February before a vote was official. And from that point, the Iraqi government (not the voters) have to formally notify the US government that they are ending the SOFA. According to the SOFA's outlines, it would expire one year after the official notification was made to the US government. A minimum of nine days and national elections, Londono notes, are supposed to take place January 16th. That would be January 26th at the earliest. And it would likely be February. If Parliament approves and it goes through. Londono notes that the basic framework needed for the January national elections have still not taken place.
In addition to the referendum on the SOFA in July, Daniel Atzmon (Foreign Policy In Focus) points out that another thing was offered to push the SOFA through the Iraqi Parliament, "The Reform Document addressed concerns about Maliki's growing clout and authoritarian tendencies by calling for more equitable power sharing in the government and security forces." Atzmon explains that the Reform Document has been largely forgotten and sketches out reality for Iraq today:
In the chaos that came with the insurgency in Iraq, it has become all too easy to label and detain innocent individuals as insurgents for political reasons. Maliki and his inner circle have garnered disturbing control over Iraqi security forces, using them to crack down on political threats. In his capacity as commander-in-chief, Maliki has assumed direct command of two army units and the elite Baghdad Brigade. He is also using U.S.-trained Iraqi Special Forces and the counterterrorism taskforce, both of which report directly to him, to advance his personal agenda.
Furthermore, Maliki is able to directly appoint military leaders without parliamentary approval. Some are concerned that the military's loyalty will be to Maliki, not Iraq. In addition to his command of military resources, Maliki controls his own intelligence service through the ministry of national security, run by a close ally.
Maliki is wielding his power to ensure support from local leaders, based on a system of fear and rewards. Some tribal leaders toe Maliki's Dawa party line in fear of arrest and indefinite detention, while others have their support paid for through control of reconstruction funds and government appointments. Lured by positions of power and control of the purse strings, Maliki is effectively bribing his way to reelection.
Through his authoritarian policies, Maliki is creating a centralized state based on a patchwork of arrangements with local leaders. This is a very precarious policy with huge risks, as maintenance of these relationships depends on how local leaders see their future in Iraq. Things could change dramatically if a shift in power relations causes one or more groups to feel threatened or marginalized. If Maliki's web of alliances were to break, Iraq could again be plunged into violent upheaval.
Yesterday Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) was reporting on a new plan to send more US troops into nothern Iraq. That's due to the fact that the Kurdish Regional Government and the central government out of Baghdad have 'tensions' and these tensions have been identified by many in the US military and government as the next big conflict wave to potentially hit Iraq -- on those fears, see Larry Kaplow's Newsweek article here. Today Chip Cummings (Wall St. Journal) reports, "The proposal to deploy fresh forces in the north undrescores a growing worry among U.S. commanders over violence there after the June 30 withdrawal of U.S. troops from all Iraqi cities." Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) quotes Gen Ray Odierno stating of the proposed flooding of US forces into Nineveh Province this September, "It won't be full-on if we do it. It will just be to build confidence, then we will slowly pull ourselves out. As we deliberately withdraw our forces, you will see that there will be less forces withdrawn from the north than any other place. It's a recognition of where we think the bigger problem areas are." She also speaks with US Institute of Peace's Sam Parker who gets at the potential problems which is the US is in the middle and, if the central government in Baghdad and the KRG are still in conflict (a good bet is they will be), their presence will be taking sides. (Taking Nouri's side.) And, as Aljazeera explains, the plan, US "forces would start in Ninevah province, which includes Mosul, and then extend to Kirkuk and to Diyala province north of the capital." NPR's Deborah Amos (All Things Considered -- link has text and audio) reports on the development and Odierno tells her, "Unfortunately, they are killing a lot of innocent civilians, and so that is not acceptable to the Iraqi government, and it's not acceptable to us. So we are trying to come up with solutions to solve this problem." And the problem with the targeting of Iraq's LGBT community? Those killings? Oh, apparently only some lives have meaning.
Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing which claimed 2 lives and left fifteen people injured, a Mosul roadside bombing which wounded an Iraqi Col's guard, a Mosul bombing which wounded four people (including two police officers) and a Tikrit bombing which injured three police officers. Reuters notes a Mosul roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 Iraqi truck driver, a Mosul car bombing left an Iraqi soldier wounded and -- dropping back to Monday night -- a Mosul car bombing claimed the life of 1 civilian.
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 police officer shot dead in Mosul.
"They gave me a gun" he said
"They gave me a mission
For the power and the glory --
Propaganda -- piss on 'em
There's a war zone inside me --
I can feel things exploding --
I can't even hear the f**king music playing
For the beat of -- the beat of black wings."
[. . .]
"They want you -- they need you --
They train you to kill --
To be a pin on some map --
Some vicarious thrill --
The old hate the young
That's the whole heartless thing
The old pick the wars
We die in 'em
To the beat of -- the beat of black wings"
-- "The Beat of Black Wings," words and music by Joni Mitchell, first appears on her Chalk Mark In A Rainstorm.
Danny Fitzsimons is facing a trial in Iraq and could be sentenced to death. He served in the British military for eight years and was stationed in Afghanistan and Kosovo. He is accused of being the shooter in a Green Zone incident this month in which 1 British contractor, Paul McGuigan, and 1 Australian contractor, Darren Hoare, died and one Iraqi, Arkhan Madhi, was injured. Eric and Liz Fitzsimons spoke to the BBC (link has video) and noted that they are not asking for Danny to 'walk.' They stated that he has to take responsibility. But they want a fair trial and do not believe that is possible in Iraq. His legal defense team doesn't believe he can get a fair trial either stating today that the British military's presence in Iraq during the war means that Fitzsimons will be used as scapegoat. First, a few e-mails came in on the SOFA today. Glad you read it. The SOFA does give Iraq control over contractors. That has nothing to do with Danny Fitzsimons and whether or not he can be tried in England as his attorneys and family desire. The Status Of Forces Agreement is a treaty the US and Iraq entered into. It has nothing to do with England. If that's not clear to you, England had to move there remaining forces into Kuwait last month. Why? Because the Iraqi Parliament had not approved the agreement between England and Iraq. With no agreement, England can't operate there. The SOFA does not cover England. Danny Fitzsimons is not covered by the SOFA. The SOFA applies only to the US and Iraq -- no other countries. Hussein Al-alak (Palestine Chronicle) covers Danny Fitzsimons as well as a protest suicide which has received very little media attention:
Both his father and step-mother admitted to the British media that they weren't even aware he had gone back to Iraq, that coupled with his addiction to alcohol and substances, the failure of the security company to carry out proper medical checks and with many independent witness reports stating that Daniel had been incredibly disturbed back home, it appears that the intelligence of the two Manchester based teachers may outweigh that of the Ministry of Defence, when they stated, "He patently should not have been allowed to go to Iraq. He is extremely poorly."
So why on earth was he sent back? The fact that bad publicity surrounding this case has only now forced many uncomfortable questions to be raised in the parliament of unelected Prime Minister and Tony Blair's financier Gordon Brown, when less than one month before the case of Daniel Fitzsimmons hit the front pages across Great Britain, 25 year old Andrew Watson threw himself off the top of a tower block in London, having saluted in front of the television, the returning bodies of eight soldiers who were brought back from Afghanistan.
When serving in Basra, Watson witnessed the deaths of two of his friends from a landmine and on a separate occasion had to carry out the bodies of dead babies from a bombed out building. According to his mother Glynis Watson, psychologically Andrew Watson "was dead when he came back from Iraq and we were desperately trying to get him the help he needed."
The family also believe that his suicide, which took place at 5 AM in July 2009 coincided with his Army roll-call time and whilst his mother recalled her son "crying in my arms and saying, "I know I'm really, really ill", hit out at the Ministry of Defence for failing to provide him with the emotional support he needed.
It's painful to write about Lynndie England because it's very obvious that she's never been all there in the head. But that doesn't excuse her and she refuses to go away. She refuses to find the rock under which to hide. We're going to drop back to June 30th for the set up on the Charles In Charge look-alike's latest stunts, that's when AP's P.J. Dickersched and Vicki Smith interviewed the War Criminal who was minimizing her actions with statements like "People don't realize I was just in a photo for a split second in time." Lynddie's the criminal who didn't just torture, she thought you went to Iraq to sleep around. And that's how she got pregnant in Iraq. And how she ended up with "It's never my fault! It's all the fault of the man I loved!" She disgraced herself and created an image that female service members have to live down. Lynndie should be hanging her head in shame instead of rushing around on a book tour. Yes, orders for the torutre came from higher up and yes, Charles Graner was selected because of his past history. The guilt doesn't end with Lynndie and Charles. It goes all the way up. But that doesn't absolve them of guilt either. But Lynndie wasn't having any of that. She was harmed, she wanted the world to know. She can't escape her infamy. Boo-hoo. She tells you she tried dying her hair (she did) and that she tried gaining weight (false, she gained it because she ate too much and she was no longer living a physically active life). It's so awful, she insists, because she's recognized.
