Monday, December 17, 2012

Ms. magazine is covering what?

Kat's "Kat's Korner: Stones release a tooth grinder" and Isaiah's  The World Today Just Nuts "The Deaths of Children" both went up last night.


children



"The Bionic Woman Season 2" is popular and should be.  The show was really a strong one and a favorite for many of us.  But e-mails I've received on the latest feature and the one the week before insist we've now covered all three seasons of so we're done and must be mistaken when we state we still have one more article to write.

We are not mistaken.  When that article runs, you'll understand if you don't already.  It'll run sometime in the next three weeks with the plan being for it to run this Sunday but that means we have to write it. 

On the topic of TV, I hope you read Ava and C.I.'s "TV: The Greed-athon" which is just wonderful. 

An e-mail wondered why, with everything going on in the world, we've started now doing two pieces on Iraq at Third?

How about: Because Iraq's getting almost no US coverage.

For example, Friday Nouri al-Maliki sent the Iraqi military to storm . . . a TV station that had been airing critical reports on government corruption.  The station has been shut down in Iraq.  Everyone should be covering that.  C.I. was the first to cover it in English and she covered it Saturday night.  Third was the second to cover it in English.  I'd love to tell you that the US press has now picked up on the story.  They haven't.  But you can read about it in English at Rudaw, for example.

For example, the US Defense Dept. signed an agreement with Iraq that allows US forces back into Iraq.  Kind of big news.  Kind of surprised the American media continue to ignore it.

Ms. magazine's blog is as useless as always.

Today, they're highlighting fashion and beauty bloggers.

WTF.

They've done Mommy bloggers too.

They do everything but highlight the women like C.I. who do serious work every damn day.  She attends Congressional hearings just so she can report on them.  Who else reports on Congressional hearings?

No one.

She reads eight different Arabic Iraq news outlets every day just to cover Iraq.  Who else does that?

No one.

But by all means, Ms., set back the cause of womanhood 100 years and serve up your damn stupid 'tributes' to bloggers who really don't do anything.

Before someone e-mails me, I said C.I.  I didn't present myself as something to be written of.

C.I. does real work.  She does it seven days a week.  She's never taken a day off online since she started The Common Ills over eight years ago.  (I should have noted the anniversary, instead it just slipped by.)  She does serious work, tackling real issues.

But by all means, go waste Ms.' time and it's image by covering 'beauty bloggers.'


I guess it shouldn't surprise me.  They were happy, after all, to put figurehead Nancy Pelosi on the cover.  But in reality, Patty Murray, in the US Senate, works harder than anyone.  She Chairs one of the most important committees (Senate Veterans Affairs Committee), she was on the Super Congress, she's on the Appropriations Committee, etc. 

But Patty Murray doesn't get covered by Ms. magazine.

The women who do the real work never do get the coverage, do they?

"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):

Monday, December 17, 2012.  Chaos and violence continue,  Nouri shuts down a satellite channel critical of him -- shuts down by using the military, tensions continue between Baghdad and Erbil,  the United Nations acknowledges receiving daily reports of torture in Iraqi prisons, a US Senator passes away, and more.
Iraq was slammed with violence today.  Al-Shorfa notes that "Iraqi security forces raised their alert to the maximum level on Monday."   AFP observes today's "violence comes after a string of attacks killed 19 people and wounded 77 yesterday."  Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) also notes today is the "second day of deadly attacks." Kitabat sees today as one when terror spreads across Iraq.     AFP counts 48 dead and UPI counts over one hundred injured.  Emily Alpert (Los Angeles Times) offers, "The explosions are a sign of the tensions simmering in Iraq nearly one year after the exit of U.S. troops. No armed group immediately said it was responsible for the attacks, according to news service reports, but outside analysts say mounting violence has been fueled by spiraling tensions in the Kurdish north and as Sunni Arab militants try to reassert control across the country."
Today's violence included car bombings, roadside bombings, sticky bombings, mortars and shootings.  Alsumaria reports a Ramadi car bombing claimed 4 lives and left seven injured and the photo shows blood flowing in the street while a double bombing in Tuz Khurmato left 5 dead and twenty injured.  All Iraq News adds that, en route to Samarra, a bus carrying Iranian pilgrims was targeted with a car bombing resulting in eleven of them being injured (it was a suicide car bombing -- the driver of the car is dead).  Reuters notes four bombs went off in Baquba resulting in 1 death and five people being injured.  Al Bawaba reports an armed attack to the west of Tikrit that left 1 police officer dead and three more injured and that a car bomb then went off killing 4 more people and injuring two more police officers.  Al Bawaba also reports, "Three Iraqi soldiers were killed by a roadside bomb in Al-Buslaibi village near Baghdad while on patrol, according to the military."  BBC News emphasizes a truck bombing outside Mosul which resulted in 7 deaths in a Shabak village, "The Shabak, who number about 50,000 and live between the Mosul plane and Baashiqa, have their own distinct language and belief system."  Al-Shorfa notes that the Ministry of Defence is boasting that they stopped a bombing targeting power transmission towers in Diyala.
Baghdad, 17 December 2012 – The Special Representative of the Secretary-General (SRSG) for Iraq, Mr. Martin Kobler, strongly condemned the attacks that have claimed dozens of lives across Iraq since yesterday, in many cases targeting civilians.
"The attacks in the disputed internal areas further aggravate the tensions there," Mr. Kobler said. "I call on all parties to engage in inclusive dialogue and to urgently work on defusing the situation to prevent an escalation.  The United Nations stands ready to facilitate if requested to do so."
Mr. Kobler extends his condolences to the families of those who were killed and his wishes for the speedy recovery of those who were injured.

As Mohammed Tawfeeq noted, Sunday was a day of violence as well.  Iraq Body Count counts 17 dead on Sunday.  Reuters noted that a Jalawla car bombing claimed the lives of 2 Peshmerga recruits and left twelve more injured including Cerwan Mohammed Ameen who states, "I woke up later to find myself in the hospital and I saw my friends near me."  That was only one of many attacks in Iraq today.  Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) reported that and also an armed attack on a Tarmiya military checkpoint which claimed 3 lives and left four people injured."  Alsumaria reported a Kirkuk bombing and mortar attack left 8 dead and that the number injured is fifty-two, that a Kirkuk sticky bombing claimed the life of 1 police officer, a group of school children were kidnapped in Alrfieat, a Riyadh armed attack left one Sahwa injured, assailants stole 400 million Iraqi dinars from a Kirkuk bank, a Baji car bombing injured four police officers, a Qasim al-Khayyat roadside bombing  injured a police officer and the brother of the Governor of Diwaniyah was shot dead.  Of Kirkuk, Xinhua observes, "The oil-rich city has been the center of contention for recent weeks. The central government established a new operation command to cover the disputed area, which angered the Kurdish regional government who later sent reinforcement troops to the area, causing a military confrontation. The tension was then defused by President Jalal Talabani under whose mediation the two sides agreed to withdraw troops."
Citing the questionable Iraqi Ministries of Defense, Health and Interior,  Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) notes 166 people died in Iraq last month.  Iraq Body Count counts 116 killed in violence this month through yesterday.  if you add that to today's figure of at least 48 dead, you get 164.  So at the half-way point of the month, the reputable death toll (that would be Iraqi Body Count) is two short of the government total for last month.

The prolonged days of violence come as Al Mada notes Iranian media is reporting that Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani (the highest religious authority in Iraq) has warned Nouri that he is dangerously close to setting off a war inside Iraq and has called on him to stop making statements that could further inflame tensions between Erbil (capital of the Kurdish Regional Government) and Baghdad.
Along with violence, the weekend brought additional bad news.  Saturday, The Iraq Times reported that cable channel Baghdadi was surrounded by the Iraqi military on Friday and they forced everyone out and then shut the station down.  They also noted that Nouri ordered the closure.  The Iraq Times reported that Iraqiya spokesperson Maysoon al-Damalouji declared that Nouri is attempting to rebuild the Republic of Fear (a reference to the days of Saddam Hussein) and decried the closing of Baghdadiya TV.
 Today Wael Grace (Al Mada) reports Nouri took to Facebook to insist that he closed Al Baghdadi as a result of "financial irregularities."  He maintains that there are fees for transimission that were not paid.    Nouri is said to have taken offense at their coverage of his Russian arms deal and his handling of the Central Bank.  Earlier the Ministry of the Interior had attempted to fall on the sword.  Al Rafidayn reports they issued a statement Saturday saying it was their decision and that of the court's to close the station.  Of course, Nouri is in charge of the Ministry of the Interior.  They have no minister because Nouri never nominated anyone for Parliament to vote on.

