Friday, January 24, 2014

Libya

Remember the Libyan War?

The illegal war Barack started?

And how he claimed he didn't need to follow The War Powers Act?

Well a lot of people died and Black Libyans were especially targeted.

Eric Draitser (CounterPunch) reports:



The battles currently raging in the South of Libya are no mere tribal clashes. Instead, they represent a possible burgeoning alliance between black Libyan ethnic groups and pro-Gaddafi forces intent upon liberating their country of a neocolonial NATO-installed government.
On Saturday January 18th, a group of heavily armed fighters stormed an air force base outside the city of Sabha in southern Libya, expelling forces loyal to the “government” of Prime Minister Ali Zeidan, and occupying the base. At the same time, reports from inside the country began to trickle in that the green flag of the Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya was flying over a number of cities throughout the country. Despite the dearth of verifiable information – the government in Tripoli has provided only vague details and corroboration – one thing is certain: the war for Libya continues.
On the Ground
Libya’s Prime Minister Ali Zeidan called an emergency session of the General National Congress to declare a state of alert for the country after news of the storming of the air base broke. The Prime Minister announced that he had ordered troops south to quell the rebellion, telling reporters that, “This confrontation is continuing but in a few hours it will be solved.” A spokesman for the Defense Ministry later claimed that the central government had reclaimed control of the air base, stating that “A force was readied, then aircraft moved and took off and dealt with the targets…The situation in the south opened a chance for some criminals…loyal to the Gaddafi regime to exploit this and to attack the Tamahind air force base…We will protect the revolution and the Libyan people.”
In addition to the assault on the airbase, there have been other attacks on individual members of the government in Tripoli. The highest profile incident was the recent assassination of the Deputy Industry Minister Hassan al-Droui in the city of Sirte. Although it is still unclear whether he was killed by Islamist forces or Green resistance fighters, the unmistakable fact is that the central government is under assault and is unable to exercise true authority or provide security in the country. Many have begun speculating that his killing, rather than being an isolated, targeted assassination, is part of a growing trend of resistance in which pro-Gaddafi Green fighters figure prominently.


Barack is a piece of crap.  That's all he is.

There's no integrity there, there's no concern for human life.

He destroyed Libya and lied about reasons why.

It was about empire.

He destroyed a country because he's no better than a Bush.  In fact, he's worse than Bully Boy Bush.

Libya remains in tatters -- even under the thugs Barack put in charge -- and the people will have to be willing to die in order to take their country back.

Cynthia McKinney, you may remember, called out the Libyan War.

She then vanished as a guest on Democracy Now!

Because Amy Goodman sold the Libyan War.  We learned a lot about who we could trust and who we couldn't over Libya.



"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):

Thursday, January 23, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue,  Iraq's Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi speaks in DC, Martha Raddatz goes back to Iraq, the assault on Anbar continues, Barack's allegedly gotten the US Congress to cave and he'll be able to give despot Nouri al-Maliki additional weapons, and more.


Iraq's Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi is currently in the United States.  With Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi currently in exile, al-Nujaifi is the highest ranking Sunni in the Iraqi government.  This morning, he spoke at the Brookings Institution.


Speaker Osama al-Nujaifi:  We first got rid of an oppressive regime and it was followed by a military occupation then a Constitution that was written in unfavorable conditions and circumstances.  There was also a road map that was set.  The Iraqis were not able to contribute to this road map because we were in a rush.  And we wanted Iraq to be an exemplary democracy.  
The Constitution in Iraq was written under very difficult circumstances and in a very sensitive period in the country  and on the hand of politicians who suffered a lot in the past -- arrested or condemned to execution, exiled or in prison.  So the psychological environment was very hard and there were mutual fears between the Iraqi components.  This was the reason why the Constitution has some problems.  And some Articles in the Constitution can be interpreted in different ways. 
We also set up mechanisms to build institutions.  But the orientation of the Constitution was not as it should have been because of the political tension and divisions.  And the institution stipulated in the Constitution was not built as it should because of the problems.  
For instance, the Federal Supreme Court which is the highest judicial body and it rules on the conflicts between different parts of the country.  
So far, we were not able to implement it because this law needs two-thirds of the votes in the Parliament and all the political parties do not agree.  So far it is tribunal.  
Now we have courts that do exist so it is not does not have the Constitutional prerogatives to be able to rule on interpreting the Constitution or deciding if the laws are Constitutional.  That's why there are Constitutional differences between the provinces, between the provinces and Baghdad or between the legislative and the executive powers. 
All this made political life more complicated in Iraq.  And our path towards being the democratic process that we seek was not smooth. There are bad implementation of the law and selective implementation. Parliament adopted some 215 laws.  Some are very important for the stability of Iraq and for providing services to the people and for building the state as it should be built.  But some of these laws were not implemented.  They were adopted, published in the journal -- official journal -- and theoretically should have been implemented but so far they are not because there are unilateral political decisions not to implement them.  
For instance, the law on the provinces that give important prerogatives to the provinces and enough funds and means to implement the essentialization of the state.  But this law was not implemented because some in the country believe that it should not be.  
Also the law about customs, it was adopted two years ago but it is paralyzed on purpose.  
So we are facing many obstacles when it comes to building institutions and building the state of Iraq.  There is selectivity in implementing the laws.  Sometimes the law is implemented on some Iraqi parties and not on some other Iraqi parties. Hence a lack of confidence by the citizens in the political process, in the state institutions and also in the participation in the political process.  
Iraq is now facing a terrorist threat as we've seen since the beginning of the year when the change has started.  And now we need to know how to defeat terrorism at the security and at the ideological level.  
We do know that in 2007 with the surge of the American forces sectarian violence ended in the country.  And we set a plan to fight al Qaeda and the terrorist groups with the support of the Sunni clans -- most especially in Anbar -- they were armed, financed and promises that they will be part of the armed forces.  And the clans were able to defeat al Qaeda and security was restored in Anbar that represents 31% of the surface of Iraq.  So we were able to bring security back and the world is witness.  
But after this victory, there was no follow up on the promises that were given to them and they did not get their rights as, for instance, to integrate into the armed forces, to get the salaries that they need to protect them from being targeted by the terrorists.  Very few of them got salaries, those who did get salaries got salaries that were very, very low, many of them were arrested because of systematic targeting by sectarian politicians or even by al Qaeda because they wanted to undermine the rule of the tribes.  
From 2009 until a few months ago, these forces were almost completely destroyed and then al Qaeda came back stronger than before.  al Qaeda was able to paralyze the tribes and the central state did not follow up on its moral and verbal promises. 
So al Qaeda is back and it is exploiting political differences and the general feeling of frustration among the Iraqi people.  It also is exploiting the systematic corruption at the political and economic level, finding the support, finances and means in some provinces in Iraq.  And in 2013, more than 9,000 Iraqis were killed and more than 25,000 were wounded and this is the highest figure in recent years. 
So the political components in Iraq were not able to build the Iraqi political system or to implement the Constitution and to reach a genuine partnership and a genuine reconciliation.  They were not able to implement the laws as it should be and get rid of corruption and abuses and they did not respect all the Iraqi components as to represent them  in a fair manner in the armed forces.  According to the Constitution, they did not provide the provinces with enough funds. Also we did not adopt the law on hydrocarbons oil and gas which is very important to set a balanced relation between the provinces and the center for the production and exportation of oil.  
So some parties are implementing the Constitution based on their own perspective and this is hindering the building of the state, the national cohesion and is leading to more division.  And more and more people are being disappointed and do not trust the political process at this point as we have seen by the very low turnout in the last general elections [2013 provincial elections] and the ones before [2010 parliamentary elections]. We believe that Iraq is, at this point, at a crossroad.  The key to situation is clear and we can find a solution.  What we need though is a strong determination and the political will for everyone to agree on the Constitution and to forget the past, to move beyond the fears and to stop punishing the Iraqi people and move to reconciliation and prevent Iraq from sliding into even greater troubles.  
In the Kurdish provinces [Kurdistan Regional Government, three semi-autonomous provinces in northern Iraq] there was a law adopted to amnesty every one who committed a crime against the Kurdish people and worked with the previous regime.  Some of them were accused of violent crimes but they decided to amnesty everyone.  And the situation in the Kurdish provinces is stable and everyone is part of the political process.  The Kurdish provinces are now an example of security and successful investment and  wise politics.  
But in central Iraq, we are still arresting people and we are also still implementing the law on the Justice and Accountability in a partial sectarian way.  We are still banishing some of the Iraqi people who were not part of the previous regime and doing so for political reasons.  That is unfair. 
So we have failed in implementing this law.  
The political process is now in jeopardy.  
We need to act clearly and swiftly.  
The next elections are very important and could solve many problems. 
The situation should be stable and calm.  
We should put an end to the violence and the  killings and we should avoid any political measures that are provocative and the day before yesterday a decision to [create three new provinces] which led to lots of reactions.  
Also the issue of what is happening in Anbar Province. Of course, al Qaeda is there and we should fight al Qaeda and we believe so.  The tribes are fighting terrorism at this point.  But not everyone in Al Anbar Province is a terrorist.  [Some residents have been taking part in protests.] There are political demands and rights and problems that need political solutions and not military answers.  
So I am ready to answer your questions now but let me state again that Iraq is at a crossroad -- either it will move towards success and democracy and provide a successful example of a democratic country in a difficult region or, God forbid, we will move into something similar to what's taking place in Syria today.  The second option is to be expected if we do not confront the existing problems in the correct manner. 
Today, Iraq needs national reconciliation and partnership instead of the marginalization 