But she didn't try to change her name. She claims her face is so famous that it wouldn't make any difference. Lynndie's confusing scandal with fame. And if she really wanted to start over, she'd have changed her name and then gone on to reply, "I get that a lot," if anyone did say, "You look like that criminal." Lynndie didn't change her name because she wants the shame she mistakes for fame. That's why she's doing the interview now and prepping for, yes, her book tour. The AP article told you that Lynnide "said she's paid her dues and repeatedly apologized." Did you hear that apology? Not only is it not in the article but anyone who's followed her press (including while she was in prison) is damn well aware that she never apologized and always pushed responsibility for her own actions off on others. She continues to minimize as she attempts to pimp her War Crimes to rake in a buck. Last Thursday, Mark Memmott (NPR) reported she told the BBC that the Abu Ghraib War Crimes were "nothing . . . compared to what they would do to us" and went on to compare it to college initiation ceremonies. By the way, that's why ALL the photos need to be released so that it makes it that much harder for LYING WAR CRIMINALS like Lynndie England to minimize what they did. Her ass should still be in prison and I loved to see the psych consult (which should have been done) that allowed the pregant in prison torturer to raise a child without state supervision. Last week a 'speaking engagement' (shouldn't that be grunting?) of Lynndie's was cancelled. AP reported the Library of Congress engagement was cancelled because the promoter was getting death threats. Lynndie should never have been invited to speak at the Library of Congress to begin with. As for the alleged death threats? Grow the hell up. If they did exist, grow up. You can't do anything without a few death threats. Most of us learned long ago to ignore them. If you don't ignore them, if you freak out and cave in to them, don't whine in public for sympathy. (To be clear, Lynndie is not the one whining and I seriously doubt that any death threat would ever stop her from speaking anywhere.) Frank James (NPR) quotes an employee at the Library of Congress objecting to Lynndie's using the landmark to promote herself:
She is a convicted criminal who was dishonorably discharged, but she's out of prison and on stage at the Library of Congress. You may recall many of the memorable pictures of the glowing Private England during her tour in Iraq, including the one of her standing next to an Iraqi prisoner, a cigarette dangling from her lip, as she points at the Iraqi prisoner's genitals as he stands there naked with a sack over his head as he's forced to masturbate in the presence of GI England and several other nude men. It sure looked like she was enjoying some good times in the picture, so maybe she'll give more behind the scenes details during her lecture on Friday as she expounds on how she's a victim who is deprived of veteran's benefits because of her dishonorable discharge. As she said in an interview published in the West Virginia Metro News on Monday: "Yeah, I was in some pictures, but that's all it was ... I just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time." That has to be comforting to those who died because of the wave of anger her snapshots ignited in the Middle East, like the family of Nick Berg who was slaughtered in front of a video camera in retaliation for Abu Ghraib, according to his murderers. America as a whole still pays the price for Private England's "wrong place -- wrong time" misadventure, but that won't stop the Library of Congress from opening its doors and handing her the mike.
Meanwhile Shelby Baker (Sweetwater, Tennessee channel 6) reports that Joy Oakes is thrilled her brother Raymond Girouard is getting out of prison. Girouard was found guilty of negligent homicides and of obstruction of justice and cospiracy in the deaths of three Iraqis. In March of 2007, when he was sentenced, Channel Six was reporting that he admitted to "lying about the killings" and they also said Girouard would "be up for parole in three to four years." Three to four? It's barely two years. For any wondering, the Iraqis he had imprisoned and was found guilty in the homicides of? They're still dead. Again, only some lives have meaning, apparently.
iraqhomophobia
the los angeles timesliz slyalsumariacbcnprmark memmottthe advocateneil brovermanfree speech radio newsdalila mahdawi
the wall street journalchip cummingsthe washington posternesto londonothe los angeles timesliz slymcclatchy newspapers
adam ashtoncindy sheehan
newsweeklarry kaplow
joni mitchell
Monday, August 17, 2009
Mondays
I'm not going to give him or his trashy family any publicity by saying their names but I will note that if you die on June 25th and your family is burying you August 29th, that's just disgusting. Now I'm Black, and we do tend to move a little slower in terms of a funeral. If you're White and your mother dies Tuesday, you'll have the funeral by the end of the week. In the Black community, we'd be more likely to have it the following week. In part due to travel issues -- family members needing to attend. (And the income bracket meaning that many would not be able to take a plane.) So June 25th death and even a July 10th funeral I could understand. But August 29th? That's just trashy.
Feminist Wire notes the following:
A poll released Saturday by CBS and the New York Times indicates that just 53 percent of American adults support military women serving in combat roles. The poll also found 83 percent support women serving in support roles for ground troops, according to CBS. The United States currently restricts women from direct combat roles in infantry positions or in the Special Forces.
The poll also found a number of ideological and demographic factors to be influential. In general, Democrats, liberals, moderates, and independents favor women serving in combat roles while Republican and conservatives oppose it. Age is also a factor: 62 percent of women respondents younger than 45 support lifting the combat restriction, while only 44 percent of women respondents older than 45 support removing the ban. Overall, only 37 percent of respondents older than 65 support lifting the restriction.
I firmly support a woman's right to hold any job a man does. I think a woman can do any job a man can and a man can do any job a woman can. (Pregnancy is not a job. Child rearing is one -- and it's a very valuable one.)
But even so, I feel a pang of sadness about the above. Great for women who want it and I hope it lets their work they are doing (women are in combat, wake up, America) but I just honestly wish we were smarter. I wish we were smarter and finding new and alternative ways of addressing conflict. Instead, it appears we will measure success solely by how women achieve on men's terms.
I'm giving Bob Somerby (Daily Howler) a link and a recommendation that you read him today; however, I can't figure out what to excerpt. Everything's pretty much inter-related and I don't see a section I can pull that might not confuse since you really need to read in full as he progresses paragraph by paragraph.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Monday, September 17, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, Human Rights Watch issues a report on the targeting of Iraq's LGBT community, Barack Obama tosses out pretty words to the VFW that aren't so pretty if anyone pays attention, too bad for Barry's vacation because Peace Mom Cindy Sheehan is paying attention, the benchmarks are forgotten, a census is called off and more.
Today Celebrity in Cheif Barry O! spoke to the VFW and made comments such as this: "When communism cast its shadow across so much of the globe, you stood vigilant in a long Cold War -- from an airlift in Berlin to mountains of Korea to the jungles of Vietnam." If your mouth just dropped open at the stunning historical ignorance of that single sentence, grasp that Barry O is whomever he thinks audiences want. He never means one damn word. That's the most frightening thing about him. George W. Bush's Iraq 'plan' was 'we'll stand down as they stand up' and Barry revealed the same 'strategy'. He also noted, "But as we move forward, the Iraqi people must know that the United States will keep its commitments. And the American people must know that we will move forward with our strategy. We will begin removing our combat brigades from Iraq later this year. We will remove all our combat brigades by the end of next August. And we will remove all our troops from Iraq by the end of 2011. And for America, the Iraq War will end." Yeah, we'll see. Barry O didn't argue "Trust me!" with comments about how he's working to ensure that troops in Iraq get more: "and for all those serving in Afghanistan and Iraq, including our National Guard and Reserve, more of the protective gear and armored vehicles that save lives." Uh, excuse me, he's been president for seven months. If US troops in Iraq (or Afghanistan, but this is the Iraq snapshot) need "more of the protective gear and armored vehicles that save lives," as commander in chief, he should have ensured that they received it. Don't tell us what you're going to do. You've been president for seven months, it's time you have accomplishments to point to and if you're saying US troops are at risk because they lack "protective gear and armored vehicles," and you haven't already taken care of this? He brags about how its in his (proposed) budget and how he's not hiding the costs of the wars. On the latter, he means that he's not doing supplementals. As Bette Davis tells Joan Crawford in Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?, "But you are, Blanche, you are." The night of June 16th, the US House voted on his War Supplemental (and passed it): 226 members (221 Democrats, 5 Republicans) voted for it, 202 members (32 Democrats, 170 Republicans) voted against it. June 18th the US Senate voted for it (91 voted for it, five -- Russ Feingold, Bernie Sanders, Jim DeMint, Mike Enzi and Tom Coburn -- voted against it.) Barack should remember that because June 24th he signed the $106 billion War Supplemental. So he's telling the American people in August that the US troops in Iraq do not have the equipment they need and in June he was signing a multi-billion dollar supplemental and not taking care of the troops in that?
Cindy Sheehan (Cindy's Soapbox) observed last week:
There has been no significant removal of troops from Iraq and there has been a very significant increase of troops to Af-Pak, with the unfortunate commensurate increase in casualties on all sides, yet there is very little movement in the "movement." McCain would be doing the exact same thing that Obama is doing in Iraq-Af-Pak: the EXACT same thing. There is no difference between what Obama is doing and what McCain would be doing, except Obama has a (D) behind his name. The profound difference to us here in the grassroots would be that if McCain were president, faux-gressives would still be up in arms about the wars and, even though our protests wouldn't change McCain's mind, at least we could retain our moral high-ground, that has been sold out to the Democrats for absolutely nothing in return.