Today the Journalistic Freedoms Observatory issues a statement noting their deep concern over press freedom in Iraq and they call on Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi to open an investigation immediately into the closure of satellite channel and radio station Al Baghdadi.  The press organization states that the Parliament is the body responsible for ensuring the future of democracy in Iraq and the future for freedom of expression.  They see the closure of the satellite TV channel and radio station as another means to reduce the role of media in Iraq and to prevent the exposure of corrutpion.  They decry the use of armed forces on the station and the forced departures of the employees from the building.


Al Mada reports the National Union of Iraqi Journalists is also protesting the closure and saying it represents a reduction of freedom of the press and liberty.  Moqtada al-Sadr is a cleric and movement leader with a significant bloc in Parliament.  Hiwa Osman (Rudaw) weighs in noting:
Whoever advised the premier to order the closure should be sacked.  But then, Maliki may have to sack himself, because in all likelihood he probably listened to his own advice, adding yet another blunder to his long list of blunders.
The decision lacks common sense, and gained nothing but more disgrace for a leader who has shown that he possesses only a single trait of leadership: Authoritarian rule – of a type that no longer has any place in Iraq.
Since the closure, social media pages have been chattering with praise for Baghdadiya and vitriol for Maliki, who is being likened to the ousted dictator Saddam Hussein. In order to silence the criticism about him on Facebook, maybe Maliki should consider clamping down on Iraq's 2.5 million Facebook users, or perhaps on the Internet itself.
The number of Baghdadiya viewers spiked after Maliki's order, with many viewers watching to learn about the premier's move. Even though Baghdadiya can no longer report from Iraq, it continues to report on the country from its Cairo headquarters and other venues. Maliki, in contrast, has no powerful medium to explain his side of the story.
MP Hussein al-Mansouri is with the Sadr bloc and he tells Wael Grace (Al Mada) that the closure was the result of the reporting the channel did on the corruption in the Russian arms deal.

Nouri's a tyrant.  And among the scandals he faces is the reports of abuse in Iraqi prisons.  Al Mada is reporting that Martin Kobler, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's special envoy in Iraq, is stating that UNAMI receives daily reports about abuses taking place in Iraqi prisons and that, in the next few days, they plan to issue a statment on the matter.  It's just one scandal after another for Nouri and his attacks on the press will not stop the truth from coming out.


People leaving comments at the Iraq Times article about the closure note Sabah al-Saadi had revelations about Nouri to make and they see the closure as a way to silence him.  As the week drew to a close, MP Sabah al-Saadi found himself suspended by Nouri's State of Law. That has not silenced him.   Ayad al-Tamimi (Al Mada) reports that today he accused Nouri and his staff of stealing public money and abusing power.  Citing documents noted in an Office of Financial Supervision report, al-Saadi says that, in the last six years, Nouri has managed to steal $42 million.  Kitabat notes that the accusations were made at a press conference held in front of Parliament.

Though Nouri may dismiss the accusations, it's worth recalling that the week started with accusations against Nouri.  Monday the Iraq Times reported Ahmed Chalabi was calling out Nouri's budget noting that Nouri's office alone has a budget eleven times greater than the budget for the Ministry of Planning. 
And if you're not getting why Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani and the United Nations are expressing concern about the state of Iraq, remember that tensions also continue between Baghdad and Erbil over the disputed areas.  Nouri sent Tigris Operation Command forces into the areas and that kicked off a new crisis which lead to them engaging in a military stand-off with the Peshmerga (elite Kurdish military force under the command of the Kurdish Regional Government).  Iraqi President Jalal Talabani announced Thursday that a deal had been agreed to.  Saturday  AP offered a very strong analysis by Adam Schreck of the disputes, the history and where things stand now.  It stands not just as history because the tensions haven't vanished.
Saturday, All Iraq News reported Nouri was verbally attacking the KRG President Massoud Barzani while Alsumaria reported Barzani stated that Nouri has committed constitutional violations including by introducing the Tigris Operation Command into northern Iraq.  Barzani most likely refers to Nouri failing to get Parliamentary approval on command of the forces -- the Constitution requires that.  He may also be referring to the powers the Constitution left to the provinces, Nouri also violated that as well. But mainly, he refers to Article 140.  Nouri became prime minister in 2006.  The Constitution calls for Article 140 to be implemented to resolve the disputed areas (by census and referendum).  For six years now, Nouri has refused to follow the Constitution and implement Article 140. As the two exchange statements, you may be reminded that Jalal said on Thursday this was over.  It's back on (using the media to trade barbs) so that may call into question Jalal's confidence over the agreement supposedly reached as well. Even more so when you grasp that Barzani is stating Nouri is pushing a Kurdish-Arab war.  As the Iraq Times reported yesterday, the 'truce' Jalal announced appeared to be over.  Today Aseel Kami (Reuters) points out, "Neither Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki nor Kurdistan President Massoud Barzani stand to benefit from letting the standoff slide into conflict, but they may try to use troop movements to shore up support with their constituents, diplomats and analysts say."

Al Mada explains this row is over Barzani's declaring the disputed areas are Kurdish, belonging to Kurdistan. If Nouri disagrees with that, you put it to rest by implementing Article 140.  Until you do that, you're just a whiner.  Al Mada's "Picture of the day" today is of a smiling Barzani and a smiling Moqtada al-Sadr (cleric and movement leader) shaking hands.  Meanwhile, Nouri's State of Law staged a walk-out during today's session of Parliament with Alsumaria explaining it was over a law on judges.
Dropping back to Monday's snapshot:

Today Nouri pretended to care about Palestinians. I'm not in the mood to cover his propaganda. He has been prime minister for over six years now. And Palestinians in Iraq were herded into camps, really unprotected from the elements and treated worse than animals. (Here and here for more on the topic.) When they've managed to leave those camps, it has not been pretty. Just a few months ago, Ali Abunimah (Electronic Intifada) was reporting on one group of Palestinian refugees. In an attempt to muster some regional support for his iffy position, Nouri wanted to grandstand on the back of Palestinians after being behind their mistreatment in Iraq for over six years now.

Tuesday, the Iraq Times called Nouri out for his "crocodile tears" on this topic and Thursday, Human Rights Watch's issued:



(Baghdad) -- Iraqi authorities should investigate allegations of torture and unfair trials of Palestinians in Iraqi prisons. A recently concluded conference in Baghdad attended by the Iraqi president, Jalal Talabani, and the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, addressed concerns about Palestinians held in Israeli jails, but did not examine allegations of serious abuses against Palestinians in Iraqi custody.

The Iraqi prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, opened the Baghdad conference on December 11, 2012, declaring support for "the rights of the Palestinian prisoners who languish in Israeli occupation jails," and stated that Iraq "is determined to be at the forefront of the efforts advocating peoples' rights and freedoms." Neither he nor other Iraqi officials commented on prisoners' and family members' allegations that Iraqi courts convicted two Palestinians based on coerced confessions that the men recanted in court, Human Rights Watch said. One of the men received a death sentence and has been transferred to a prison where the Ministry of Justice usually carries out executions.

"Prime Minister al-Maliki's claim to support Palestinian prisoners is brutally ironic given Iraq's record of torture and ill-treatment of detainees in its own prisons, including Palestinians held there," saidJoe Stork, deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. "The prime minister should order an immediate investigation into the Palestinians' credible claims of torture and unfair trials and cancel any plans to execute them."

Ahmad Amer Abd al-Qadir Mohammed, 30, a Palestinian born in Iraq, was sentenced to death in May 2011. The Rusafa Criminal Court verdict said that Iraqi security forces arrested Mohammad on July 21, 2006, in the al-Zayouna district of Baghdad. The first time his family received news of his whereabouts, they said, was over a year later, when a police officer contacted the family, informed them that Mohammad was in prison, and demanded US$200 to allow them to speak to him.