Okay, on the above.  This is the second week where inadequate translators were provided at a DC Iraq event.  Last week, it was Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq at the US Institute of Peace.   Brookings' translator -- a woman -- was better than the man translating at the US Institute of Peace.  He was awful.  It took him so long -- lengthy pauses -- to figure out what was being said that he would stop mid-sentence because a new person had begun to speak.

She wasn't that bad.  But "[Some residents have been taking part in protests.]"?  I have no idea what he said because she rushed through a bad translation.  She did this also with the section where I have "[create three new provinces"] which instead found her stating that the military launched campaigns in four provinces on Tuesday.

Until the end of the speech, she repeatedly used the term "confessional" when the English word for the term al-Nujaifi was using was "sectarian."  I do realize that context is a great deal.  I really think if you're translating on current events, you should know current events.  The woman did better than the man who stumbled and fumbled and left whole sections untranslated.  But this really shouldn't be considered acceptable.  As I've noted before I have a friend who runs a translation firm.  I told her about this experience and asked if it's considered acceptable?  She said it wasn't.  And I don't see how it could be.  Two people were hired to do jobs which were translating the remarks of visiting politicians.  If you're not translating the remarks, if you're not translating them correctly, you're not doing your job.

On the above, I also broke it up into paragraph form.  Normally, we don't do that.  But that's such a large section of words.  And they had to be included because if Saleh al-Mutlaq and the MPs last week got very little US media coverage, Osama al-Nujaifi is getting even less coverage.

Gus Taylor (Washington Times) is one of the few covering this morning's event.

With fears growing that the situation could trigger an all-out civil war between Iraq’s Shiites and Sunnis, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has yielded to pressure from the Obama administration to delay using the Iraqi military, which is dominated by Shiites, to mount full-scale assault on Anbar.
Mr. al-Maliki has also begun paying more secular Sunni tribesmen to fight back against the extremists in Fallujah.
But Mr. al-Nujayfi on Wednesday suggested the move may be too little too late — or that it must be expanded upon significantly and quickly if the Maliki government has any hope of forging a sustainable alliance with secular Sunni tribal leaders going forward.
He also said the rise of al Qaeda-linked groups in Anbar could most accurately be blamed on the Maliki government’s abandonment of previous alliances that U.S. military forces once nourished with those tribal leaders.
Karen DeYoung and Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) report on the Brookings event and on the visit to the US:

The amount of face time that Nujaifi got with top U.S. officials — including Secretary of State John F. Kerry and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel — suggested that Washington realizes that mobilizing Iraq’s beleaguered Sunni community will be key to restoring order in Anbar. A State Department official said Washington is hopeful that the ongoing crisis might deliver a larger breakthrough in Iraq’s stagnant politics.
“A big part of what Nujaifi and we are trying to do is move this beyond the military front,” said the official, who was not authorized to speak publicly about the situation. “Even if you can quell the al-Qaeda advances long-term, you won’t be able to make any progress without political reform as well.”
Yesterday, Iraq's Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi met with US President Barack Obama.







And yesterday, the White House issued the following:
The White House
Office of the Vice President

Readout of Vice President Biden's Meeting with Iraqi Council of Representatives Speaker Osama al-Nujaifi


This afternoon, President Obama joined Vice President Joe Biden’s meeting with Iraqi Council of Representatives Speaker Osama al-Nujaifi and a delegation of Iraqi parliamentarians. Both sides reaffirmed the importance of the strategic partnership between the United States and Iraq.   The President encouraged Iraq’s leaders to continue dialogue to address the legitimate grievances of all communities through the political process. Both sides agreed on the need for both security and political measures to combat terrorism, and discussed efforts to formally integrate local and tribal forces into the state security structures consistent with the Government of Iraq’s public commitments in recent days.  President Obama and Vice President Biden also expressed the United States’ strong support for continued cooperation between local and tribal leaders and the Iraqi Government against al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI)/the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).  The President and Vice President underscored that the United States stands with Iraq and its people in the fight against AQI/ISIL and other extremist groups.


Osama al-Nujaifi's visit was also noted in today's US State Dept press briefing conducted by spokesperson Marie Harf.



QUESTION: There’s been a number – two of the highest-ranking Sunni political – elected political leaders from Iraq have been through town in the last week.

MS. HARF: Mm-hmm. Yep.

QUESTION: The speaker of --

MS. HARF: Nujayfi.

QUESTION: Yeah. Nujayfi is here now. I was wondering if you could, first, just kind of give us a sense of whether or not he’s having any official meetings in this building --

MS. HARF: Mm-hmm. Yeah.

QUESTION: -- and who’s he going to be meeting with and what are they going to talk about?