Cindy's not sitting still. Barack vacations on Martha's Vineyard from Sunday through the 30th and Cindy will be there:
From her home in California, Ms. Sheehan released this statement:
"There are several things that we wish to accomplish with this protest on Martha's Vineyard. First of all, no good social or economic change will come about with the continuation or escalation of the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. We simply can't afford to continue this tragically expensive foreign policy.
Secondly, we as a movement need to continue calling for an immediate end to the occupations even when there is a Democrat in the Oval Office. There is still no Noble Cause no matter how we examine the policies.
Thirdly, the body bags aren't taking a vacation and as the US led violence surges in Afghanistan and Pakistan, so are the needless deaths on every side.
And, finally, if the right-wing can force the government to drop any kind of public option or government supported health care, then we need to exert the same kind of pressure to force a speedy end to the occupations."
Cindy Sheehan will arrive on the Vineyard on Tuesday, August 25th.
Late last night Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) reported Human Rights Watch would be releasing a report today on the targeting of Iraq's LGBT community: "Although the scope of the problem remains unclear, hundreds of gay men may have been killed this year in predominantly Shiite Muslim areas, the report's authors said, basing their conclusion on interviews with gay Iraqi men, hospital officials and an unnamed United Nations official in Baghdad." The Austin-American Statesman (compiling various wire reports) noted, "The campaign has been largely blamed on Shiite extremists who target behavior deemed un-Islamic, beating and even killing women for not wearing veils and bombing liquor stores." B-b-but, the New York Times told us the Shi'ite militias are standing down! And that they're lovely! Why, they're not just lovely, they're de-lovely! Imagine the New York Times ever being wrong about Iraq -- it's one for Ripley's. This morning the BBC added, "The report says members of the Mehdi Army militia group is spearheading the campaign, but police are also accused even though homosexuality is legal. Witnesses say vigilante groups break into homes and pick people up in the street, interrogating them to extract the names of other potential victims, before murdering them." CNN notes, "Interviews with doctors indicate hundreds of men had been killed, but the exact number was unclear because of the stigma associated with homosexuality in Iraq, the New York-based watchdog group said in its report." BBC correspondent Natalia Antelava interviewed gay men in Baghdad who report that no attempts are made by security forces to stop the assaults against them.The Human Rights Watch report is entitled "'They Want Us Exterminated': Murder, Torture, Sexual Orientation and Gender in Iraq." For the 67-page report [PDF format warning] click here. The report opens with Hamid relating how his partner was murdered: It was late one night in early April, and they came to take my partner at his parents' home. Four armed men barged into the house, masked and wearing black. They asked for him by name; they insulted him and took him in front of his parents. All that, I heard about later from his family. He was found in the neighborhood the day after. They had thrown his corpse in the garbage. His genitals were cut off and a piece of his throat was ripped out.Since then, I've been unable to speak properly. I feel as if my life is pointless now. I don't have friends other than those you see; for years it has just been my boyfriend and myself in that little bubble, by ourselves. I have no family now -- I cannot go back to them. I have a death warrant on me. I feel the best thing to do is just to kill myself. In Iraq, murderers and thieves are respected more than gay people. Their measuring rod to judge people is who they have sex with. It is not by their conscience, it is not by their conduct or their values, it is who they have sex with. The cheapest thing in Iraq is a human being, a human life. It is cheaper than an animal, than a pair of used-up batteries you buy on the street. Especially people like us. His partner of ten years is murdered and he has to live in fear, hide his own grief and hide who he is. And this is the country the US 'liberated'. Human Rights Watch's report notes that most of the Iraqis interviewed self-label as "gay" but the murderers would "describe the victims and excuse the killings with a potpourri of words and justifications, identifying those they abominate in shifting ways -- suggesting how concerns about an Iraq where men are no longer masculine drive the death squads, as much as fears of sexual 'sin.' 'Puppies,' a vilifying slang term of apparently recent vintage, implies that the men are immature as well as inhuman. Both the media and sermons in mosques warn of a wave of effeminacy among Iraqi men, and execrate the 'third sex'.'' The report also notes that while "gay" may be a new term in Iraq, homosexuals and lesbians are not new to Iraq ("always existed in Iraqi society, as in all societies"). HRW also notes that the hatred towards "'feminized' men reveals only hatred of women." Tariq shares with HRW: At the end of March, I started to hear from friends that the Mahdi Army was killing gays. The newspapers also reported there was an increase in the "third sex" in Iraq, also known as "puppies" [jarawi]. Then on April 4, I found out that two of my gay friends, Mohammed and Mazen, had been killed. I think those were their names; within a gay group, gays rarely give out their real names. We were friends, we met in cafes or chatted on the Internet, andone day they just disappeared. A few days later, I met the brother of one of them and he told me they were killed. They were kidnapped on the street and then their bodies were found near a mosque, with signs of torture. One was 18, one was 19. A couple of days after that, on April 6 or 7, I was in my parents' house, and someone threw a letter at the door. I didn't see who. Inside the envelope was a bullet. It had brown blood on it, and the letter said, "What are you still here for? Are you ready to die?" I think those two were tortured into giving my name, because two days after I learned they were killed I got this threat. ... I spoke by phone to a friend of mine yesterday night: he is also gay but he's very masculine and no one knows about him. He said, "Get out if you can and save yourself. They are killing gays left and right." I said, "Who is doing it?" He said, "Everyone knows. Who do you think? The Mahdi Army." The report traces how militias originated from the security vacuum created by the US invasion. The Madhi 'Army' billed itself as the protector of society and "an agent of social cleansing." An unnamed journalist floats the idea that the Mahdi militia is now targeting LGBTs because "[g]etting rid of the Sunnis and the Americans is less important". Mashal was kidnapped by the Mahdi militia and he's quoted explaining:It was about 4 p.m. and four men came inside the shop. They lingered and when I tried to get them to leave, they pulled out guns. They had three cars -- one a black Daewoo -- and they put me in one and covered my eyes. It was the Mahdi Army -- they are the ones who operate in the area. The place they took me to wasn't far away: it was very close to a mosque or actually in the courtyard, because I could hear the call to prayer very clearly. When they hauled me out of the car they beat me until I fell unconscious. Late the next day, they came to me and said, "We know you are gay, we know you're farakhji" [a derogatory term used in Iraq for men who have sex with men]. They pulled out a list of names and started reading them: you know these perverts, you know X and Y and Z. They gave the first name and the neighborhood where he lived. I knew four who were still alive. One they had already killed. They had killed my friend Waleed in February, before I was kidnapped. He was walking down a big street between Hayy Ur and al Shaab [in northeast Baghdad near Sadr City] at dusk. I asked Waleed's brother about it later, and he told me, "Waleed was slaughtered in the street. Don't ask more." I am sure he was killed because he was gay. He was walking with a bunch of straight friends, and he was killed, not them: he was the one they targeted. He was the first name on the list they read me. There were many more names I didn't know. I admitted knowing those four, but I said it was only because they were customers in my shop. They interrogated me for three hours that night. They kept me blindfolded and gagged, and when they wanted me to speak, they took out the gag. They demanded I give them names of other gays. At night they got a broomstick, and they used it to rape me. After that, they negotiated a ransom. They asked my family for $50,000 USD.My brothers sold my shop, my car, everything I had to put together half that. When they let me go they said, "We have our sources, and we know exactly what you do. If you step outside your house, you are dead." I never left the house for more than a month, until I fled Baghdad. One of the people whose names they read to me ran away from Baghdad, with his parents. Two others I know are just hiding in their houses. A few don't answer their phones and I don't know what has happened to them. This is targeting of a population and it goes on while US service members are on the ground in Iraq but the US White House, State Dept and Embassy in Baghdad do nothing -- despite requests from US House Reps Jared Polis, Tammy Baldwin and Barney Frank, among others. And the problem includes Iraqi forces (and, I say, Nouri). The report explains: Iraqi police and security forces have done little to investigate or halt the killings. Authorities have announced no arrests or prosecutions; it is unlikely that any have occurred. While the government has made well-publicized attempts since 2006 to purge key ministries of officials with militia ties, including the Ministry of Interior, many Iraqis doubt both its sincerity and its success. Most disturbingly, Human Rights Watch heard accounts of police complicity in abuse -- ranging from harassing "effeminate" men at checkpoints, to possible abduction and extrajudicial killing. As the targeting has taken place, the Iraqi government has refused to call it out. The report points out, "Iraq's leaders must be defenders of all its people. The Iraqi state must desist from silence, and fully and immediately investigate the murder and torture of people targeted because they do not correspond to norms of 'masculinity,' or are suspected of homosexual conduct." Following the murders, the police look the other way. The murders are not punished, the killings are not investigated: "The brutality of the killings, the proliferation of mutilated corpses discarded in the trash, not only conveys the power of the killers and dispensability of the victims, but makes the dead a savage example. Bodies castrated, broken, tortured -- becomes billboards, on which punishment is less imposed than inscribed." The report makes recommendations for many bodies but here are the recommendations for the Iraqi government: • Investigate all reports of militia or other violence against people targeted because they do not correspond to norms of "masculinity," or are suspected of homosexual conduct, and appropriately punish those found responsible; • Publicly and expressly condemn all such violence; • Investigate whether ties continue between the Ministry of Interior and militias that have operated in the past as quasi-independent security forces under the Ministry's protection, including the Mahdi Army; • Investigate all claims of abuse by police or security forces, including abuses against people because they do not correspond to norms of "masculinity," or are suspected of homosexual conduct, and appropriately punish those found responsible; • Investigate and prosecute all Ministry of Interior officials involved in death squad killings or other unlawful acts, including torture, assault, and extortion; • Properly vet and train all police, security forces, and criminal justice officials, ensuring that this entails training in human rights inclusive of issues of sexual orientation and gender expression and identity, and establish effective monitoring and accountability mechanisms;• Take all appropriate measures to end torture, disappearances, summary killings, and other abuses, including abuses based on sexual orientation and gender expression and identity; • Repeal article 128 of the Criminal Code, which identifies "The commission of an offence with honorable motives" as a "mitigating excuse"; • Examine vague articles of the Criminal Code, including paragraphs 401, 402, 501, 502, and 200(2), that could justify arbitrary arrest or harassment of people due to their sexual orientation or gender expression and identity, or could be used to prevent civil society from addressing unpopular or stigmatized issues; repeal or modify them if necessary, or otherwise ensure that they are not applied in an arbitrary or discriminatory manner contrary to international human rights law; • Create and support an independent National Human Rights Commission; • Support the development of domestic independent human rights non-governmentalorganizations with the capacity to monitor the full range of human rights violations, and ensure that they can operate without state harassment or interference; • Train all criminal-justice authorities in effective responses to gender-based violence against women and men; • Promote gender equality by embodying in legislation explicit guarantees for women's equal rights to marriage, within marriage, at the dissolution of marriage, and in inheritance.A large number of the LGBT community is fleeing or has fled Iraq and HRW calls on foreign governments to assist with this segment of the Iraqi refugee population. They note Jordan, Turkey and Syria -- three countries that house the majority of Iraq's external refugees -- are not countries where LGBTs are likely to feel welcomed.