Mohammad's family visited him at a detention center in the Baladiyat district of Baghdad in August 2007. They told Human Rights Watch that they were horrified to see him in what one family member said was "very bad shape." His body bore "marks of torture," including visible scars from burns. Mohammad told his family that his interrogators had drilled through his left hand, broken his right foot, poured scalding hot tea on his body, and put salt on his burns. To end the torture, Mohammad confessed that he was a member of an armed group that intended to plant explosives.

Baghdad's Rusafa Criminal Court sentenced Mohammad to death following a trial that led to allegations of serious violations of his right to a fair trial. The defense lawyers said that witnesses gave conflicting testimony. Mohammad withdrew his confession in court, stating that it had been coerced with torture, and the court took note of a forensic medical report by the Ministry of Health documenting scars on his body consistent with torture.

The court convicted Mohammad based on his withdrawn confession, however, according to court documents Human Rights Watch obtained. In October, he was transferred to a prison in Camp Justice, notorious for its death row. He remains there awaiting a decision on his lawyers' petition for a retrial alleging flagrant irregularities in his case.

Iraqi authorities should suspend the death sentence and conduct a full and independent investigation into Mohammad's allegations of torture, Human Rights Watch said.

Mahmoud Mohammad Kamal Ahmad, a 30-year-old Iraq-born Palestinian, also was convicted based on a recanted confession. Sources close to Ahmad told Human Rights Watch that he was initially detained on March 17, 2007, when he presented a fake ID at a police checkpoint in the height of Iraq's sectarian conflict. Ahmad has told these sources that interrogators tortured him "in many ways" for six months to force him to "admit to killing Iraq troops and raping Iraqi women." His interrogators broke his leg, dislocated his shoulder, broke some of his teeth, and threatened to kill his mother and sister, he said.

Human Rights Watch obtained a copy of a medical examination by the Ministry of Health's Forensic Medical Institute conducted on August 10, 2008, more than a year after his arrest and initial interrogation. The report documents scars on various parts of his body, including "scars on his right eyebrow, nose and chin area, right elbow, left thumb, right palm and penis" that were older than six months.

Ahmad confessed to membership in the armed group Tanthim al-Tawhid wa al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidain, to having planted explosives in 2006, and to killing Americans. At his trial, he recanted his confession, claiming that it was obtained under torture. The prosecution did not provide any other evidence against him.

The court convicted Ahmad on December 15, 2009, apparently solely on the basis of his recanted confession. On February 22, 2010, the public prosecutor submitted an objection to the verdict, stating that the evidence against Ahmad was insufficient and demanding his release. Ahmad's own "confession" stated that he had participated in terrorist acts in February, March, and October 2006 – which the prosecutor said was impossible since he had been detained from January 25, 2005 until June 25, 2006, at Camp Bucca Prison. Nevertheless, the Court of Cassation upheld the verdict.

Relatives of Palestinian prisoners in Iraqi jails have repeatedly called on Palestinian Authority representatives to intervene on behalf of their relatives in Iraq. Human Rights Watch has been unable to verify whether Palestinian authorities have requested to visit Mohammad or Ahmad in their respective detention centers in Iraq, or to arrange adequate legal representation for them.

Under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, ratified by Iraq in 1963, consular officers or their authorized representatives "shall have the right to visit a national of the sending State who is in prison, custody, or detention, to converse and correspond with him and to arrange for his legal representation."

"The 'Conference on International Solidarity with Palestinian Prisoners in Israeli Occupation Jails' is a perfect opportunity for Palestinian Authority representatives to fulfill their obligation to their citizens to help protect them in jails in Iraq, and anything less would be pure hypocrisy," Stork said. "Iraqi and Palestinian authorities alike need to live up to their promises."
New topic, Baha Mousa was an Iraqi whose 'crime' was working at a hotel -- possibly seeing British soldiers steal money as well.  Baha was guilty of nothing but was terrorized and then rounded up and taken into British custody where he was beaten until he died.  From the July 13, 2009 snapshot:


Moving over to England, Matthew Weaver (Guardian) notes that Iraqi Baha Mousa's death at the age of 26 while in British custody in September 2003 is the subject of a public inquiry in England which began today and that, "A central issue of the inquiry is why five 'conditioning techniques' -- hooding prisoners, putting them in stress positions, depriving them of sleep, depriving them of food and water, and playing white noise -- were used on Iraq detainees.  The techniques, inflicted on IRA suspects, were banned in 1972 by then prime minister, Edward Heath."  The Telegraph of London offers that Baha "was beaten to death" while in British custody, "sustaining 93 separate injuires, including fractured ribs and a broken nose."  The Telegraph also notes that the inquiry was shown video of Corporal Donald Payne yelling and screaming, "shouting and swearing at the Iraqis as they are force to main painful 'stress position'." Julian Rush (Channel 4) offers a video report of the hearing thus far and what the inquiry is supposed to explore over the next year. BBC explains the Sir William Gage led inquiry will explore four segments:

• The history of "conditioning" techniques, like hooding, used by UK troops while questioning prisoners from Northern Ireland in the early 1970s to the invasion of Iraq in March 2003                             

• What happened to Mr Mousa and other Iraqi detainees          

• Training and the chain of command                           

• Events since 2003 and any recommendations for the future   



Back in June,  ITV reported of Dr. Derek Keilloh:

He is then said to have failed to conduct an adequate examination of Mr Mousa's body after death and failed to notify a superior officer of the circumstances of his death. He faces similar claims relating to two other detainees he examined after Mr Mousa's death.
His account of those three examinations through witness statements given at the time, and maintained in interview under caution, at a court martial and at the public inquiry, are said to be "untrue".

Today, Andrew Johnson (Belfast Telegraph) reports the latest, "A former British Army doctor has been found guilty of attempting to cover up the death of an Iraqi civilian who was fatally beaten by British troops in 2003, and of failing to protect other detainees."  Peter Magill (Lancashire Telegraph) notes of the Baha Mousa inquiry,  "Another detainee, Ahmed Al Matari, who had also been seen by Dr Keilloh at the detention centre after being kicked in the kidneys and legs, accused him of behaving like a 'criminal' during."  Press TV adds, "Britain's Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service will now decide what penalty the British doctor will face."  The editorial board of Scotland's Herald weighs in, "Army medics cannot afford to be squeamish but ignoring such brutality amounts to a betrayal of all the servicemen and women who behave decently and within the rules. It also acts as a recruiting sergeant for extremism and destroys at a stroke any goodwill built up with the local population. It is shameful that it has taken so long to uncover the truth. Though maltreatment of detainees may not have been routine, the fact that a number of other such inquiries are still crawling through the system suggests this was more than the work of a 'few bad apples'."
In the United States, a member of Congress has passed away.  Ken Dilanian (Los Angeles Times) notes that Senator Daniel Inouye died today and goes on to report on the life of the 88-year-old Senator.   At the Senator's online office, his biography includes:
Although he was thrust into the limelight in the 1970s as a member of the Watergate Committee and in 1987 as Chairman of the Iran-Contra Committee, he has also made his mark as a respected legislator able to work in a bipartisan fashion to enact meaningful legislation.
[. . .]
Senator Inouye has championed the interest of Hawaii's people throughout his career. With his support, Hawaii's infrastructure has been strengthened, its economy diversified, and its natural resources protected and restored. For local residents, particularly Native Hawaiians, whose history and welcoming culture give the state its defining characteristics, Senator Inouye has increased job training and employment opportunities, provided more community healthcare, and provided support services and research to help small businesses and diverse sectors, from agriculture to high technology.
His imprint is seen on all of the state's islands through initiatives such as Honolulu and Neighbor Island bus service, steady construction jobs in support of military infrastructure, the diversification of agriculture, the birth of the Kauai High Technology Center and the rise of the Pacific Missile Range Facility, the launch of the Maui supercomputer, the expansion of national parks and wildlife refuges in Hawaii, and the protection of Hawaiian monk seals, sea turtles, the alala (Hawaiian crow), the nene goose and coral reefs.
Senator Inouye got his start in politics in 1954 when he was elected to the Territorial House of Representatives; soon after his election, his Democratic colleagues, well aware of Inouye's leadership abilities, selected him as their Majority Leader. In 1958 he was elected to the Territorial Senate. When Hawaii became a state in 1959, he was elected the first Congressman from the new state, and was re-elected to a full term in 1960. He was first elected to the U.S. Senate in 1962 and is now serving his ninth consecutive term.
On May 24, 2008, Senator Inouye married Irene Hirano, who is President of the U.S.-Japan Council. He was married for nearly 57 years to Margaret Awamura Inouye, a former instructor at the University of Hawaii, who passed away on March 13, 2006.
He has a son, Ken, who is married to Jessica Carroll from Rochester, New York, and a granddaughter Mary Margaret "Maggie" Inouye.
Senator Patty Murray is the Chair of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee.  Her office issued the following today:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 17, 2012
CONTACT: Murray Press Office
(202) 224-2834
Senator Murray's Statement on the Passing of Senator Inouye
"Danny Inouye was an American hero of the highest order.  As a soldier he broke barriers with his heroism, as a proud Hawaiian he committed his life's work to serving the people of his state, and as a legislator he earned the admiration of everyone he worked with on both sides of the aisle, including me.
"He will be particularly missed among the people of the Pacific Northwest, many of whom will never realize the enduring legacy he has had in investing in our infrastructure, bolstering our economy, and keeping our military installations strong.
"When the truly remarkable Senators of our time are discussed Senator Inouye's name will always be right at the top.  He gave everything he had for his country and for the state he served since being elected its very first Congressman.
"My thoughts are with his family and loved ones at this difficult time.  I also know that in time all that he achieved and stood for will be appropriately honored and celebrated here in Washington D.C. and back in Hawaii."
###
Matt McAlvanah
Communications Director
U.S. Senator Patty Murray
202-224-2834 - press office
202--224-0228 - direct
matt_mcalvanah@murray.senate.gov
News Releases | Economic Resource Center | E-Mail Updates
Senator Patty Murray's office
 