MS. HARF: Yeah. So I have a couple updates on Speaker Nujayfi’s travel to the States. On Monday, so four days ago, Secretary Kerry met with the Speaker of the Iraqi Council of Representatives, Usama al-Nujayfi, to discuss bilateral issues, including the ongoing situation in Anbar province. They discussed our shared commitment toward a long-term partnership under the Strategic Framework Agreement.
The Secretary noted the importance of cooperation between Anbari local and tribal leaders, the Iraqi security forces, and national leaders in the fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant in Anbar province. In that light, the Secretary welcomed the stated commitment by the Government of Iraq to incorporate Iraqi citizens in Anbar who stand up to fight ISIL and other extremist groups into the formal security structure of the state.
The Secretary further praised Speaker Nujayfi’s commitment to support efforts to enlist tribes to control their local areas, in coordination with provincial councils and the Government of Iraq. The two also discussed the importance of Iraq’s national election in April. And Secretary Kerry assured Speaker Nujayfi that the United States will continue to work with United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq to ensure that the election occurs on time, is transparent, and reflects the will of the Iraqi people.
And the Vice President also met with Speaker Nujayfi. This was yesterday, I believe. President Obama joined Vice President Joe Biden’s meeting with Iraqi Council of Representatives Speaker Usama al-Nujayfi and a delegation of Iraqi parliamentarians. Both sides reaffirmed the importance of the strategic partnership between the United States and Iraq. The President encouraged Iraq’s leaders to continue dialogue to address the legitimate grievances of all communities through the political process.
Both sides agreed on the need for both security and political measures to combat terrorism and discuss efforts to formally integrate local and tribal forces into the state security structures. Both the President and Vice President expressed the United States strong support for continued cooperation between local and tribal leaders and the Iraqi Government against al-Qaida in Iraq and the Islamic State of Iraq in the Levant, and of course, underscored that the United States stands with Iraq and its people in this fight against extremist groups.
And I can check on the timing of that meeting. So those are just a couple of his meetings he’s had.

QUESTION: Just one more. Could you just speak to the challenges associated with – of managing these meetings with opposition figures from a political situation that’s fairly tense with sectarian divisions right now? I mean, has the Maliki government or the prime minister had anything to say about the fact that these guys are coming, and is there – have you followed up with him within the context of these meetings?


MS. HARF: Not to my knowledge. I mean, we’ve made very clear to the Iraqi Government that we will talk to the different political leaders from all sides as part of our engagement. The Vice President has spoken a number of times to Prime Minister Maliki in the recent weeks. The Secretary has made calls. A lot of people have made calls. Brett McGurk, who folks know knows Iraq very well, was just there for an extended trip where he met with political leaders from across the board. So this has certainly been our practice. I haven’t heard anyone suggest that it should be otherwise.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: Change of subject?

MS. HARF: Yes. What, on Iraq?

QUESTION: On Iraq, yeah. I’m just – there’s been a proposal in recent days, I believe by the Maliki government, to break off three new pretty much Sunni-dominated provinces in Iraq. They would be in mostly western and northern Iraq, but it would be two provinces in Anbar around Fallujah and Tuz Khormato, and then up north in Ninawa near Tal Afar. I’m just wondering if this came up in the discussions with the Secretary or to your extent of knowledge with the Vice President, and what the Administration feels about this. I know there’s been a strong sense of keeping one country of Iraq --

MS. HARF: Absolutely.

QUESTION: -- but I don’t know how that would equate with breaking off into new provinces within Iraq.


MS. HARF: Right. It’s a good question and I actually – I’m sorry to do this to you twice today – don’t know the answer. So let me check with our folks. I’m not aware of the details of the proposal, but I can see if it came up in discussions and see what our take is on what that might mean. You’re absolutely right that we’ve long said Iraq needed to remain a unified country, certainly, but I’m happy to check on that.


Still on the topic of the US and Iraq, this evening on ABC World News, Martha Raddatz reported from Iraq.

Martha Raddatz:  When the sun goes down in Baghdad, this is what happens: The American military moves in.  ABC News obtained these images -- a massive American cargo jet delivering weapons to Iraqi partners.  2400 rockets to arm Iraqi helicopters [. . .]


Bradley Klapper (AP) reported this morning, based on unnamed sources, that US senators -- such as Senator Bob Menendez -- have been persuaded to drop their objections regarding Apache helicopters among other weapons Barack wants to provide to Iraq's prime minister and chief thug Nouri al-Maliki.


Mustafa al-Kadhimi (Al-Monitor) conducted a major interview with Shi'ite politician Adil Abdul-Mahdi who was Vice President of Iraq.  In 2006, he and Tareq al-Hashemi were Iraq's two vice presidents; in 2010 he and al-Hashemi were again named Vice Presidents and, in 2011, Khondair al-Khozaei was named a third vice president, weeks later Abdul-Mahdi resigned his post in protest of the ongoing corruption and other issues.  He is a member of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (led by Ammar al-Hakim) and he has often been mentioned as potential prime minister -- most often in 2005 and 2006. He shared that he thought Nouri made a mistake in seeking a second term and all of the crises which followed that.

We noted that section yesterday.  In light of today's AP news, we're noting a different section.


Al-Monitor:  You served as vice president of Iraq for a number of years and then resigned from the post this term. Do you think that the presidency carried out its role on the constitutional level, and how do you view the presidency in the absence of President Jalal Talabani?

Abdul-Mahdi:  First, I hope that President Talabani regains his health and well-being, so that he can regain his role as a balanced figure whom everyone turns to in times of crisis. But to answer your question, I would say: No, it did not play a role on the political and constitutional levels. The presidency is not, as they say, an honorary institution. Rather, according to the Constitution, it is a supervisory institution, and its task is to monitor the correct implementation of the Constitution. It has a lot of tools to do this. But it failed to carry out this role and in turn contributed to negative developments. However, it cannot be denied that, in some way, they [presidency officials] served as a safety valve, as political leaders at least gathered to ensure calm in periods of crisis.




Jalal Talabani is the President of Iraq.  Or he's supposed to be.  The question continues to be: Can you be the president of a country you're not in?   December 2012,  Iraqi President Jalal Talabani suffered a stroke.   The incident took place late on December 17, 2012 (see the December 18, 2012 snapshot) and resulted in Jalal being admitted to Baghdad's Medical Center Hospital.    Thursday, December 20, 2012, he was moved to Germany.  He remains in Germany currently.  Over a year and one month later, he remains in Germany.  He's been posed for three sets of photos starting in May of 2012.  They don't want you to see his left side.  They also don't want anyone to try to speak to him -- not reporters, not Iraq's prime minister, not members of Talabani's political party and not Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi.

Barack wants to send more weapons to Nouri who doesn't have a check on him anymore.

As Abdul-Mahdi pointed out, it is not a ceremonial position.  The presidency acts as a check, a balance.