The LGBT community is among the many communities targeted in 'liberated' Iraq today. The press is another target. Friday they demonstrated and that day's snapshot included a link to BBC video footage of the demonstration which somehow became "nearly 100 Iraqi journalists, news media workers and their supporters" when Sam Dagher showed up with a 'report' in Saturday's New York Times. Yesterday Adam Ashton (McClatchy's Kansas City Star) did a better job -- he notes around 200, as opposed to the Times' less than 100 who protested Friday -- but where's the draft law in his article? Not in his article. He does note: "Journalists' fears have been inflamed this summer by a decision from the Iraqi Ministry of Culture and Ministry of Interior requiring publishers to get their permission before printing books and by an Aug. 7 speech at a prominent Shiite mosque where an imam and lawmaker denounced a journalist's work, triggering fears for the writer's safety." (Here's a link to Ashton's story at McClatchy.) NPR's Deborah Amos (All Things Considered) manages to address the topic (and put the boys to shame):Deborah Amos: The demonstrators chose a place in central Baghdad that sends an unmistakable message: Al-Mutanabi Street -- a literary center for generations is lined with book shops as well as an outdoor market that does a lively trade in racy romance novels and political magazines. Here book sellers joined journalists and authors for a rousing protest. Over the past few months, the government has been quietly proceeding on laws to register websites and ban certain books. But opponents say it's a first step to limit freedom of expression. Emad al-Khafaji: I am afraid of the return of the censorship. Deborah Amos: Iraqi journalist, Emad al-Khafaji. Emad al-Khafaji: It's not enough to say, "For national security, I cannot accept this book or that book." No, this thing will remind us of Saddam era. Deborah Amos: When Saddam's era was swept away after the US-led invasion, new media outlets came rushing in. Even the poorest neighborhoods sprouted rooftop satellite dishes. For the first time, Iraqis could feast on Lebanese music videos and Turkish soap operas. They soon discovered website porn and online gambling but in this media revolution more dangerous ideas appeared promoting hatred and sectarian violence. The prime minister's proposed law would prohibit websites that deal with terrorism but also drugs, gambling, negative comments about Islam and pornography. Hanna Edward, a human rights actvist, says these vague categories are aimed at stifling Iraq's diversity. Hanna Edward: This really hinders our democracy, diversity of expression, diversity of opinions. Without it, I fear that we are going again to some dictatorship. Deborah Amos: Iraq's National Library and Archives has already been a target for government censors. Saad Eskander, the executive director, tells the story in his office filled with books. He's rescued old texts, hidden in basements and personal libraries, written in Hebrew from the day when Iraq had the largest Jewish community in the region. He's also rescued books written by Saddam Hussein. The new censors wanted those books gone. Saad Eskander: They say we have no right even they are written in a way that not acceptable to us but they are an Iraqi [no idea on the word]. Deborah Amos: A part of Iraq's heritage's Eskander says, he won that fight for now. Saad Eskander: It reflect old mentality its part of our historical memory and should be read and studied and analyzed in order to prevent the emergence of such dictatorship and brutality in our society. Deborah Amos: Which is why he says he will stand against the prime minister's proposed censorship law.
At the end of last week, Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reported on the lack of electricity in Baghdad, how graffiti can be found proclaiming "Electricity is dead. Pray for its soul" and noting, "Electricity long has been a benchmark for reconstruction success in Iraq. Even as American troops have withdrawn from Iraqi cities and there's talk of a faster U.S. pullout from the country, however, electricity remains elusive for millions of Baghdad residents." Hammoudi notes the benchmarks. No one seems to remember them. The White House proposed them. They were supposed to be the way 'success' could be measured. Congress was all for them. Nouri al-Maliki signed off on them. That was 2007. By 2008, movement on any benchmark would be hailed as 'success!' That's all you needed, movement. Wasn't movement 'achievement'? Weren't they the same thing. As the 'results' demonstrate in 2009, no. They weren't the same thing. And by 2009, they're all but forgotten even though, generally, when two parties sign off on something, what you have is a binding contract.
Staying with benchmarks, in 2005, Iraq created a Constitution and ratified it. The Constitution held that a census would be held in Kirkuk and a referendum held there to determine the will of the residents -- did they want to be part of the central government out of Baghdad or part of the Kurdistan Regional Government? The area was historically targeted by Saddam Hussein who moved Arabs in and forced Kurds out. It is a disputed territory. As 2006 came to a close, the Bush White House began talking "benchmarks" by which "success" in Iraq could be measured. They proposed a set of benchmarks to Congress and to Nouri al-Maliki which both signed off on. The benchmarks included resolving the Kirkuk issue. The referendum has never taken place. Repeatedly, Nouri manipulates bodies such as the United Nations which then whine that the Kurds need to wait -- as if this wasn't agreed to both in the Consitution and in the benchmarks. Provincial elections took place in 14 of Iraq's 18 provinces back in January and in three of the KRG's provinces in July. The missing one? Kirkuk. Nouri announced that a census would finally take place and that the entire country would vote in January elections in 2010 (kicked back from December 2009). Now BBC reports that Iraq's "has postponed indefinitely plans to hold its first nationswide census in 22 years". AFP adds that politicians (Arab and Turkmen) have declared that they will block the census and that they will work to overturn Article 140 of the Constitution. They quote Kurdish politician Sherzad Adil stating, "Article 140 is constitutional and the Iraqi government is obliged to implement it. The delay in implementing it is the fault fo the governments that followed the former regime and we hope the problems will be solved before the next (general) election." Aseel Kami and Michael Christie (Reuters) remind, "The census would have shed light on the actual ethnic composition of those areas. Many Arab and Turkmen leaders in Kirkuk opposed the survey there, and have also opposed holding a referendum on the city's fate."
And on the topic of northern Iraq, this morning Ernesto London (Washington Post) reported online that the top US commander in Iraq, Gen Ray Odierno, states US forces may be position "along disputed areas" and that Nouri's thrilled with the idea and quotes Odierno saying, "I think they all just feel more comfortable if we're there."
As Third noted yesterday, there were 122 reported deaths in Iraq last week and 414 reported wounded ("Last Sunday found the press reporting 6 deaths and 12 people injured. Monday saw 61 deaths reported and 252 injuries. Tuesday saw 11 dead and 57 wounded. Wednesday's numbers were 11 dead and 21 injured. Thursday 25 lives were claimed and 51 people were wounded. Friday there were 2 reported deaths and 6 reported injured. Saturday saw 6 dead and 15 injured.") Yesterday saw 13 reported dead and 41 reported injured. Violence continued today.
Bombings?