Senator Murray's YouTube Channel
 
Senator Murray's Press Office Twitter Account
 
RSS Feed for Senator Murray's office
US House Rep Jeff Miller is the Chair of the House Veterans Affairs Committee.  His office issued the following statement from him today:
I am saddened by the news this evening of Senator Inouye's passing.  He was one of the last World War II veterans in Congress, and a leading veteran advocate for more than 50 years.  His selfless service to our nation dates back well before his time on Capitol Hill, where in hard battle on the fields of Italy in 1945 his actions resulted in being bestowed the Medal of Honor.  With his passing, we remember the bravery and dedication of the Greatest Generation, and with each day that sets, we mourn all who battled through this life to find reward in the next.
cnn
Posted by at

Friday, December 14, 2012

Jane Mayer's an idiot

Pre-2007, if Jane Mayer had written something or spoken, I would weigh it.  She was really something back then.

But she decided to become a cheap, tacky whore and lost her mind and integrity in the process.  She's spent forever and a day in the last years whining about Republicans, whining about Christians (I am a Christian) and writing garbage that wasn't worthy of publication.

She's a whore.  That's all she'll ever be.

She was the leading voice on Guantanamo in the press.  But Barack got elected promising to close Guantanamo and didn't so Whore Mayer had to find something else to write about because she only holds Republicans accountable.

Now the haggard looking whore goes after Katharyn Bigelow.  (Disclosure, I have met Bieglow.  She is a nice person.  She's also someone of the left.)

David Poland (MCN) takes on some of Mayer's crazy.

Good for him.  Let's take on another aspect.  Bigelow is attacked by these lunatics because she is a woman.  We saw it before with her previous film that a bunch of "Iraq Veterans" Against the War attacked. 

I'm tired of the left trash.  I'm tired of all the garbage from these asswipes who don't give a damn about anything.

Unlike Whore Mayer, I call out torture.  I called it out under Bush (like Mayer) and I call it out under Barack.  I call out the Drone War as well.  Whores like Mayer fall silent when a Democrat is in the White House.

Trashy Whore Jane Mayer thinks she can hide form her journalistic failings  by attacking a film.



Ava and C.I. called out the Whore earlier this year in "TV: When sitcoms preach, public affairs go funny:"
And what better guest to embrace self-parody than Jane Mayer, The New Yorker writer who gave a damn about the abuse in the Guantanamo Bay prison until Barack Obama was sworn in and oversaw it. In other words,  Jane Mayer's one of those people who've spent the last few years pissing all over herself in public while people point and snicker.

These days, she dabbles at writing with one article after another that's supposed to scare people into voting for Barack Obama.  What should really scare people is how delusional Jane Mayer is.

Attempting to expose religious conservative Bryan Fischer, Mayer babbled on about how his organization (American Family Association) compared Barack to Hitler.  Mayer was shocked and couldn't stop babbling about that.  She apparently was hopped up on too many drugs in the '00s to notice when the same comparisons were made about Bully Boy Bush and Hitler.

 Explaining why she churns out the meaningless crap of late, Mayer insisted, "Well, I was down in Mississippi actually covering the [Rick] Santorum campaign [for the GOP presidential nomination] and interviewing lots of supporters of Santorum.  And what caught my eye was their opinions were so viciously anti-Obama, not just that they were politicallly opposed, but they were really worked up about it."

Imagaine that.  Right-wing Christian Republicans who supported Rick Santorum were not embracing Barack.  Who could have guessed?  Anyone with half a brain -- anyone except Jane Mayer.


How bad was it?  A former producer and First Amendment supporter told us after hearing the interview, "If I was still doing TV, I'd turn that into a sitcom called Dumb Bitch."

And whether you'd call it that or something else, it was one embarrassment after another.  There was Mayer coming off like an out-of-touch elitist who really didn't know a damn thing about the country that she lived in and was begging to be ridiculed as she babbled on, "And what you begin to realize is out in the country, if you're from the East Coast, where I live, that there is a completely alternative universe and a completely alternative media universe. And there are even alternative sets of facts that they put out."


There was a story, a small story, in what Mayer had in front of her.  It was about a homophobic preacher.  But she was so out of touch with American that she repeatedly lost sight of that.  Which is how you got Mayer being incredulous that "sixty-six percent of the Republican voters in Mississippi don't believe in Darwin's theory of evolution.  They believe that the human race was created as told in Genesis!"  This shocked her.

What should have shocked her was that she's claiming 66% of Mississippi residents don't believe in evolution.  That's actually a left-wing lie.  We hadn't heard that number before so we had to search it out.  When we did we found numerous left-wing sites tossing "66%" around and linking to this PPP poll which actually found 60% of Mississippi Republicans saying that they did not believe in evolution. But when you're filled with hate and ignorance, like Jane Mayer, you just add 6% to the actual poll.

In the real world, a place Mayer's passport bears no stamp from, that's a fairly standard figure.  Gallup's 2009 survey found only 39% of Americans believed in evolution (25% said no, 36% said no opinion).

"They believe that the human race was created as told in Genesis!" she marveled.  We're surprised she's surprised.  Earlier this month, Gallup's polling found that 46% of Americans believe in the creation story laid out in Genesis.

We wouldn't call a sitcom based on Mayer "Dumb Bitch," but as she continued babbling "Stupid Cow" seemed an apt title.  Especially when Terry Gross is noting that this organization is considered a hate group and there are so many examples that Mayer can provide of that, legitimate examples but instead she rushes in with, "I mean he's talked about how under Obama the Homeland Security Administration, he claims, is stockpiling ammunition, which he says that the Obama administration is going to, as he puts it, use on us, meaning, you know, Americans who oppose Obama, I guess."

How is that hate speech?

Because somebody doesn't like the current president, it's hate speech?

It's not hate speech.  It may be paranoia, but it's not hate speech.

And Jane Mayer looks like a stupid, stupid woman.  An idiot.  An embarrassment.  The joke of her profession.  (Gina Chon would be the joke of her former profession.)

Maybe Mayer would be less stunned by what Americans think if she actually spent more time talking to them.  If that happened, she'd find out that many do believe in the creation story, that many don't believe in Darwinism, that not everyone was born in New York City, the way she was.  And getting out of her little goldfish bowl might not just make her more aware of the world around her, it might also make her a better journalist, one who could honestly address homophobia and stop getting distracted by the fact that there are people out there who will not vote for Barack Obama -- according to Gallup that's about the same number of American that are planning to vote for him.  A little more than that if third parties were included in the poll.