Dropping back to Tuesday's snapshot:


UPI reports, "Iraq was the only member of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries to post a decline in oil production last month, the IEA said Tuesday."  Nouri al-Maliki's Iraq stands out -- just never in a good way.  Today the prime minister and chief thug of Iraq wanted to take bows again.  AP notes that Nouri's government issued a declaration, "The justice ministry carried out the executions of 26 (men) convicted of crimes related to terrorism on Sunday."  CNN adds, "One of those executed was Adel al-Mashhadani, a militia leader in Baghdad who was "famous for sectarian crimes," the statement said. He was a member of the Awakening, the Sunni tribal fighting force who fought alongside the United States against al Qaeda militants."  The announcement of the executions come one day after UNAMI issued their [PDF format warning] latest human rights report on Iraq which included:



16. Declare a moratorium on the use of the death penalty in accordance with UN General Assembly resolutions 62/149 (2007), 63/168 (2008), 65/206 (2010) and 67/176( 2012) ; revie w the criminal code and the criminal procedure code with a view to abolishing the death penalty; and consider acceding to the Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR aimed at abolishing the death penalty; 
17. Implement international standards that provide safeg uards of the rights of those facing the death penalty , as set out in the annex to Economic and Social Council resolution 1984/50 of 25 May 1984 , until the death penalty is abolished in Iraq.



Clearly, Nouri's not listening to the United Nations.
Today Human Rights Watch issued World Report 2014 which notes 2012 saw Nouri's government execute at least 129 people while 2013 saw the number increase to 151.  BBC News notes today's executions come after "m the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights for an immediate halt to executions in Iraq. A spokesman for Navi Pillay said in October large-scale killings were 'obscene and inhumane'."



On Sunday, Nouri authorized 26 executions.  Today?  Raheem Salman, Isabel Coles and Robin Pomeroy (Reuters) report 11 executions were carried out today. AFP observes, "UN chief Ban Ki-moon urged Iraq to halt executions on a visit to Baghdad this month, but was publicly rebuked by Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki who said the country does not 'believe that the rights of someone who kills people must be respected'."


On security, National Iraqi News Agency reports a Qabri-Laabid home invasion left 1 police member and 2 other people dead, 1 corpse was discovered dumped in Basra (gun shot wounds), an armed attack in Alsinaiyah left two Iraqi soldiers injured, an Aini-Lbeidhah roadside bombing left 1 soldier dead and four more injured, a Hit city roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 police member and left three more injured, the Iraqi military's shelling of Falluja left 2 civilians dead and ten more injured ("including women and children"), an Abu Ghraib armed clash left 1 Iraqi soldier dead and three more injured,  and 1 contractor shot dead in Badush, a Muqdadiyah bombing left two Iraqi soldiers injured.  All Iraq News adds, "Two terrorists of what is so called the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria were killed nearby the Iraqi-Syrian borders."  Alsumaria reports an eastern Baghdad attack by assailants on motorcycles who shot dead 1 shop owner and left a worker injured, and the corpse of 1 child was discovered hanging in a Zammar market.


Again, this evening on ABC World News, Martha Raddatz reported from Iraq and spoke with US Ambassador to Iraq Robert Stephen Beecroft.

Martha Raddatz: [. . .]  America's Ambassador tells us Falluja has fallen to an al Qaeda that is now rising across this country. 

Robert Beecroft:  We're in a very precarious situation.  They're capable of-of serious assaults.

Martha Raddatz:  Do you know what -- approximately how many number of al Qaeda are there in Ramadi?

Robert Beecroft:  A lot of people saying these days you've got around 2,000 in the country hard core.

Martha Raddatz:  An astonishing number.  Falluja is really not far from Baghdad.  We wanted to see how far we could get.  It would not be far. Iraqi forces are ringing the city with checkpoints and armored vehicles.  About five miles out of Falluja, the roads became far more desolate and Iraqi security forces warned us we should not go any further.

It's a two minute report, there's not time for a lot.  So let's note Ann:



This is happening because Nouri wouldn't listen to the peaceful protesters who have been protesting now for over a year and because he is terrorizing Anbar Province.

Violence breeds more violence -- especially when the violence is carried out by the government.

I want you to look around your neighborhood the next time you are out.  Figure out how many streets make up your neighborhood.

And then picture that your neighborhood was being bombed and shelled and Hellfire missiles fired on it by the government.

Why?

Because they insisted 'terrorists' were in the neighborhood.

Maybe they were, maybe they weren't.

But you know your not a terrorist.  And you should know your neighbors next door and across your street.

Looking around, you should see a lot of innocent people.

And realize that they are all suffering.

Why?

Because the inept government either doesn't know how to combat terrorism or just wants an excuse to destroy you and your family and your neighbors.

This is collective punishment.

Wikipedia notes:


Collective punishment is the punishment of a group of people as a result of the behavior of one or more other individuals or groups. The punished group may often have no direct association with the other individuals or groups, or direct control over their actions. In times of war and armed conflict, collective punishment has resulted in atrocities, and is a violation of the laws of war and the Geneva Conventions. Historically, occupying powers have used collective punishment to retaliate against and deter attacks on their forces by Resistance movements (e.g. destroying entire towns and villages where such attacks have occurred).



It is illegal and it is a War Crime.

Yet instead of the White House demanding Nouri cease and desist immediately, Barack rushes to arm Nouri with more weapons he continues to use on the Iraqi people.

War Crimes.





Twitter exchange on Iraq today:

    1. When I reach Twitter marks and think I'm a big shot I remember 's phone autocorrects my name to 'trashcan'
    2. Mine doesn't autocorrect your name! Always know it's you! LOL!
    3. Haha I appreciate it. Mercifully, most phones autocorrect my name to 'peasant', rather than the alternative.
    4. LOL! That is MUCH better than Liz's! Hope you're well today!
    5. Can't complain at all. Baghdad has been quiet (touch wood) today. Thanks for asking, hope you're well too.
    6. Very concerned about things are going there and in Anbar. Stay safe!!






  • Finally, Christopher A. Preble notes a CATO Institute event on Iraq to be held next month:



    Just over two years after the last U.S. combat troops were withdrawn from Iraq, an insurgency is raging throughout the country. The black flags of ISIS – the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham – now fly over Fallujah, the site of some of the bloodiest battles of the U.S war in Iraq. These recent gains by extremists, and the apparent inability of the Iraqi government to exercise control over its territory, have many in U.S. foreign policy circles worried.
    Many blame Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki for the uptick in violence, arguing that his heavy-handed policies toward the Sunni minority laid the groundwork for the current insurgency. (e.g. here) Others blame the Obama administration for failing to successfully negotiate a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), which would have allowed a small residual U.S. force to remain in the country to help train the Iraqi army and conduct counterterrorist operations. The claim that such forces would have been able to exert great leverage over the Iraqi political class, and that Obama himself bears some blame for the violence because he withdrew U.S. troops rather than leave them in Iraq without a SOFA, ignores that our forces were unable to fix Iraq’s shattered political system even when they were in Iraq in large numbers. (More on this here.)
    Iraqi politics, Iranian influence, and a spillover of violence from the Syrian civil war make the situation far more complex than most want to admit. It’s one thing to assign blame, it’s quite another to find solutions.
    At an upcoming Cato policy forum, “Understanding the Continuing Violence in Iraq,” experts will provide context for the current situation, outline obstacles facing the Iraqi government, and debate what role, if any, the United States should play. Speakers include Douglas Ollivant of the New American Foundation, who wrote on this subject earlier this month, and Harith Hasan who, with Emma Skye, commented on Iraqi politics here last year, and has also written a book on the subject.
    The event begins at Noon, on Tuesday, February 12th. To learn more, and to register, click here.