AFP reports a car bombing outside Taji which claimed 5 lives and left thirty-eight people injured according to "local police Lieutenant Sarmed Sami." Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad car bombing which claimed 2 lives and left eleven people (nine are police) injured. Dropping back to yesterday, Reuters notes a Kirkuk roadside bombing which injured six police officers.
Shootings?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Mosul checkpoint was attacked and 2 police officers were killed with a civilian wounded and 1 "off-duty" police officer was shot dead in Mosul and, dropping back to Sunday, 1 civilian was shot dead in Mosul. Reuters notes a Sunday night attack on a checkpoint in Mussayab in which 1 Sahwa was killed and three more were injured, a drive-by shooting in Mussayab Sunday night in which a Sahwa leader was shot dead and a Mosul shop break-in Sunday night in which the owner was shot dead. Note that Reuters' Sunday violence included under "Bombings" and "Shootings" today was not reported yesterday and not included as part of Sunday's count. It will be counted at this site as part of Monday's count. (And, yes, we will keep a running count because the press seems unable/unwilling to do so.)
Corpses?
Reuters notes the Iraqi government announced today they'd found 10 corpses in the last two weeks in Baghdad. Hope those weren't Sunni corpses -- it would destroy the New York Times' p.r. efforts. (As noted August 12th, "Mass graves turn up in a month is he going to retract? Hell no, they never do.")
Shane Bauer, Sarah Shourd and Josh Fattal are three American citizens who visited northern Iraq and allegedly went hiking and allegedly crossed over into Iranian territory. Saturday, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton released a statement which noted, "Regarding the three American hikers, Joshua Fattal, Shane Bauer, and Sarah Shourd, who were detained by Iranian authorities on July 31, we once again call on the Iranian government to live up to its obligations under the Vienna Convention by granting consular access and releasing these three young Americans without further delay." They are being held by the Iranian government and, last week, they were moved to Tehran. Damien McElroy and Ahmad Vahdat (Telegraph of London) report that Iraqi tribal leader Farhad Lohoni is stating that eye witnesses (his family members) saw the Americans seized by Iranians who were in Iraqi territory and the Iranians were allegedly part of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Meanwhile Rahmat al-Salaam (Asharq Alawsat) reports that the governments of Iraq and Iran met "to discuss border problems and implementation of the Algiers Agreement." Kareem Abedzair (Azzaman) reports on the meeting as well and notes promises on both sides to create more "border controls."
Saturday, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton released a statement on Ken Bacon, "The United States and the world lost a great humanitarian leader with the passing today of Ken Bacon, President of Refugees International. Most Americans remember Ken as the unflappable civilian voice of the Department of Defense, where he served with distinction as spokesperson for many years. But for millions of the world's most vulnerable people -- refugees and other victims of conflict -- Ken was an invaluable source of hope, inspiration and support. From Centeral Africa to South Asia to the Americas, Ken shone the spotlight on the causes of humanitarian suffering, and served as an impassioned yet reasoned advocate for the principles of humanitarian protection and assistance. We will miss Ken, but we will be inspired by the contributions he has made and the example he has set." Refugees International notes he was 64-years-old and "died . . . [Saturday] morning from an agressive melanoma that spread into his brain." They also note:
In 2006, Mr. Bacon pushed Refugees International to investigate the plight of Iraqi refugees at a time when no one was willing to acknowledge or speak out about this matter. Drawing on the findings of Refugees International's field research teams, Mr. Bacon was a leader in pushing the U.S. government and the UN to recognize the world's fastest growing refugee crisis at that time. His advocacy with senior administration officials and key members of Congress, such as Senator Edward Kennedy, was instrumental in achieving extensive press coverage and policy discussions on Iraqi displacement, the creation of a State Department task force on the problem, a sharp increase in international assistance for displaced Iraqis, and greater numbers of Iraqis are being resettled in this country.
For approximately 25 years, worked for the Wall St. Journal, first as a correspondent and then as an editor. Stephen Miller (Wall St. Journal) explains, "Mr. Bacon lived simply in Washington, riding a bicycle to work as a reporter, and walking to work as a Pentagon spokesman. He was legendarily frugal with the air conditioning in his family's townhouse in D.C.'s scorching summers. In 1994, he responded to incoming Secretary of Defense [William J.] Perry's summons to the Pentagon, where issues like U.S. involvement in Bosnia and Haiti dominated the agenda. As a former reporter, he mixed well with the Washington press corps and was retained by the subsequent defense secretary, William S. Cohen." Matt Schudel (Washington Post) adds, "Survivors include his wife of 43 years, Darcy Wheeler Bacon of Washington and Block Island; two daughters, Katharine Bacon of Brookline, Mass., and Sarah Bacon of Brooklyn, N.Y.; his father, Theodore S. Bacon of Peterborough, N.H.; a brother; and two grandchildren." The family is asking that those who wish to note the passing make a donation to Refugees International instead of sending flowers.
And finally, we'll note this from Sherwood Ross' "America's Warfare State" (Information Clearing House):
"On my last day in Iraq," veteran McClatchy News correspondent Leila Fadel wrote August 9th, "as on my first day in Iraq, I couldn't see what the United States and its allies had accomplished. ... I couldn't understand what thousands of American soldiers had died for and why hundreds of thousands of Iraqis had been killed." Quite a few oil company CEO's and "defense" industry executives, however, do have a pretty good idea of why the war Fadel deplored is being fought. As Michael Cherkasky, president of Kroll Inc., said a year after the Iraq invasion boosted his security firm's profits 231 percent: "It's the Gold Rush." What follows is a brief look at some of the outfits that cashed in, and at the multitudes that got took. "Defense Earnings Continue to Soar," Renae Merle wrote in The Washington Post on July 30, 2007. "Several of Washington's largest defense contractors said last week that they continue to benefit from a boom in spending on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan..." Merle added, "Profit reports from Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics and Lockheed Martin showed particularly strong results in operations in the region." More recently, Boeing's second-quarter earnings this year rose 17 percent, Associated Press reported, in part because of what AP called "robust defense sales." But war, it turns out, is not only unhealthy for human beings, it is not uniformly good for the economy. Many sectors suffer, including non-defense employment, as a war can destroy more jobs than it creates. While the makers of warplanes may be flying high, these are "Tough Times For Commercial Aerospace," Business Week reported July 13th. "The sector is contending with the deepening global recession, declining air traffic, capacity cuts by airlines, and reduced availability of financing for aircraft purchases."
iraq
cindy sheehan
reuters
the washington posternesto londonocnnbbc newsnatalia antelavanprall things considereddeborah amoshuman rights watch
laith hammoudimcclatchy newspapers
adam ashtonaseel kamimichael christiebbc newsthe telegraph of londondamien mcelroyahmad vahdatrahmat al-salaam
sahar issathe new york timesrod nordland
sam dagher
sherwood ross
Feminist Wire notes the following:
A poll released Saturday by CBS and the New York Times indicates that just 53 percent of American adults support military women serving in combat roles. The poll also found 83 percent support women serving in support roles for ground troops, according to CBS. The United States currently restricts women from direct combat roles in infantry positions or in the Special Forces.
The poll also found a number of ideological and demographic factors to be influential. In general, Democrats, liberals, moderates, and independents favor women serving in combat roles while Republican and conservatives oppose it. Age is also a factor: 62 percent of women respondents younger than 45 support lifting the combat restriction, while only 44 percent of women respondents older than 45 support removing the ban. Overall, only 37 percent of respondents older than 65 support lifting the restriction.
I firmly support a woman's right to hold any job a man does. I think a woman can do any job a man can and a man can do any job a woman can. (Pregnancy is not a job. Child rearing is one -- and it's a very valuable one.)
But even so, I feel a pang of sadness about the above. Great for women who want it and I hope it lets their work they are doing (women are in combat, wake up, America) but I just honestly wish we were smarter. I wish we were smarter and finding new and alternative ways of addressing conflict. Instead, it appears we will measure success solely by how women achieve on men's terms.
I'm giving Bob Somerby (Daily Howler) a link and a recommendation that you read him today; however, I can't figure out what to excerpt. Everything's pretty much inter-related and I don't see a section I can pull that might not confuse since you really need to read in full as he progresses paragraph by paragraph.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Monday, September 17, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, Human Rights Watch issues a report on the targeting of Iraq's LGBT community, Barack Obama tosses out pretty words to the VFW that aren't so pretty if anyone pays attention, too bad for Barry's vacation because Peace Mom Cindy Sheehan is paying attention, the benchmarks are forgotten, a census is called off and more.