And that captures the idiot Jane Mayer.



"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):

Friday, December 14, 2012.  Chaos and violence continue, protests against Nouri continue for day four in Iraq, Nouri's lashing out that means he feels comfy, US House Rep Lynn Woolsey winds down her Congressional service, a needed bill that Senator Patty Murray fought for in the Senate may die because the House doesn't think it's the 'right time' to vote on it, the Pentagon releases the latest suicide data for the Army, and more.
 
 
US House Rep Lynn Woolsey was one of the creators of the Out of Iraq Caucus in the House of Representatives.  Alongside other brave voices in the House like Maxine Waters, Woolsey stood firmly against the Iraq War.  She did not seek re-election this year and this week spoke on the House floor about war and peace (video here).
 
US House Rep Lynn Woolsey:  Mr. Speaker, throughout my career in public life and even before, nothing has motivated me more than a desire to end wars and violent conflict.  When I was a small girl saying bedtime prayers or making a birthday wish blowing out the candles, I always asked for world peace.  So no surprise that, over a decade ago, I opposed the Iraq War before it even started.  It was appalling that we would invade a nation that hadn't provoked us, that had nothing to do with 9-11 and did not have weapons of mass destruction.  It was a lonely fight at that time.  But I didn't do it to be loved. It was a matter of principle.  Barbara Lee, Maxine Waters and I formed the triad, Woolsey, Waters and Lee, to organize our opposition.  We held forums, we developed an Out Of Iraq Caucus, we traveled around the country.  And in January 2005, I offered the first amendment here on the House floor calling for our troops to be brought home.  Some of my own party thought that it was a mistake, that we wouldn't get any votes or enough votes and that we would be embarrassed.  Well I told them that even if I were the only one voting to bring our troops home, I would not be embarrassed.  Well as it happened, we got 128 bi-partisan votes that very first time.  So you see, Mr. Speaker, when you lead, people follow.  Because a handful of progressive leaders and progressives in our country that were vocal and fearless, eventually public opinion turned. It turned against the Iraq War.  It turned towards peace.  If we and other outspoken political advocates hadn't ignored conventional wisdom and hadn't pressed for peace, the war in Iraq could still be going on today.  In April, Mr. Speaker, of 2004, I began speaking on this very spot of the House floor about my very strong anti-Iraq War convictions.  Eventually, these speeches focused on Afghanistan where we've now been waging war for more than 11 years despite more than 2,000 Americans dead and nearly $600 billion wasted.  Even though, we are undermining our own interests and failing to bring security and stability to Afghanistan.   Over the last eight-plus-years, I've spoken here nearly every day that I could  to drive home what a moral disaster and strategic failure these wars have been.  When constituents and others call or come up to me and thank me, I say, "But we're still there."  I don't deserve thanks until all of our troops are home.  You know, Mr. Speaker, because you've been here for many of them, my speeches haven't been just about bringing our troops home.  They've offered a new vision for global engagement. From here, I've outlined my Smart Security Platform which calls for development in diplomacy instead of invasions and occupations, civilian surges instead of military surges.  Smart Security means helping other nations educate their children, care for their sick and strengthen their democratic institutions. Smart Security says we can make America safe by building international goodwill, by empowering people with humanitarian assistance instead of sending troops or launching drone attacks.  It's the right thing to do.  It's the smart thing to do.  And it costs pennies on the dollar compared to military force. So, Mr. Speaker, today I'm delivering that message for the 444th time and my final time on the House floor to speak on five minute special order.  This is the last of my special order speeches on war and peace and Smart Security.  I'm retiring from Congress at the end of this year and I believe part of my legacy will be that I worked diligently for peace and a safer world.  So in closing, Mr. Speaker, I'd like to acknowledge that sometimes I've been accused of wanting a perfect world but I consider that a compliment.  Our founders strove for a more perfect union.  Why shouldn't we aim for a perfect world?   You see, I'm perfectly and absolutely certain that if we don't work towards a perfect world we won't ever come close to providing a safe, healthy and secure world for our grandchildren and their grandchildren.  So I thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank my wonderful staff who have helped me over the last twenty years to work for a perfect world which means peace, health and security for all.  I yield back.  Thank you all.
 
Lynn Woolsey is a Democrat who was first elected in the Novembe 1992 elections (a "Year of the Woman" in real time and the first time the genderquake was undeniable in the elections).  She has served California's sixth district.  Lynn Woolsey succeeded Barbara Boxer in the seat, Boxer, in the "Year of the Woman" 1992, was elected to the US Senate.  Greg Cahill (Pacific Sun) interviewed Lynn on her time in the US Congress.  Excerpt:
 
Now the wars are winding down, and the economy is in recovery. Why leave the job now?
 
[Lynn Woolsey:]  I'm a person whose timing has worked for her. Actually, I thought I'd be in Congress for 10 years. And then all of a sudden, zip, it's 20. I'm 75 years old. And I've gotten on an airplane every week that we're in session on a Monday or Tuesday morning and fly back on a Thursday or Friday afternoon. Week after week after week. And I'm tired of doing that. It doesn't work for my body and it doesn't work for my soul. During the last Congress, the 111th Congress, I toyed with the notion that that should be my last term. But Jared Huffman hadn't termed out in the state Legislature yet. And I wasn't 100 percent sure about that decision. So I ran and got re-elected knowing that would be my last term. [House minority leader Rep.] Nancy Pelosi asked me, "When did you know?" And I said I knew when I walked backed into Congress and said to myself, "I really wish I hadn't done it this time." I felt like, I don't know why I'm here--I don't want to be here. I didn't stop working--we worked our hearts out these last two years. But I just knew it was time. I was sick and tired of money and politics. I mean, it's going to ruin our democracy if we don't do something [about campaign finance reform]. And I gave lots of notice.
 
You're retiring from politics but it sounds as though you plan to stay quite active.
 
[Lynn Woolsey:] Oh, I am going to retire. If Lynn Woolsey doesn't learn to sit down and be calm in what I consider to be the last quarter of her life, she'll be in trouble. I want to enjoy my life without all the spin. I mean, I've raised four kids and was a working mom and active in my community. I get to sit down.
 
 
 
As a member of Congress, Lynn didn't just mouth words.  Nor did she cave when she made a stand.  Her word counted for something and she took it very seriously.  She will be missed.
 
 
 
And sad to say that as one of the strong left leaders leaves Congree, I find myself wondering if maybe on the left we just need to throw in the towel?  I wondered that not because of the loss of Lynn Woolsey in the Congress but because of the garbage by Gareth Porter at Truthout.  I'd seen him in his too long Real News Network interview and thought, "Maybe he just doesn't speak well on the subject."  But now his promised 'big piece' on counter-insurgency is out and the natural response to it is to string together numerous curse words.  Let's get two of his paragraphs in here.
 
The COIN manual ducked some central issues in the US wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan - most notably whether US troops should have been carrying out violent "cordon and search" operations, especially when they had little or no real intelligence to go on. Intent on staying within the political consensus of the military establishment, Petraeus opted not to criticize the tactic of violently invading private homes and seizing military-age males in the middle of the night in front of their families, which had become routine in Iraq.
But in one area, the manual staked out a bold new position. It called for the commander in a counterinsurgency war to influence the coverage of the war by the news media. "The media directly influence the attitude of key audiences toward counterinsurgents, their operations and the opposing insurgency," the section on "information operations" said. "This situation creates a war of perceptions between insurgents and counterinsurgents conducted continuously using the news media."
 
 
Did it duck "some central issues"?  Well Gareth did too.  Gareth's apparently opposed to searches that cart away males but that's about all he can really call out.  The very notion of counter-insurgency -- long called out on the left in past wars -- is just accepted by Porter.  As for "a bold new position," your ignorance exceeds your ethical decay.  I don't care what your damn manual told you.  I don't give a damn.  Counter-insurgency has always included the media and 'messaging.'  That you're too stupid to know that is appalling.
 