     
     

    the associated press




    Wednesday, January 22, 2014

    I'd prefer ethics to symbolism, thank you

    "Black Madness Under Obama: African Americans More Pro-NSA, Anti-Snowden Than Whites and Hispanics" (Glen Ford, Black Agenda Report):
    In yet another example of African American moral and political deterioration in the Age of Obama, a new Pew Research poll shows Blacks are more in favor of NSA spying on Americans than are whites or Hispanics. Moreover, the data indicate that Blacks are probably more likely to favor prosecution of Edward Snowden for his NSA spying revelations, than are other ethnic groups.
    Back in September, polling history was made when Black Americans were more in favor of air strikes against Syria than whites and Hispanics – the first time, ever, that African Americans were ranked as the most bellicose major ethnicity in the United States.
    Something ugly has happened to Black America since 2008, eroding – if not reversing – the progressive Black historical consensus on issues of peace, civil liberties and social justice that has prevailed since pollsters began soliciting Black opinion. One must conclude that, either Black progressivism was a much shallower political current than previously believed, or that the presence of a Black president has been such a shock to Black consciousness, so profoundly disorienting, that it has grievously distorted collective Black perceptions of reality. The African American worldview has been mangled beyond imagining.
    Back in June of last year, when MSNBC’s Black plantation hands Melissa Harris-Perry and Joy-Ann Reid were calling for Edward Snowden’s head on a platter, and Black South Carolina congressman James Clyburn was telling people that Snowden’s NSA revelations were nothing more than “an effort to embarrass the president,” 60 percent of Blacks and an equal proportion of Hispanics approved of “the government’s collection of telephone and Internet data as part of anti-terrorism efforts.” Only 44 percent of whites wanted the NSA’s metadata collections to continue. Pew Research pollsters asked the same questions after President Obama’s speech on NSA spying, last Friday. The survey showed that NSA’s stock had fallen considerably over the past six months, but Blacks remain more NSA spy-friendly than whites and Hispanics. Forty-three percent of African Americans still approve of the agency’s telephone and internet data collection, compared to 39 percent of whites and 40 percent of Hispanics, while majorities of whites (55 percent) and Hispanics (52 percent) opposed Obama on spying. Only 49 percent of Blacks would break with  administration policy. In conventional political terms, African Americans – who are subjected to hyper-surveillance like no other group in the U.S. – are most heavily represented on the far Right on this issue, steadfast with “their” president.

    I agree with Cynthia McKinney, we have lost our way.

    And I disagree with Alice Walker and others who insist that at least Barack and the Obamas have symbolic value.

    As a community, the Black community has been the soul and heart of the country.  We have repeatedly called out assaults on other countries, cuts to the safety net, etc. 

    All that stopped when Barack became president.

    It's not a fair trade off.

    I'd rather have young Black children today raised with ethics and compassion than with the knowledge that a half-White, half-Black man can occupy the White House.

    If those are the alternatives, I'll go with a Black sensibility and community that cared about humanity and spoke out in defense of the country and the people in need -- in this country and all over the world.

    As Cynthia McKinney (at Black Agenda Report) noted in September:

    Finally, as an African American who is a child of the Civil Rights Movement, let me say categorically that the U.S. President betrays the legacy of the leaders of slave rebellions and of the Black struggle to be free with every U.S. bomb dropped, every veteran maimed, every child killed that he authorizes around the world.  The time for peace is now.
    And I will close with this, the words of our late assassinated President, John F. Kennedy, who just months before he was murdered said:
    “What kind of peace do we seek?  Not a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war.  Not the peace of the grave or the security of the slave.  I am talking about genuine peace, the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living, the kind that enables men and nations to grow and to hope and to build a better life for their children—not merely peace for Americans, but peace for all men and women—not merely peace in our time, but peace for all time.”
    Yes, it is true.  We in the United States once had a President who spoke of peace and mutuality and respect.  He was killed by snipers’ bullets just months later.
    Let me add here that I just returned from Syria, going there with a U.S. delegation led by former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark.  The effort is real to turn Syria into a Libya.  And then, after Syria, the drums of war will beat against Iran; and then after Iran?
    They won’t stop until we stop them.
    We know the path that we must take.  For if a President who wanted to take the path of peace could be killed in public like that, just imagine what they will do to us.

    We used to stand for something.  But we've allowed ourselves to be robbed of it by a half-White man raised by White people who doesn't understand a thing about the Black community or what it means to be Black.

    "Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):

    Wednesday, June 22, 2014.  Chaos and violence continue, Nouri's assault on Anbar continues, more families are displaced in Anbar, the use of collective punishment, we look at the silence on Anbar, we note how Alice Walker managed to leave the Cult of St. Barack and regain her voice, and more.



    Nouri al-Maliki, prime minister and chief thug of Iraq, continues his assault on Anbar Province.  And where are the people around the world objecting?  Falluja's electrical grid has been destroyed (by the Iraqi military), this week has seen a school bombed (by the Iraqi military),  Iraq Times notes that Nouri's assault on Anbar has displaced over 22,000 families.

    And this is treated as a misfortune and how sad but . . . No, not a misfortune.  The Anbar residents are victims of War Crimes.  Monday, Aswat al-Iraq quoted MP Mohammed Iqbal Omar (he's with Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi's Mutahidoun bloc) noting the military was responsible for the deaths, that the mission remains "vague" and he called for this "tragic" assualt to cease and for a political solution to be worked out.

    Applause to him.  But I'm not talking about Iraqis right now.  I'm not talking about the cowardly and cowed press (I'm sorry AFP but when you had journalist arrested just months ago, you should have made a news report and not buried it -- you risk your own lives and everyone else's when you respond to Nouri's thuggery with silence). I'm not talking about the disappointing and lying US government.

    I'm talking about the people of this world.  This site started in November 2004.  The second assault of Falluja began shortly after.  We called it out.  Like we call out this one.

    But in 2004, we weren't the only ones calling out the terrorizing of the Iraqi people.

    Where are those voices today?

    Leslie Cagan, was United for Peace and Justice nothing but an ego trip for you?  Noam Chosky, you know this is wrong and you've given one trivial and useless interview after another in recent weeks but never stopped to call out what's happening in Anbar.  CODEPINK, I call you "CODESTINK" and you get mad and your itty bitty feelings are all hurt.  You tell me repeatedly when Medea Benjamin embarrasses herself and your organization that I'm "not being helpful" when I note it here.  I'm sorry, when are you helpful?  My role is the role of the critic.  It is clearly defined and I serve that purpose.  Your role is supposedly advocating for peace.  How do you do that when Medea rails against The Drone War but can't call out the person who oversees and continues it?  (That would be US President Barack Obama.)

    Without Iraq, CODEPINK would never have been a media event.  They were a momentary joke with their FCC actions before the start of the illegal war.  It was about self-interest for them, their little media stunts.  That's how most people saw it, a bunch of bored people dressing in pink for attention.  And CODEPINK realized that which is why they basically dropped domestic issues.  (Illegal spying, et al, has to have an international aspect to appeal to CODEPINK today.)  They'd be nothing today without Iraq.  Protesting it gave them meaning, gave them stature, made them appear to be a serious organization.