Today Celebrity in Cheif Barry O! spoke to the VFW and made comments such as this: "When communism cast its shadow across so much of the globe, you stood vigilant in a long Cold War -- from an airlift in Berlin to mountains of Korea to the jungles of Vietnam." If your mouth just dropped open at the stunning historical ignorance of that single sentence, grasp that Barry O is whomever he thinks audiences want. He never means one damn word. That's the most frightening thing about him. George W. Bush's Iraq 'plan' was 'we'll stand down as they stand up' and Barry revealed the same 'strategy'. He also noted, "But as we move forward, the Iraqi people must know that the United States will keep its commitments. And the American people must know that we will move forward with our strategy. We will begin removing our combat brigades from Iraq later this year. We will remove all our combat brigades by the end of next August. And we will remove all our troops from Iraq by the end of 2011. And for America, the Iraq War will end." Yeah, we'll see. Barry O didn't argue "Trust me!" with comments about how he's working to ensure that troops in Iraq get more: "and for all those serving in Afghanistan and Iraq, including our National Guard and Reserve, more of the protective gear and armored vehicles that save lives." Uh, excuse me, he's been president for seven months. If US troops in Iraq (or Afghanistan, but this is the Iraq snapshot) need "more of the protective gear and armored vehicles that save lives," as commander in chief, he should have ensured that they received it. Don't tell us what you're going to do. You've been president for seven months, it's time you have accomplishments to point to and if you're saying US troops are at risk because they lack "protective gear and armored vehicles," and you haven't already taken care of this? He brags about how its in his (proposed) budget and how he's not hiding the costs of the wars. On the latter, he means that he's not doing supplementals. As Bette Davis tells Joan Crawford in Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?, "But you are, Blanche, you are." The night of June 16th, the US House voted on his War Supplemental (and passed it): 226 members (221 Democrats, 5 Republicans) voted for it, 202 members (32 Democrats, 170 Republicans) voted against it. June 18th the US Senate voted for it (91 voted for it, five -- Russ Feingold, Bernie Sanders, Jim DeMint, Mike Enzi and Tom Coburn -- voted against it.) Barack should remember that because June 24th he signed the $106 billion War Supplemental. So he's telling the American people in August that the US troops in Iraq do not have the equipment they need and in June he was signing a multi-billion dollar supplemental and not taking care of the troops in that?
Cindy Sheehan (Cindy's Soapbox) observed last week:
There has been no significant removal of troops from Iraq and there has been a very significant increase of troops to Af-Pak, with the unfortunate commensurate increase in casualties on all sides, yet there is very little movement in the "movement." McCain would be doing the exact same thing that Obama is doing in Iraq-Af-Pak: the EXACT same thing. There is no difference between what Obama is doing and what McCain would be doing, except Obama has a (D) behind his name. The profound difference to us here in the grassroots would be that if McCain were president, faux-gressives would still be up in arms about the wars and, even though our protests wouldn't change McCain's mind, at least we could retain our moral high-ground, that has been sold out to the Democrats for absolutely nothing in return.
Cindy's not sitting still. Barack vacations on Martha's Vineyard from Sunday through the 30th and Cindy will be there:
From her home in California, Ms. Sheehan released this statement:
"There are several things that we wish to accomplish with this protest on Martha's Vineyard. First of all, no good social or economic change will come about with the continuation or escalation of the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. We simply can't afford to continue this tragically expensive foreign policy.
Secondly, we as a movement need to continue calling for an immediate end to the occupations even when there is a Democrat in the Oval Office. There is still no Noble Cause no matter how we examine the policies.
Thirdly, the body bags aren't taking a vacation and as the US led violence surges in Afghanistan and Pakistan, so are the needless deaths on every side.
And, finally, if the right-wing can force the government to drop any kind of public option or government supported health care, then we need to exert the same kind of pressure to force a speedy end to the occupations."
Cindy Sheehan will arrive on the Vineyard on Tuesday, August 25th.
Late last night Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) reported Human Rights Watch would be releasing a report today on the targeting of Iraq's LGBT community: "Although the scope of the problem remains unclear, hundreds of gay men may have been killed this year in predominantly Shiite Muslim areas, the report's authors said, basing their conclusion on interviews with gay Iraqi men, hospital officials and an unnamed United Nations official in Baghdad." The Austin-American Statesman (compiling various wire reports) noted, "The campaign has been largely blamed on Shiite extremists who target behavior deemed un-Islamic, beating and even killing women for not wearing veils and bombing liquor stores." B-b-but, the New York Times told us the Shi'ite militias are standing down! And that they're lovely! Why, they're not just lovely, they're de-lovely! Imagine the New York Times ever being wrong about Iraq -- it's one for Ripley's. This morning the BBC added, "The report says members of the Mehdi Army militia group is spearheading the campaign, but police are also accused even though homosexuality is legal. Witnesses say vigilante groups break into homes and pick people up in the street, interrogating them to extract the names of other potential victims, before murdering them." CNN notes, "Interviews with doctors indicate hundreds of men had been killed, but the exact number was unclear because of the stigma associated with homosexuality in Iraq, the New York-based watchdog group said in its report." BBC correspondent Natalia Antelava interviewed gay men in Baghdad who report that no attempts are made by security forces to stop the assaults against them.The Human Rights Watch report is entitled "'They Want Us Exterminated': Murder, Torture, Sexual Orientation and Gender in Iraq." For the 67-page report [PDF format warning] click here. The report opens with Hamid relating how his partner was murdered: It was late one night in early April, and they came to take my partner at his parents' home. Four armed men barged into the house, masked and wearing black. They asked for him by name; they insulted him and took him in front of his parents. All that, I heard about later from his family. He was found in the neighborhood the day after. They had thrown his corpse in the garbage. His genitals were cut off and a piece of his throat was ripped out.Since then, I've been unable to speak properly. I feel as if my life is pointless now. I don't have friends other than those you see; for years it has just been my boyfriend and myself in that little bubble, by ourselves. I have no family now -- I cannot go back to them. I have a death warrant on me. I feel the best thing to do is just to kill myself. In Iraq, murderers and thieves are respected more than gay people. Their measuring rod to judge people is who they have sex with. It is not by their conscience, it is not by their conduct or their values, it is who they have sex with. The cheapest thing in Iraq is a human being, a human life. It is cheaper than an animal, than a pair of used-up batteries you buy on the street. Especially people like us. His partner of ten years is murdered and he has to live in fear, hide his own grief and hide who he is. And this is the country the US 'liberated'. Human Rights Watch's report notes that most of the Iraqis interviewed self-label as "gay" but the murderers would "describe the victims and excuse the killings with a potpourri of words and justifications, identifying those they abominate in shifting ways -- suggesting how concerns about an Iraq where men are no longer masculine drive the death squads, as much as fears of sexual 'sin.' 'Puppies,' a vilifying slang term of apparently recent vintage, implies that the men are immature as well as inhuman. Both the media and sermons in mosques warn of a wave of effeminacy among Iraqi men, and execrate the 'third sex'.'' The report also notes that while "gay" may be a new term in Iraq, homosexuals and lesbians are not new to Iraq ("always existed in Iraqi society, as in all societies"). HRW also notes that the hatred towards "'feminized' men reveals only hatred of women." Tariq shares with HRW: At the end of March, I started to hear from friends that the Mahdi Army was killing gays. The newspapers also reported there was an increase in the "third sex" in Iraq, also known as "puppies" [jarawi]. Then on April 4, I found out that two of my gay friends, Mohammed and Mazen, had been killed. I think those were their names; within a gay group, gays rarely give out their real names. We were friends, we met in cafes or chatted on the Internet, andone day they just disappeared. A few days later, I met the brother of one of them and he told me they were killed. They were kidnapped on the street and then their bodies were found near a mosque, with signs of torture. One was 18, one was 19. A couple of days after that, on April 6 or 7, I was in my parents' house, and someone threw a letter at the door. I didn't see who. Inside the envelope was a bullet. It had brown blood on it, and the letter said, "What are you still here for? Are you ready to die?" I think those two were tortured into giving my name, because two days after I learned they were killed I got this threat. ... I spoke by phone to a friend of mine yesterday night: he is also gay but he's very masculine and no one knows about him. He said, "Get out if you can and save yourself. They are killing gays left and right." I said, "Who is doing it?" He said, "Everyone knows. Who do you think? The Mahdi Army." The report traces how militias originated from the security vacuum created by the US invasion. The Madhi 'Army' billed itself as the protector of society and "an agent of social cleansing." An unnamed journalist floats the idea that the Mahdi militia is now targeting LGBTs because "[g]etting rid of the Sunnis and the Americans is less important". Mashal was kidnapped by the Mahdi militia and he's quoted explaining:It was about 4 p.m. and four men came inside the shop. They lingered and when I tried to get them to leave, they pulled out guns. They had three cars -- one a black Daewoo -- and they put me in one and covered my eyes. It was the Mahdi Army -- they are the ones who operate in the area. The place they took me to wasn't far away: it was very close to a mosque or actually in the courtyard, because I could hear the call to prayer very clearly. When they hauled me out of the car they beat me until I fell unconscious. Late the next day, they came to me and