Here's the way this will go.  I'll get e-mails about how "Gareth is really trying hard and, gosh, it's not easy and if you want someone to call out David Petraeus . . ."  Gareth has a job to do.  Does he do his job or not?  No, he's not doing his job -- or he's doing it very poorly.  As for calling out Petraeus, it may be a media fad at present but here we've always called out Petraeus. 
 
If you're going to write about counter-insurgency, you need to know about it.  It's war on a native people.  The occupier tries to make a group of natives undesirable so that the rest of the population will turn on the undesirables.  To make people undesirable, you demonize them, you make it difficult for people to befriend or help them.  You do other things as well.  To do these other things, you tell yourself lies.  For example, labeling the native (non-South) Vietnamese media "propaganda" allowed counter-insurgency to target the media and to justify the lying.   Counter-insurgency includes outright murder.  People are targeted for murder to frighten the population at large.  You saw that in Iraq and you've seen it throughout the US usage of counter-insurgency.  Take the Phoenix Program during Vietnam.  As the RAND Corporation noted, while its supporters cheer the program, its "detractors condemn it as a merciless assassination campaign."  Let's go to the CIA for some whining:
 
The Phoenix program is arguably the most misunderstood and controversial program undertaken by the governments of the United States and South Vietnam during the Vietnam War. It was, quite simply, a set of programs that sought to attack and destroy the political infrastructure of the Lao Dong Party (hereafter referred to as the Viet Cong infrastructure or VCI) in South Vietnam. 1
Phoenix was misunderstood because it was classified, and the information obtained by the press and others was often anecdotal, unsubstantiated, or false. The program was controversial because the antiwar movement and critical scholars in the United States and elsewhere portrayed it as an unlawful and immoral assassination program targeting civilians.
 
 
We called it out because it was unethical and it was illegal and, yes, we called it out.  Today Gareth Porter can't even do that.  A ho-hum piece where this may be objectionable  . . . The ignorance and the cowardice is appalling.  At this late date, if we on the left can't call out counter-insurgency, that's on us, we're just pathetic and ineffective.   Via Z-Net, here's an excerpt of a January 10, 2005 broadcast, Katie Couric (then host of NBC's Today) discussing with retired Gen Wayne Downing  the article Newsweek published on the Salvador option possibly being brought to Iraq (Michael Hirsh and John Barry were the authors of the Newsweek article). 
 
 
 
"Gen. DOWNING: Well, Katie, I -- I think this term is very unfortunate because this El Salvador thing brings up the connotation of death squads, of illegal activity that took place in -- in -- by some of the El Salvadorian military 20 years ago. But I think what they're considering is to use a special -- or more special Iraqi units trained and equipped and perhaps even led by US Special Forces to conduct strike operations against this -- this insurgency, against the leaders of it, which of course is a very valid strategy, a very valid tactic. And it's actually something we've been doing since we started the war back in March of 2003.
 
"COURIC: But is this going to be used more, or in greater numbers? According to Newsweek, they're going to -- the -- the US Special Forces will train specially chosen Kurdish forces and Shiite militiamen.
 
"Gen. DOWNING: Right.
 
"COURIC: So does this signal a -- a -- I guess an escalation of this technique at least?
 
"Gen. DOWNING: I wouldn't say an escalation, Katie. I -- I think what we're looking at is -- there are already some special units formed. We have special police commandos now of the Iraqi forces which conduct these kind of strike operations. I think what we're looking at is another type of unit. In other words, they -- they've got 10 tools right now in their tool box, this is probably adding a -- an 11th or perhaps even a 12th tool. But -- but, Katie, I -- I really want to emphasize what they are going after here. These -- these insurgents leaders, these are terrorists. These are people who have been decapitating hostages. These are the people who have been planning and -- and perpetrating these suicide bombers...that has killed thousands of -- of friendly Iraqis. These are very, very legitimate targets, and actually part of the overall strategy for countering this insurgency...
 
"COURIC: But in El Salvador many innocent civilians were killed when these kind of tactics were employed. Are you concerned about that, or the possibility this will increase anti-American sentiment in the general Iraqi population?
 
"Gen. DOWNING: Katie, this has nothing to do with El Salvador. Those operations that were conducted down there were conducted by -- by renegade military leaders. This is under the control of the US forces, of the current interim Iraqi government. There -- there's no need to think that we're going to have any kind of a -- a killing campaign that's going to maim innocent civilians.
 
 
 
The government pretends that counter-insurgency has been proved to be effective.  That actually hasn't happened and I don't understand why a Gareth Porter or anyone else would accept the premise that counter-insurgency is 'good' but has a few aspects that may be troubling?  I don't get that at all.   Tom Hayden called out counter-insurgency during Vietnam.  He's one of the few voices who've called it out during the Iraq War.  In a column on Petraeus a few weeks ago, he included this paragraph:
 
As this test of wills unfolded, Petraeus, with the help of an inbred, fawning mass media, had become knwon as "the greatest soldier of his generation," the counterinsurgency strategist who staved off a dishonorable American retreat in Iraq, the guiding hand behind The U.S. Army-Marine Corps Counterinsurgency Field Manual, the man who would revive the South Vietnam "Phoenix Program" from the ashes of disgrace. The Petraeus field manual rallied a cult of true believers who have been convinced for thirty years that America's war in Vietnam would have been won if only the politicians back in the States had not pulled the plug on Phoenix because of claims of torture plus photos of emaciated Vietcong prisoners held in tiny cages. (This is all true, not a screenplay. Please see the Field Manual for more on the pacification program, pp. 73-75; see also, "Countering Global Insurgency," by Petraeus top counterinsurgency advisor, David Kllkullen, in the Small Wars Journal, November 30, 2004)
 
In that paragraph, Tom Hayden makes it clear how disgusting counter-insurgency is.  In one paragraph.  In his very long article, Gareth Porter never manages to do the same.  Click here for audio of Douglas Valentine on Between The Lines discussing the various assassination programs in the early days of the Iraq War.
 
Nicola Anderson (Independent) reports that Kallada Abdul has just become a citizen of Ireland.  Six years ago, she left Iraq due to the violence and went to Ireland where her son Dr. Mudafar Altawash had already moved to several decades ago.  At 83, it is thought that Kallada might be the oldest "to ever become a new citizen."  She is among millions of refugees who have left Iraq since the start of the Iraq War in 2003.  She is also among a small number of lucky refugees who have been granted asylum and/or citizenship in a host country.  Deborah Amos's excellent 2010 book  Eclipse of the Sunnis: Power, Exile, and Upheaval in the Middle East charts the lives of some who fled Iraq due to the violence.  Among those who have fled Iraq or moved to the KRG (Kurdistan Regional Government -- semi-autonomous region in northern Iraq) due to safety concerns are Iraqi Christians.  As  Sean McLachlan (Gadling) observed earlier this month: 
 
The Christian Community in Iraq is a lot smaller than it was in 2003 when the Coalition invaded. During the occupation, radical Muslims claimed the Christians were helping the invaders and used this as an excuse to attack them. Churches and shops were bombed and individual Christians were murdered or told to leave on pain of death.
In an interview with the BBC, the priest at St Joseph's Chaldean Church in Baghdad said that in the past nine years his parish has shrunk from 1,200 families to 300. The New York Times reports that before the war the Christian population was estimated to be as high as 1.4 million, and has now dropped to less than 500,000.
 
The violence and the targeting has led surviving Iraqi Christians to consider leaving.  Among the violence, the October 31st, 2010 attack on Our Lady of Salvation Church in Baghdad.  Today, Nouri attended the latest reported opening of the Church (this one's supposed to finally be the real one) and Alsumaria reports he used the opportunity to accuse the European Union of being responsible for Iraqi Christians leaving Iraq.  He gave a speech at the Church where he declared the EU had needed to stop encouraging Christians to leave and that all can live in Iraq in harmony. All Iraq News notes the head of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, Ammar al-Hakim attended the ceremony.  Nouri's blaming the European Union for his own failure to protect Iraqi Chrisitans.  He hasn't felt able to lash out like this since November of 2010 when he publicly attacked France for providing medical treatment for survivors of the assault on Our Lady of Salvation Church.
 