    Yet today they can't mention Iraq.  They refused to note it when, in the fall of 2012, Tim Aragno (New York Times) reported that Barack had sent "a unit of Army Special Operations soldiers [. . .] to Iraq to advise on contuerterrorism and help with intelligence." That was shameful and disgusting but it was on the eve of the 2012 presidential elections and CODEPINK are Cult of St. Barack.  That's why they never 'bird-dogged' then-Senator Barack Obama in their faux action.  It's why co-founder Jodie Evans was a bundler for Barack's 2008 campaign -- a detail she should have made public by CODEPINK in 2007.  They just finished two days of 'action' in Switzerland but couldn't stand up for the Iraqi people.

    Cult of St. Barack is not fatal.  You can shake it and re-emerge as someone committed to peace.  March 9th of last year, Lyse Doucet (Newshour, BBC World Service) interviewed Alice Walker.  Excerpt.

    Alice Walker: And you know, he charmed me, he held out this wonderful vision of a different way.  But we cannot have the different with with the same people and the same programs and the same destructiveness.  It's impossible. So I smile at my naivete in a way but I love it too.  I love that I have such a youthful hopefulness about the possibility of change. 

    Lyse Doucet:  Well you wrote a letter to Obama when he came to power and you gave him some advice about how to work with the enemy.  And, of course, it was about that time that he got his Nobel Peace Prize.  Did he listen --

    Alice Walker:  No.

    Lyse Doucet:  -- to you advice?

    Alice Walker:  No.  No.  I don't think he listens, really, to people like me.  I don't think he is the kind of person who pays that much attention to the masses actually.  I say that because I have a friend who actually ended up as part of his team but was soon kicked out because he was probably too truthful and too radical.  And one of the things he came back to tell us was that in the inner circle in the White House they don't think that they get into positions of power because people, you know, masses of people protest and demonstrate and, you know, vote.  They think they get there because people pay a lot of money to get them there. And so that's who they listen to. So, I think we've been, you know, naive in our desperate desire to have leadership that will change things.

    Lyse Doucet:  But now he has several more years.  Do you have any hope that in his second term he could pursue the kind of changes that you and others like you believe should happen?

    Alice Walker:  I don't think he's powerful enough.  I don't think one person can do all of that and I also think that he's more like a CEO rather than like the person who actually has the power to make decisions that will change things very much. 

    Lyse Doucet:  Do you see him as someone who came to change the system and then the system changed him?

    Alice Walker:  I don't know if he actually came into power to change the system.  He said he was going to make changes but I think he listens much more to bankers and to people that are not us, not the masses of the people and the poets.  And I must say, I think it's fatal not to listen to women, children and poets.  

    Lyse Doucet:  He seems -- He says he listens to poets, poets like you, poets like Maya Angelou, he invites them to his great moments.

    Alice Walker:  Well he invites them.  He doesn't invite me.  I have never been invited.  And I understand why he would think twice about doing that because I probably wouldn't go because I see the use of drone warfare as criminal and so I think it is a criminal act.  I think that the presidents before him were criminals.  And I think that they've made war on-on humanity and on the planet and they should be actually brought to justice for these things.

    Lyse Doucet:  You may remember that ten years ago this week, you were arrested outside the White House where you were protesting against the war in Iraq.  And yet at that moment, you and Barack Obama, before he came to power, agreed more or less on the war in Iraq.

    Alice Walker:  Well he said he was on our side but he didn't stop the war.  And even though they have withdrawn some troops, there are still tons of Americans there and their job now seems to be what the plan was all along which was to administer the oil fields.  And I came from people in the south who struggled very hard for decency and goodness and who believed in justice and who worked very hard to change an evil system of apartheid in the United States so there's no way that I can feel that this is good and what he, as the head of this country, seems to be about. 


    Alice Walker survived the Cult of St. Barack and re-emerged with her own voice intact.  Others could do the same if they so desired.

    In the interview, Alice notes, "We cannot sanction the destruction of people anywhere."

    And she's right.  So why are so many today silent as Anbar is terrorized?

    This is not about justice or even about terrorism.

    The Boston Marathon Bombing took place April 15, 2013.  The US government didn't respond by shelling Cambridge and bombing Watertown.  Since when do you respond to act of crime by sending in the military to attack the people and their homes, schools, cities and towns?

    You don't do that.

    A good leader, as opposed despot like Nouri, does everything he or she can to ensure the safety of the people.  But Nouri is not a legitimate leader.  First the Bully Boy Bush administration insisted he be made prime minister in 2006 and then, despite the votes of the Iraqi people, the Barack Obama administration insisted that he have a second term in 2010.

    Mustafa al-Kadhimi (Al-Monitor) speaks with Shi'ite politician Adil Abdul-Mahdi who was Vice President of Iraq.  In 2006, he and Tareq al-Hashemi were Iraq's two vice presidents; in 2010 he and al-Hashemi were again named Vice Presidents and, in 2011, Khondair al-Khozaei was named a third vice president, weeks later Abdul-Mahdi resigned his post in protest of the ongoing corruption and other issues.  He is a member of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (led by Ammar al-Hakim) and he has often been mentioned as potential prime minister -- most often in 2005 and 2006.

    Al-Monitor:  What is a decision taken by Maliki that you wished he had not taken or thought it wiser that he postponed taking?


    Abdul-Mahdi:  His candidacy for a second term. I hoped that the principles of power rotation be better promoted, particularly considering that Mr. Maliki and the State of Law Coalition failed to receive the preponderance of votes and never had a parliamentary majority, even after they formed an alliance with the Supreme Council, the Sadrist movement and the remaining National Coalition forces that formed the National Alliance. He did not garner the majority of votes until after the Kurdistan Alliance and the Iraqiya bloc endorsed him following long months of complications and secret deals that were detrimental to him and the state during his second term, causing it to become more complex than it was during the first term. For, to rule during his second term, he had to disrupt the legislative and oversight role played by parliament. … And he reneged on the Erbil Agreement, leading to a period of complex conflicts that even reached the ranks of the National Alliance. The country then entered a period when it was ruled through a cult of personality, militarization, a system of quotas and the manufacture of new crises without solving older ones first. … The post and office cannot be of utmost importance. If each of us always claimed that others were wrong and we were always right, and never realized that right and wrong are subjective and not an objective reality, we would disrupt any possibility for change and the opportunity to discover the potential of others. This makes the battle for the premiership a complex one, akin to facing a military coup every time [elections are held]. … But in fact, it is a natural and simple process predicated on the majority that will be formed in parliament. In his capacity as a leader who gained his mandate and legitimacy through free and direct elections, I would have hoped that Mr. Maliki would have become a role model in this regard. Doing so would not have only benefited the country, it would have also been beneficial for his legacy, in accordance with the popular saying that states, “Look at the actions of others and realize how good mine are.” The halo of quarrelsome personalities and leaders would thus fade, to be replaced by agendas and actions, the goodness and usefulness of which could be clearly seen by the people, who would fight to maintain them through democratic means.


    He's an artificial 'leader.'  He was never chosen by the people.  He remains an illegitimate leader and illegitimate leaders will always use violence against the people to maintain a hold on power.

    A real leader would have listened.  A real leader would have honored power-sharing agreements (like The Erbil Agreement).  A real leader would have listened to the protesters in 2011 instead of lying that if they'd leave the streets, he'd end corruption in 100 days!  He didn't end it.  He doesn't even care about it anymore.  The protests started back up December 21, 2012 and they continue.