said, "We know you are gay, we know you're farakhji" [a derogatory term used in Iraq for men who have sex with men]. They pulled out a list of names and started reading them: you know these perverts, you know X and Y and Z. They gave the first name and the neighborhood where he lived. I knew four who were still alive. One they had already killed. They had killed my friend Waleed in February, before I was kidnapped. He was walking down a big street between Hayy Ur and al Shaab [in northeast Baghdad near Sadr City] at dusk. I asked Waleed's brother about it later, and he told me, "Waleed was slaughtered in the street. Don't ask more." I am sure he was killed because he was gay. He was walking with a bunch of straight friends, and he was killed, not them: he was the one they targeted. He was the first name on the list they read me. There were many more names I didn't know. I admitted knowing those four, but I said it was only because they were customers in my shop. They interrogated me for three hours that night. They kept me blindfolded and gagged, and when they wanted me to speak, they took out the gag. They demanded I give them names of other gays. At night they got a broomstick, and they used it to rape me. After that, they negotiated a ransom. They asked my family for $50,000 USD.My brothers sold my shop, my car, everything I had to put together half that. When they let me go they said, "We have our sources, and we know exactly what you do. If you step outside your house, you are dead." I never left the house for more than a month, until I fled Baghdad. One of the people whose names they read to me ran away from Baghdad, with his parents. Two others I know are just hiding in their houses. A few don't answer their phones and I don't know what has happened to them. This is targeting of a population and it goes on while US service members are on the ground in Iraq but the US White House, State Dept and Embassy in Baghdad do nothing -- despite requests from US House Reps Jared Polis, Tammy Baldwin and Barney Frank, among others. And the problem includes Iraqi forces (and, I say, Nouri). The report explains: Iraqi police and security forces have done little to investigate or halt the killings. Authorities have announced no arrests or prosecutions; it is unlikely that any have occurred. While the government has made well-publicized attempts since 2006 to purge key ministries of officials with militia ties, including the Ministry of Interior, many Iraqis doubt both its sincerity and its success. Most disturbingly, Human Rights Watch heard accounts of police complicity in abuse -- ranging from harassing "effeminate" men at checkpoints, to possible abduction and extrajudicial killing. As the targeting has taken place, the Iraqi government has refused to call it out. The report points out, "Iraq's leaders must be defenders of all its people. The Iraqi state must desist from silence, and fully and immediately investigate the murder and torture of people targeted because they do not correspond to norms of 'masculinity,' or are suspected of homosexual conduct." Following the murders, the police look the other way. The murders are not punished, the killings are not investigated: "The brutality of the killings, the proliferation of mutilated corpses discarded in the trash, not only conveys the power of the killers and dispensability of the victims, but makes the dead a savage example. Bodies castrated, broken, tortured -- becomes billboards, on which punishment is less imposed than inscribed." The report makes recommendations for many bodies but here are the recommendations for the Iraqi government: • Investigate all reports of militia or other violence against people targeted because they do not correspond to norms of "masculinity," or are suspected of homosexual conduct, and appropriately punish those found responsible; • Publicly and expressly condemn all such violence; • Investigate whether ties continue between the Ministry of Interior and militias that have operated in the past as quasi-independent security forces under the Ministry's protection, including the Mahdi Army; • Investigate all claims of abuse by police or security forces, including abuses against people because they do not correspond to norms of "masculinity," or are suspected of homosexual conduct, and appropriately punish those found responsible; • Investigate and prosecute all Ministry of Interior officials involved in death squad killings or other unlawful acts, including torture, assault, and extortion; • Properly vet and train all police, security forces, and criminal justice officials, ensuring that this entails training in human rights inclusive of issues of sexual orientation and gender expression and identity, and establish effective monitoring and accountability mechanisms;• Take all appropriate measures to end torture, disappearances, summary killings, and other abuses, including abuses based on sexual orientation and gender expression and identity; • Repeal article 128 of the Criminal Code, which identifies "The commission of an offence with honorable motives" as a "mitigating excuse"; • Examine vague articles of the Criminal Code, including paragraphs 401, 402, 501, 502, and 200(2), that could justify arbitrary arrest or harassment of people due to their sexual orientation or gender expression and identity, or could be used to prevent civil society from addressing unpopular or stigmatized issues; repeal or modify them if necessary, or otherwise ensure that they are not applied in an arbitrary or discriminatory manner contrary to international human rights law; • Create and support an independent National Human Rights Commission; • Support the development of domestic independent human rights non-governmentalorganizations with the capacity to monitor the full range of human rights violations, and ensure that they can operate without state harassment or interference; • Train all criminal-justice authorities in effective responses to gender-based violence against women and men; • Promote gender equality by embodying in legislation explicit guarantees for women's equal rights to marriage, within marriage, at the dissolution of marriage, and in inheritance.A large number of the LGBT community is fleeing or has fled Iraq and HRW calls on foreign governments to assist with this segment of the Iraqi refugee population. They note Jordan, Turkey and Syria -- three countries that house the majority of Iraq's external refugees -- are not countries where LGBTs are likely to feel welcomed.
The LGBT community is among the many communities targeted in 'liberated' Iraq today. The press is another target. Friday they demonstrated and that day's snapshot included a link to BBC video footage of the demonstration which somehow became "nearly 100 Iraqi journalists, news media workers and their supporters" when Sam Dagher showed up with a 'report' in Saturday's New York Times. Yesterday Adam Ashton (McClatchy's Kansas City Star) did a better job -- he notes around 200, as opposed to the Times' less than 100 who protested Friday -- but where's the draft law in his article? Not in his article. He does note: "Journalists' fears have been inflamed this summer by a decision from the Iraqi Ministry of Culture and Ministry of Interior requiring publishers to get their permission before printing books and by an Aug. 7 speech at a prominent Shiite mosque where an imam and lawmaker denounced a journalist's work, triggering fears for the writer's safety." (Here's a link to Ashton's story at McClatchy.) NPR's Deborah Amos (All Things Considered) manages to address the topic (and put the boys to shame):Deborah Amos: The demonstrators chose a place in central Baghdad that sends an unmistakable message: Al-Mutanabi Street -- a literary center for generations is lined with book shops as well as an outdoor market that does a lively trade in racy romance novels and political magazines. Here book sellers joined journalists and authors for a rousing protest. Over the past few months, the government has been quietly proceeding on laws to register websites and ban certain books. But opponents say it's a first step to limit freedom of expression. Emad al-Khafaji: I am afraid of the return of the censorship. Deborah Amos: Iraqi journalist, Emad al-Khafaji. Emad al-Khafaji: It's not enough to say, "For national security, I cannot accept this book or that book." No, this thing will remind us of Saddam era. Deborah Amos: When Saddam's era was swept away after the US-led invasion, new media outlets came rushing in. Even the poorest neighborhoods sprouted rooftop satellite dishes. For the first time, Iraqis could feast on Lebanese music videos and Turkish soap operas. They soon discovered website porn and online gambling but in this media revolution more dangerous ideas appeared promoting hatred and sectarian violence. The prime minister's proposed law would prohibit websites that deal with terrorism but also drugs, gambling, negative comments about Islam and pornography. Hanna Edward, a human rights actvist, says these vague categories are aimed at stifling Iraq's diversity. Hanna Edward: This really hinders our democracy, diversity of expression, diversity of opinions. Without it, I fear that we are going again to some dictatorship. Deborah Amos: Iraq's National Library and Archives has already been a target for government censors. Saad Eskander, the executive director, tells the story in his office filled with books. He's rescued old texts, hidden in basements and personal libraries, written in Hebrew from the day when Iraq had the largest Jewish community in the region. He's also rescued books written by Saddam Hussein. The new censors wanted those books gone. Saad Eskander: They say we have no right even they are written in a way that not acceptable to us but they are an Iraqi [no idea on the word]. Deborah Amos: A part of Iraq's heritage's Eskander says, he won that fight for now. Saad Eskander: It reflect old mentality its part of our historical memory and should be read and studied and analyzed in order to prevent the emergence of such dictatorship and brutality in our society. Deborah Amos: Which is why he says he will stand against the prime minister's proposed censorship law.
At the end of last week, Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reported on the lack of electricity in Baghdad, how graffiti can be found proclaiming "Electricity is dead. Pray for its soul" and noting, "Electricity long has been a benchmark for reconstruction success in Iraq. Even as American troops have withdrawn from Iraqi cities and there's talk of a faster U.S. pullout from the country, however, electricity remains elusive for millions of Baghdad residents." Hammoudi notes the benchmarks. No one seems to remember them. The White House proposed them. They were supposed to be the way 'success' could be measured. Congress was all for them. Nouri al-Maliki signed off on them. That was 2007. By 2008, movement on any benchmark would be hailed as 'success!' That's all you needed, movement. Wasn't movement 'achievement'? Weren't they the same thing. As the 'results' demonstrate in 2009, no. They weren't the same thing. And by 2009, they're all but forgotten even though, generally, when two parties sign off on something, what you have is a binding contract.