When Nouri's cocky, it's usually a sign that he's about to screw someone over.  The breathing space some believe was created yesterday when Iraqi President Jalal Talabani announced Nouri and the KRG had reached an agreement with regards to the military stand-off that was taking place in disputed areas may have just gotten a lot smaller.  With Nouri, the pattern is he makes deals that he then refuses to honor.  That's not just my opinion, Al Mada notes Nouri's refusal to honor agreements in his second term as prime minister and they zoom in on the Erbil Agreement (publishing it in full).  As they note, the longest political stalemate in Iraq followed the 2010 elections.  In those parliamentary elections that Nouri's State of Law was supposed to overwhelmingly win, the voters went another way.  Ayad Allawi's Iraqiya came in first place.  Nouri's State of Law came in second place. 
 
Per the Constitution, Jalal Talabani should have named someone from Iraqiya prime minister-designate.  Per the Constitution, that person would then have 30 days to create a Cabinet (select people, nominate them to be Ministers and have Parliament vote to approve them).  Success at that would mean the person was no longer prime minister-designate but was now prime minister.  Failure to create a Cabinet in 30 days would result in Jalal naming someone else to be prime minister-designate, per the Constitution.
 
Nouri wanted a second term.  And US President Barack Obama didn't give a damn about democracy, will of the people, the Iraqi Constitution or the Iraqi people who turned out to vote. Let's again note this from John Barry's "'The Engame' Is A Well Researched, Highly Critical Look at U.S. Policy in Iraq" (Daily Beast):



Washington has little political and no military influence over these developments [in Iraq]. As Michael Gordon and Bernard Trainor charge in their ambitious new history of the Iraq war, The Endgame, Obama's administration sacrificed political influence by failing in 2010 to insist that the results of Iraq's first proper election be honored: "When the Obama administration acquiesced in the questionable judicial opinion that prevented Ayad Allawi's bloc, after it had won the most seats in 2010, from the first attempt at forming a new government, it undermined the prospects, however slim, for a compromise that might have led to a genuinely inclusive and cross-sectarian government."
 
Bully Boy Bush installed Nouri as prime minister in 2006 (the Iraqi Parliament wanted Ibrahim al-Jafaari to be prime minister).  In 2010, Barack loved Nouri.  How do you make someone prime minister when they didn't meet the criteria outlined in the Constitution?
 
You set aside the Constitution.  Barack had the US government spend forever negotiating a contract, popularly known as the Erbil Agreement because it was signed in November of 2010 at a political meet-up held in the KRG capital of Erbil.  The US government went around asking the leaders of the political blocs what they really wanted.  A wish list was prepared.  These things were then offered in the contract in exchange for their agreeing (in the contract) to allow Nouri al-Maliki to have a second term.  He'd already held up the process by 8 months.  Eight months after the election, Iraq still didn't have a prime minister.  Nouri brought things to a stand still and was able to do that because he had Barack's support.
 
So what do you do if you're an Iraqi politician?  You can hold out forever for the Constitution and I honestly believe that's what they should have done. (I don't live in Iraq, however.  Fakhri Karim does and he's being targeted by Nouri -- Nouri's office issued a statement this week attacking the editor -- because Karim believes Iraq can be and should be everything outlined in the country's Constitution.  For that, for faith in Iraq's future, Karim is being publicly attacked by Nouri al-Maliki.)  But to move things forward, they signed off on the contract.  It gave Nouri a second term.
 
And what of the rewards the political leaders were supposed to receive (such as the implementation of Article 140 in the Constitution, the creation of an independent national security body, etc.)?  It just wasn't time, Nouri insisted.  Within weeks, Iraqiya was stating Nouri was breaking the contract.  The US government swore it wasn't so.  The same US government that swore it was a valid contract and that the President of the United States gave his word to fully back.  But Nouri tossed it aside -- Iraqiya was right -- and the White House revealed themselves to be a snake pit of liars and users who say anything to get what they want. (Yes, that is Barack's reputation in Iraq.  No, it's not pretty but it was earned by his actions.)
 
Since the summer of 2011 the current stalemate (Political Stalemate II) has been going on as Iraqiya, the Kurds and Moqtada al-Sadr have called for the Erbil Agreement to be implemented.  The US government has remained silent on the issue -- the White House is always silent when it's time to call Nouri al-Maliki out.
 
 
They've rewarded the tyrant -- in Republican and Democratic administrations -- who has repeatedly been caught running torture cells in prisons and detention centers.  Nouri won nothing in the recent battle which is another reason to watch him closely.  But, more importantly, no one else did.  The deal Iraqi President Jalal Talabani outlined basically just turns the clock back to a time right before Nouri sent the Tigris Operation Command forces into the disputed areas.  There is no concession won that Nouri will now suddenly follow the Constitution and implement Article 140 as he's required to do -- as he was supposed to some time ago.  Fakhri Karim (chair and editor of Al Mada) observes in a column today that Jalal has wasted too much time appeasing and has refused to use his powers as president to hold Nouri in check.  He notes Nouri's blatant violation of the Constituion and how, despite this increasing, Jalal just ignores it and works on repairing dialogue when he should be using his role as president to protect the Constitution.
 
He's correct.  And a growing number of people find Nouri's actions and statements outrageous and embarrassing.   Kitabat reports hundreds turned out in Nasiriyah yesterday to protest the verbal attack Nouri launched Monday on Moqtada al-Sadr and that some of the signs carried call for an Iraqi Spring -- similar to 2011's Arab Spring.  As Kitabat has previously reported, there are already plans by Iraqi youth to take to the streets in January  Protesters in Nasiriyah said Nouri was guilty of covering up corruptions and protecting thieves of the public money.  They burned photos of Nouri al-Maliki and chanted that this was the final warning.  This was only the latest protest this week following Nouri al-Maliki publicly attacking cleric and movement leader Moqtada al-Sadr in a speech on Monday.  Dropping back to Tuesday's snapshot:


In Basra and Baghdad today, protests took place against Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.  Al Mada reports photos of Nouri were burned and he was denounced loudly.  As noted in yesterday's snapshot, Nouri used a Monday speech allegedly about human rights to attack Moqtada al-Sadr -- cleric and movement leader.  Dar Addustour adds "thousands" poured into the streets in Baghdad at two o'clock in the afternoon.  As they marched to a central location, Muzaffar Square, they chanted slogans.  Nouri can take comfort in that his wasn't the only photo burned -- there were also a few photos of former leader Saddam Hussein that were set on fire.   All Iraq News notes that as the protests took place, Moqtada al-Sadr issued a statement noting that the Iraqi army must be armed but not via corrupt deals (like the Russian deal Nouri signed and then called off) and that all arms must be to defend Iraq and not used to attack Iraqis.  Please note that all three previous links have a photo of the turnout in Baghdad, it was huge.  Just how large it was may be best captured in the photo Kitabat runs.  At the Basra protest, Sheikh Khalid al-Issawi tells Al Mada that the protest is to convey the outrage over Nouri's verbal attack on Moqtada while, in Baghdad, Sheikh Taha Altablawbawi explains that the people of Sadr City, elders, intellectuals, children, all, are serving notice that attacks on Moqtada al-Sadr will not go unnoticed and will result in a response. Protester Sam Abdul-Mahdi tells Alsumaria that this is the start of protests in Basra and that Nouri should retract his attack on Moqtada.  The Iraq Times reports that Nouri ordered helicopters to fly overhead during the Baghdad protest and that some Sadrists saw that as an attempt at intimidation.
Al Mada reports that Iraqiya is warning that if changes do not take place in Iraq quickly, popular uprisings will take to the streets.  Protests were taking place around Iraq in January.  Demonstrators were calling out the disappearance of their loved ones into the 'justice system,' they were calling out the lack of jobs and the lack of basic services.  This swelled into the massive protests that took place across Iraq February 25th.  Iraqis took to the streets and, in Baghdad, Nouri sent his forces to attack.  Iraqi reporters were kidnapped by the police after covering the protests, they were then tortured and forced to sign statements saying they had not been tortured.  Haidi al-Mahdi was one of those reporters.  It was after the protests, he and some other reporters were ordering lunch and seated a table when Nouri's forces barged over, used the butt of their guns to strike people and rounded up Haidi and the other reporters.
 