    He doesn't want to meet the protesters demands.  He doesn't want to inspire or lead.  He just wants to destroy.

    Abdulaziz al-Mahmoud (Peninsula) explains:


    After about a year of peaceful protests in Al Anbar province, the Prime Minister of Iraq, Nouri Al Maliki, has sent army troops to end the sit-in by force.
    The troops, as always, were holding sectarian flags and shouting chants of revenge for Al Hussein ibn Ali’s death by Yazid bin Muawiya and his allies, so they killed, burned and captured a large number of people.
    Consequently, as an already known spontaneous reaction, residents of Al Anbar wielded weapons to defend their lives, homes and dignity. As a result, Iran immediately declared that it supported Al Maliki in his war against terrorism and that it was ready to send him necessary support.
    The US declared the same thing; it even rushed weapons Al Maliki had asked for. The United Nations Security Council, the UN Secretary-General and the Arab League adopted the same stance.
    What is this nonsense?
    Is it possible that all these parties do not know that Sunnis in Iraq are suffering under a savage and sectarian regime, which works its fingers to the bone to humiliate, marginalise, displace, impoverish and exclude them, using every villainous way created by a sadistic and ruthless mind? Has Iran begun reaping the fruits of its long stand-off with the US?


    And the office of the European Union's Struan Stevenson issued the following:

    “Iraq is plummeting rapidly towards civil war and genocide,” according to a senior EU lawmaker Struan Stevenson, a Conservative Euro MP from Scotland who chairs the European Parliament’s important Delegation for Relations with Iraq. Stevenson says that an onslaught against supposed Al Qaeda terrorists in 6 Iraqi Provinces is no more than a cover for the “annihilation of Sunnis opposed to the increasingly sectarian Shia policies of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.”

    Speaking from Scotland Struan Stevenson said:


    “When I visited Iraq in November I met with many of the leading Sunnis who had organised protests and demonstrations against Maliki in Anbar and Kirkuk and other Sunni Provinces. I also met with the Grand Mufti, one of only 2 religious leaders of the Sunnis in Iraq. All of them told me in detail how they were under constant attack by Maliki’s forces and how often these forces would be infiltrated by highly-trained assassins from Iran, who could be identified easily because they spoke Farsi rather than Arabic. They told me how thousands of Sunnis have been killed in these attacks and how Sunni Imams and mosques were being ruthlessly targeted.
    “Maliki’s determined efforts to eradicate all leading Sunnis from the Iraqi government, including trumped-up charges of terrorism against the leading humanitarian, Vice President of Iraq Tariq al-Hashemi, has led to an upsurge of protests which have continued for more almost two years. The last straw was the violent arrest of the senior Sunni MP and Chair of the Iraqi Parliament’s Economics committee – Dr Ahmad Alwani – on 28th December, when an assault force of 50 armoured vehicles, helicopter gunships and hundreds of heavily armed troops massacred 9 members of his family and arrested him and over 150 of his staff on baseless charges of terrorism. Dr Alwani has been a key critic of Maliki and of Iranian meddling in Iraq.
    “Just as I was told in November, Maliki’s ploy, aided and abetted by the mullahs in Iran, is to label all of the Sunnis as terrorists, claiming that they are active members of Al Qaeda. In fact I have been assured that there are no foreigners involved in the uprisings in the 6 SunniProvinces. Although some Al Qaeda jihadists had infiltrated Ramadi in al-Anbar Province, near the Syrian border, they were quickly driven out by the locals. The people who have now taken up arms against Maliki’s forces are ordinary Iraqi citizens, forced to defend themselves against a ruthless dictator. Shamefully, the Obama administration has fallen for this ploy and supplied Maliki with, 75 Hellfire air-to-ground missiles which are now raining down on his own people in Ramadi and other Sunni cities. 10 reconnaissance drones are expected to follow in March, with a further 48 drones and the first of a batch of F-16 fighter jets later in the year.
    “The Americans seem unable to accept the fact that their blundering intervention in Iraq has so far led to over 1 million Iraqi deaths, changed that oil-rich nation into a virtual basket-case and simply replaced the brutal Saddam Hussein with another corrupt and bloody dictator in Nouri al-Maliki. Providing him with US arms to wage outright war on the Sunni minority in Iraq, as the Iranian mullahs cheer from the side-lines, will solve nothing and will certainly lead to civil conflict. The only solution is to remove Maliki from office and replace him with a non-sectarian government of all the people, which respects freedom, democracy, human rights, women’s rights and the rule of law and stops the growing interference from Tehran. Even senior Shias whom I met in Iraq have voiced their concern over Maliki’s malign regime.
    For the Americans to hide behind Maliki’s lies and fabrications that Al Qaeda terrorists have taken over Ramadi and Fallujah and other Sunni cities will pave the way to the genocide of Iraq’s Sunni population.”
    On behalf of Mr Struan Stevenson MEP


    Where are the Americans speaking out for the residents of Anbar?  

    John Feffer writes another ridiculous piece (click here for Foreign Policy In Focus -- we're not linking to The Nation).  He never condemns the assault on Anbar.  This is a heavily populated province and Nouri's launching US-provided Hellfire missiles, it's bombing cities and towns, it's launching mortar attacks on cities and towns, it's prevented aid from reaching the province and so much more.  Feffer manages to mention Anbar -- but only in relation to 'al Qaeda.'

    The reason that so many on the pathetic left could not call out the assault on Afghanistan was because toss out the words 'al Qaeda' and suddenly they lose their spine.  But the attack on Afghanistan destroyed lives -- and continues to do so.

    If 10% of the population of Anbar was established to be al Qaead or al Qaeda linked, that still wouldn't justify the attacks.  There is no justification.  There is never a justification for collective punishment which is why it's classified as a War Crime.

    The Latin American Herald Tribune reports, "Security forces killed more than 60 suspected terrorists in a 24-hour period, Iraqi authorities said Wednesday."  Suspected terrorists?  Well, the killers never tell the truth, do they?  Look at all of Barack Obama's claims that his Drone War only kills 'terrorists.'

    Feffer writes another ignorant and ill-informed commentary.  At one point, he writes:

    “From 2006 to 2008, tribesmen were able to beat Al Qaeda with the cooperation of American forces and the support of the Iraqi government,” Sunni politician Osama al-Nujaifi told The New York Times. “After gaining victory over Al Qaeda, those tribesmen were rewarded with the cutting of their salaries, with assassination and displacement.” Many Iraqis complain that the United States has not done enough to pressure the al-Maliki government to heal the rift with the country’s Sunni minority.


    Do you see a problem?

    In 2008, was Nancy Pelosi billed as "a Democrat politician" by the press?  No, she was billed with her title: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.  Today, she's billed as House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.

    Osama al-Nujaifi is a Sunni politician.  He's also Speaker of Parliament.  So if you're only going to reference him once in your article, you go with, "Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi."