Staying with benchmarks, in 2005, Iraq created a Constitution and ratified it. The Constitution held that a census would be held in Kirkuk and a referendum held there to determine the will of the residents -- did they want to be part of the central government out of Baghdad or part of the Kurdistan Regional Government? The area was historically targeted by Saddam Hussein who moved Arabs in and forced Kurds out. It is a disputed territory. As 2006 came to a close, the Bush White House began talking "benchmarks" by which "success" in Iraq could be measured. They proposed a set of benchmarks to Congress and to Nouri al-Maliki which both signed off on. The benchmarks included resolving the Kirkuk issue. The referendum has never taken place. Repeatedly, Nouri manipulates bodies such as the United Nations which then whine that the Kurds need to wait -- as if this wasn't agreed to both in the Consitution and in the benchmarks. Provincial elections took place in 14 of Iraq's 18 provinces back in January and in three of the KRG's provinces in July. The missing one? Kirkuk. Nouri announced that a census would finally take place and that the entire country would vote in January elections in 2010 (kicked back from December 2009). Now BBC reports that Iraq's "has postponed indefinitely plans to hold its first nationswide census in 22 years". AFP adds that politicians (Arab and Turkmen) have declared that they will block the census and that they will work to overturn Article 140 of the Constitution. They quote Kurdish politician Sherzad Adil stating, "Article 140 is constitutional and the Iraqi government is obliged to implement it. The delay in implementing it is the fault fo the governments that followed the former regime and we hope the problems will be solved before the next (general) election." Aseel Kami and Michael Christie (Reuters) remind, "The census would have shed light on the actual ethnic composition of those areas. Many Arab and Turkmen leaders in Kirkuk opposed the survey there, and have also opposed holding a referendum on the city's fate."
And on the topic of northern Iraq, this morning Ernesto London (Washington Post) reported online that the top US commander in Iraq, Gen Ray Odierno, states US forces may be position "along disputed areas" and that Nouri's thrilled with the idea and quotes Odierno saying, "I think they all just feel more comfortable if we're there."
As Third noted yesterday, there were 122 reported deaths in Iraq last week and 414 reported wounded ("Last Sunday found the press reporting 6 deaths and 12 people injured. Monday saw 61 deaths reported and 252 injuries. Tuesday saw 11 dead and 57 wounded. Wednesday's numbers were 11 dead and 21 injured. Thursday 25 lives were claimed and 51 people were wounded. Friday there were 2 reported deaths and 6 reported injured. Saturday saw 6 dead and 15 injured.") Yesterday saw 13 reported dead and 41 reported injured. Violence continued today.
Bombings?
AFP reports a car bombing outside Taji which claimed 5 lives and left thirty-eight people injured according to "local police Lieutenant Sarmed Sami." Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad car bombing which claimed 2 lives and left eleven people (nine are police) injured. Dropping back to yesterday, Reuters notes a Kirkuk roadside bombing which injured six police officers.
Shootings?
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Mosul checkpoint was attacked and 2 police officers were killed with a civilian wounded and 1 "off-duty" police officer was shot dead in Mosul and, dropping back to Sunday, 1 civilian was shot dead in Mosul. Reuters notes a Sunday night attack on a checkpoint in Mussayab in which 1 Sahwa was killed and three more were injured, a drive-by shooting in Mussayab Sunday night in which a Sahwa leader was shot dead and a Mosul shop break-in Sunday night in which the owner was shot dead. Note that Reuters' Sunday violence included under "Bombings" and "Shootings" today was not reported yesterday and not included as part of Sunday's count. It will be counted at this site as part of Monday's count. (And, yes, we will keep a running count because the press seems unable/unwilling to do so.)
Corpses?
Reuters notes the Iraqi government announced today they'd found 10 corpses in the last two weeks in Baghdad. Hope those weren't Sunni corpses -- it would destroy the New York Times' p.r. efforts. (As noted August 12th, "Mass graves turn up in a month is he going to retract? Hell no, they never do.")
Shane Bauer, Sarah Shourd and Josh Fattal are three American citizens who visited northern Iraq and allegedly went hiking and allegedly crossed over into Iranian territory. Saturday, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton released a statement which noted, "Regarding the three American hikers, Joshua Fattal, Shane Bauer, and Sarah Shourd, who were detained by Iranian authorities on July 31, we once again call on the Iranian government to live up to its obligations under the Vienna Convention by granting consular access and releasing these three young Americans without further delay." They are being held by the Iranian government and, last week, they were moved to Tehran. Damien McElroy and Ahmad Vahdat (Telegraph of London) report that Iraqi tribal leader Farhad Lohoni is stating that eye witnesses (his family members) saw the Americans seized by Iranians who were in Iraqi territory and the Iranians were allegedly part of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Meanwhile Rahmat al-Salaam (Asharq Alawsat) reports that the governments of Iraq and Iran met "to discuss border problems and implementation of the Algiers Agreement." Kareem Abedzair (Azzaman) reports on the meeting as well and notes promises on both sides to create more "border controls."
Saturday, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton released a statement on Ken Bacon, "The United States and the world lost a great humanitarian leader with the passing today of Ken Bacon, President of Refugees International. Most Americans remember Ken as the unflappable civilian voice of the Department of Defense, where he served with distinction as spokesperson for many years. But for millions of the world's most vulnerable people -- refugees and other victims of conflict -- Ken was an invaluable source of hope, inspiration and support. From Centeral Africa to South Asia to the Americas, Ken shone the spotlight on the causes of humanitarian suffering, and served as an impassioned yet reasoned advocate for the principles of humanitarian protection and assistance. We will miss Ken, but we will be inspired by the contributions he has made and the example he has set." Refugees International notes he was 64-years-old and "died . . . [Saturday] morning from an agressive melanoma that spread into his brain." They also note:
In 2006, Mr. Bacon pushed Refugees International to investigate the plight of Iraqi refugees at a time when no one was willing to acknowledge or speak out about this matter. Drawing on the findings of Refugees International's field research teams, Mr. Bacon was a leader in pushing the U.S. government and the UN to recognize the world's fastest growing refugee crisis at that time. His advocacy with senior administration officials and key members of Congress, such as Senator Edward Kennedy, was instrumental in achieving extensive press coverage and policy discussions on Iraqi displacement, the creation of a State Department task force on the problem, a sharp increase in international assistance for displaced Iraqis, and greater numbers of Iraqis are being resettled in this country.
For approximately 25 years, worked for the Wall St. Journal, first as a correspondent and then as an editor. Stephen Miller (Wall St. Journal) explains, "Mr. Bacon lived simply in Washington, riding a bicycle to work as a reporter, and walking to work as a Pentagon spokesman. He was legendarily frugal with the air conditioning in his family's townhouse in D.C.'s scorching summers. In 1994, he responded to incoming Secretary of Defense [William J.] Perry's summons to the Pentagon, where issues like U.S. involvement in Bosnia and Haiti dominated the agenda. As a former reporter, he mixed well with the Washington press corps and was retained by the subsequent defense secretary, William S. Cohen." Matt Schudel (Washington Post) adds, "Survivors include his wife of 43 years, Darcy Wheeler Bacon of Washington and Block Island; two daughters, Katharine Bacon of Brookline, Mass., and Sarah Bacon of Brooklyn, N.Y.; his father, Theodore S. Bacon of Peterborough, N.H.; a brother; and two grandchildren." The family is asking that those who wish to note the passing make a donation to Refugees International instead of sending flowers.
And finally, we'll note this from Sherwood Ross' "America's Warfare State" (Information Clearing House):
"On my last day in Iraq," veteran McClatchy News correspondent Leila Fadel wrote August 9th, "as on my first day in Iraq, I couldn't see what the United States and its allies had accomplished. ... I couldn't understand what thousands of American soldiers had died for and why hundreds of thousands of Iraqis had been killed." Quite a few oil company CEO's and "defense" industry executives, however, do have a pretty good idea of why the war Fadel deplored is being fought. As Michael Cherkasky, president of Kroll Inc., said a year after the Iraq invasion boosted his security firm's profits 231 percent: "It's the Gold Rush." What follows is a brief look at some of the outfits that cashed in, and at the multitudes that got took. "Defense Earnings Continue to Soar," Renae Merle wrote in The Washington Post on July 30, 2007. "Several of Washington's largest defense contractors said last week that they continue to benefit from a boom in spending on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan..." Merle added, "Profit reports from Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics and Lockheed Martin showed particularly strong results in operations in the region." More recently, Boeing's second-quarter earnings this year rose 17 percent, Associated Press reported, in part because of what AP called "robust defense sales." But war, it turns out, is not only unhealthy for human beings, it is not uniformly good for the economy. Many sectors suffer, including non-defense employment, as a war can destroy more jobs than it creates. While the makers of warplanes may be flying high, these are "Tough Times For Commercial Aerospace," Business Week reported July 13th. "The sector is contending with the deepening global recession, declining air traffic, capacity cuts by airlines, and reduced availability of financing for aircraft purchases."
iraq
cindy sheehan
reuters
the washington posternesto londonocnnbbc newsnatalia antelavanprall things considereddeborah amoshuman rights watch
laith hammoudimcclatchy newspapers
adam ashtonaseel kamimichael christiebbc newsthe telegraph of londondamien mcelroyahmad vahdatrahmat al-salaam
sahar issathe new york timesrod nordland
sam dagher
sherwood ross
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)