 
Al Mada notes that protesters also showed their support for Moqtada on Wednesday in Baghdad, Najaf, Basra and Maysan and that they called out Nouri and burned photos of Nouri.  Al Mada reports that the protests continued in Baghdad and Najaf today for the fourth consecutive day.  If you're not aware of those protests, it's because the non-Iraqi media hasn't been reporting them.
 
Late Thursday, a Baghdad bombing took place.  Details on the numbers weren't in when we did the snapshot.  All Iraq News reports that it was 2 bombs and that 1 person died and five more were injured. And violence today?  All Iraq News reports 1 corpse was discovered in Babylon (shot to death), and a Falluja car bombing claimed 3 lives. Alsumaria notes a Samarra car bombing has claimed the life of 1 woman with sixteen injured.  The Iraq Times notes that journalist Saifi Qaisi remains missing.  Yesterday's snapshot noted, "The Journalistic Freedom Observatory also notes that Saifi Qaisi, editori-in-chief of Safir newspaper, disappeared Sunday when he left a management and editorial meeting to return home by cab but never made it home.  The fifty-year-old has a wife and three children and has been a journalist since the 1980s."  The paper notes that all the hospitals in Baghdad were contacted and that police were given information on Sunday and that he was targeted for assassination in July 2008 but survived the bombing with injuries to his head and back.  The paper also notes the murder of journalist Samir Sheikh a few weeks ago.  He was shot dead November 17th while driving his car in Baghdad.
 
 
Turning to the US,  Rick Wills (Tribune-Review) reports a memorial service was held today for Iraq War veteran and Afghanistan War veteran Major Benjamin Follansbee who "apparently hanged himself on Monday in his Fayetteville, N.C., residence".  At this point, the death is not ruled a suicide.  Yesterday, the Pentagon released their data on Army suicides for November.  In October, there were 20 possible suicides according to last month's data.  The Pentagon notes that 1 of the 20 has been ruled  to not be a suicide.  9 of the remaining 19 were confirmed suicides and "10 remain under investigation."  That's an update on October.  For November?  They believe there are 15 potential suicides and 2 have been confirmed as that while 13 remain under inviestigation.  The Pentagon statement notes: "For 2012, there have been 177 potential active-duty suicides: 113 have been confirmed as suicides and 64 remain under investigation.  Active-duty suicide number for 2011: 165 confirmed as suicides and no cases under investigation."
 
 
From service members to veterans,  June 27th, the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee -- which Senator Patty Murray is the Chair of -- held a hearing  (we covered that hearing in the June 27th and June 28th snapshots).  Tracy Keil was one of the witnesses and her testimony included:
 
My husband Matt was shot in the neck while on patrol in Ramadi, Iraq on February 24, 2007 just 6 weeks after we were married.  The bullet went through the right side of his neck, hit his vertebral artery, went through his spinal cord and exited through his left shoulder blade.  Matt instantly because a quadriplegic.  When I first saw him 3 days after he was injured I was in shock, they explained to me that he had a "Christopher Reeve type injury."  He would be on a ventilator for the rest of his life and would never move his arms or legs.
Matt and I looked at each other in his hospital room at Walter Reed and he asked me if I still loved him? I said "baby you're stuck with me!" at that moment we knew that we would be okay if we stayed in this together.  I knew that we just needed to work really hard to get Matt off his ventilator to increase his life expectancy.  Ultimately we moved to Craigh Hospital in Denver to be closer to family support.
Four weeks to the day of arriving at Craig Hospital in Denver, Matt was officially off of his ventilator and we could truly concentrate on him doing physical rehabilitation.  Matt has regained about 10% function of his left arm but not his hand.  He was feeling good and getting used to his new normal of being in a wheelchair and asking for help for everything.
It was while we were at Craigh hospital that we started talking about having a family.  Craig doctors talked to us about in vitro fertilization and recommended some doctors for us to speak to when we were ready to start a family.  We started to get really excited that even though so much had been taken away from Matt physically that we could still have the future we always dreamed of. 
My husband is the most amazing man I have ever met, he is strong, honest and loyal and he wanted us to both have everything we always wanted before his injury and we agreed that this injury wasn't the end, it was the beginning of a new life, and we were in this together.
We had our whole lives ahead of us.  Matt was just 24 when he was injured and I was 28.  We are very fortunate that he survived his injuries that day and we made a promise to each other on our wedding day "For better or worse, in sickness and in health" I meant every word and still do today.  It is a challenge for my husband and I everyday but we knew we still wanted to start a family.  I remember back when he was in rehabilitation at Craigh Hospital it's all we could talk about was when we were going to be adjusted to our new normal and when we would we be ready to have children. We always knew we had wanted children.
In 2008 we moved into a fully handicap accessible home built for us by Homes For Our Troops.  We were starting to feel like things were falling into place in our lives.  We felt like we were starting to get back on track to where we were before Matt was injured.
His injury unfortunately prevents him from having children naturally.  In mid 2008 I started asking the VA what services they could offer my husband and I to assist us with fertility.  I can remember hitting road blocks at every turn.  I decided to take things into my own hands and write letters and make phone calls to try and get anyone to listen to us that we needed help.  Fertility treatments are very expensive and since I had left my full time job we were still adjusting to living on one income.
I felt helpless and hopeless and thought that our dreams of having a family may never come true.  The VA finally said that they would cover the sperm withdrawal from my husband . . . that costs $1,000 and that they would store the sperm for us at no charge.
It was very difficult when I found out there was no help available for us from the VA or Tricare. I felt very defeated, sad, disappointed and in some ways I felt helpless.  I researched everything I could about how to get Tricare to cover some of the costs but they couldn't because it was a direct result of my husband's injury and that fell under the VA.  The VA said that they had no programs in place for this sort of thing.  I even started asking non profits to assist with the cost and they couldn't help due to the other immediate needs of injured service members.


That's the story of one family.  The Defense Dept estimates that there are nearly 2,000 veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars who have suffered injuries that could impact reproduction.  If you are a service member, you can get coverage via Tricare.  But if you are a veteran, you currently have no coverage.  Yesterday, Tracy Keil and her husband Iraq War veteran Matt Keil and their twins Faith and Matthew were in the Senate.  They were present to hear Senator Patty Murray explain from the floor why her bill, the Women Veterans and Other Health Care Improvement Act of 2012, was needed.   Murray explained, "This is about giving veterans who have sacrificed everything -- every option we have to help them fulfill the simple dream of starting a family.  It says that we are not turning our back on the catastrophic reproductive wounds that have become a signature of these wars.  It says to all those brave men and women that didn't ask questions when they were put in harm's way, that we won't let politics get in the way of our commitment to you."  Lawrence Downes (New York Times) observes, "Disabled veterans won a big, unexpected victory today: the Senate passed Senator Patty Murray's bill to expand fertility services, including in-vitro fertilization, at the Veterans Affairs Department. Ms. Murray, the Washington Democrat and chairwoman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, sponsored the bill, S.3313, to help service members whose war wounds have left them unable to have children."   Rick Maze (Marine Corps Times) states the just passed bill is already dead.  Why?  US House Rep Jeff Miller, Chair of the House Veterans Affairs Committee, supposedly doesn't want it to be brought to a vote.  As Miller's presented in a quote in that article by Maze, Miller favors it for the 113th session of Congress that will begin in January.  If that's a correct reading of Miller (and Maze is one of the country's strongest reporters so it most likely is a correct reading), Miller's fiscal responsibility that he always touches on and how important it is to be a strong steward of public monies (tax payer money) is not being followed.  There's no reason in the world that it can't be voted on in the House.  They're not even on vacation yet.  And why would you want to waste tax payer money starting the process up all over again in the 113th Congress?  The bill needs to be put to a vote.  It's not fair to veterans not to and it's not fair to tax payers.  If every bill that passed in December was put on hold until the 113th Congress (when I say 'put on hold,' I mean it's stopped in its tracks.  It will have to be revoted on in the 113th Congress, the entire process will have to start over), when are they going to accomplish anything.  Tax payers paid for the printing of the bill, for the time spent researching the bill, for the time spent writing the bill and for the time spent presenting the bill.  Tax payers have footed the bill on this.  To not vote on it in the House is to waste the tax payer dollar.
 
 
 
 
Posted by at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)