    Nouri's assault on Anbar continues with NINA noting military helicopters continue to bomb Falluja and Ramadi.  Wael Grace (Al Mada) reports that Anbar MPs say Nouri is attempting to extend the assault on Anbar up through the April 30th parliamentary elections.  MP Hamid al-Mutlaq notes a government acting wisely would have avoided a military campaign by listening to the cries of the protesters and granting concessions, would have avoided bombing cities by being in talks with the police and people of the city.  Nouri al-Ali al-Kilani (Kitbat) offers a column on how Nouri al-Maliki, and his double standards, endorse and breed sectarianism in Iraq.  He notes the thug and prime minister goes before the Iraqi people sullen and issues threats.

    And the war's spreading to the airwaves and social media.  Al-Shorfa reports, "The local government in Iraq's Anbar province on Wednesday (January 22nd) announced the launch of a counter-terrorism radio station to raise awareness about threats posed by al-Qaeda and extremist groups."  And Omar al-Jaffal (Al-Monitor) reports:

    The administrator of the Facebook page for Rayat Ahl al-Sunnah Fil-Iraq (Flag of the Sunnis in Iraq), which views the army as occupying Anbari cities to harass and oppress the population there, pleaded with the media to support the “battle of the people of Anbar against the army.” In an interview with Al-Monitor, he asserted, “The media has not dealt fairly with our cause. We established a page on Facebook so that we could tell the world what is happening in Anbar.”
    The group's page has attracted a large number of supporters from among Sunni youths, who share the page’s view that Anbar's “cities are being brought to ruin by the army.”
    On the other side of the online battle, the Facebook page for the Iraqi Electronic Army seeks to close down pages that call for fighting the army by informing Facebook administrators of abuses aimed at Iraqi national figures on them. The page administrator, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told Al-Monitor, “Our page wages war against all the terrorist pages, from every sect and religion in Iraq.” He denied that his page had received “material support from any political faction in Iraq.” He said that it “communicates with all the soldiers of Anbar to relay word of what is happening on the ground there.”


    And the signs of Nouri's leadership failure are all around.  Xinhua reports:


    Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al- Maliki on Wednesday said that the time has come to end al-Qaida presence in the city of Fallujah in the volatile province of Anbar, while four people were killed and nine wounded in violent attacks across the country.
    "The time has come to settle this subject and end the presence of this gang in this city (Fallujah) to save its residents from their evil," Maliki said in his weekly televised speech to the nation.

    "I ask the sons of this province, its tribes and notables and all who live there to be ready to take serious stands against those dirty people without casualties and without sacrifices," Maliki said without specifying a time for any action.


    He didn't ask for his help when he started the assault, didn't even think about them.  But now that he's created yet another mess he can't clean up, he's dependent upon others to accomplish what he couldn't.

    Again, Iraq Times notes that Nouri's assault on Anbar has displaced over 22,000 families.  Loveday Morris (Washington Post) reports from Karbala:

    The plush accommodation halls on the outskirts of this southern Iraqi city, normally reserved for visiting Shiite pilgrims, now teem with displaced Sunnis fleeing violence in the Western province of Anbar.
    There and elsewhere, sectarian tensions are brewing as Iraq spirals into the worst cycle of violence it has experienced in years. But here, in one of the holiest cities for Shiite Muslims, Sunni children play on brightly painted swings as families gather in the waning winter light beside clipped magnolia-lined lawns.

    The refugees Nouri's assault has created should be seen as shocking and disgusting.  Iraq can't afford more displaced people and to ask the citizens of Anbar to live through Nouri's assault on the province is to ask a great deal of a province that's already suffered more than enough.  Hamza Mustafa (Ashraq Al-Awsat) reports:

    The Anbar Provincial Council has formed a crisis unit ahead of a possible military raid on Fallujah in the hopes of resolving the conflict in the city peacefully.
    Council head Sabah Karhout issued a statement Tuesday, saying: “Anbar has formed a crisis cell led by Governor Ahmad Al-Dulaimi,” adding: “The military solution will be the last resort if the ongoing negotiations between officials and tribal leaders fail.”


    National Iraqi News Agency reports:

    The Political Council in Kirkuk called on those who are described as the owners of the decision not to invade Fallujah to spare the blood of Iraqis and not to aggravate things.
    Head of the Council , Sheikh Abdul Rahman Munshid al- Assi told / NINA / that "We appeal to the Prime Minister and the acting ministers of defense, interior and chief of staff , intelligence and the national security, that the responsibility is great in taking such decision to invade Fallujah and areas of the rest of Anbar .



    Through yesterday, Iraq Body Count counts 791 violent deaths for the month so far.  Today, Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) notes, "Armed confrontations and roadside bombs made for a bloody day in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul on Wednesday, claiming the lives of at least 16 people -- including militants who died in a battle with the Iraqi army, police in Mosul said."  National Iraqi News Agency reports 2 fighters were shot dead in Tikrit, Nouri's federal police boasted they killed 10 suspects "in the area of Aljazeerah south of Mosul," indiscriminate military artillery shelling at Falluja left 1 person dead and two more injured, an Alaaskari bombing left three police officers injured, an Ein al-Jahesh Village roadside bombing left 1 Iraqi soldier dead and three more injured, a Mosul armed attack left 1 police officer dead and two more injured, a Baghdad shooting (Camp Sara area) left 1 person dead, a Baghdad shooting (Tarmiyah area) left one person injured, a southwest Baghdad mortar attack (Radwaniyah area) killed 1 person and left two people injured, 2 fighters were shot dead in Mousl, a Kirkuk shooting left SWAT officer Mohamed Kamel injured, and 1 corpse was discovered in Kirkuk (38-year-old male with "signs of torture and gunshot wounds"). All Iraq News notes 1 "Iraqi Army officer with a Major rank was kidnapped to the west of Ramadi city." 1  Alsumaria notes that late last night, 1 farmer was kidnapped in Tikrit with assailants then setting a house bomb which killed 1 woman and left five people injured.



    We noted the death of Iraqi journalist Firas Mohammed Attiyah in Monday's snapshot.  Today the Guardian's Greenslade Blog noted the death and these details:

    The bomb exploded as Attiyah accompanied a government patrol to a ceremony in the city of Khalidiya. Muayad Ibrahim, a journalist for Anbar TV, was also wounded in the incident.

    They're wrong.  We were as well.  Despite early reports claiming the journalist was 'embedded' with the military at the time of his death, that is not correct.  Kitabat reports today that his news outlet has confirmed that Firas Mohammed Attiyah was not with the military when he died, he was enroute to Ramadi to meet with displaced families.

    Yesterday, we noted the pretty spin AP put on Nouri's decision to carve up areas of Iraq (where he polls especially poorly and where the judiciary does not bend to his will) to create new provinces out of the city of Falluja, Tuz Khurmato and the Valley of Nineveh.

    Alsumaria reports an emergency session was called today by Anbar's provincial council and that, yesterday, Kurdish MP Khalid Shwani called Nouri's efforts a flagrant violation of the Iraqi Constitution.  National Iraqi News Agency adds:

    The head of the provincial council in Anbar, Sabah Karhut rhot confirmed that: "Fallujah is part of Anbar province, and cannot be a governorate at this time ."
    He told the National Iraqi News Agency / NINA / : "Anbar provincial council held an urgent meeting to discuss the government's decision to make the city of Fallujah a governorate without informing the local government officials in Anbar ."
    He added : "The local government in Anbar have not contacted the central government to make Fallujah a province by itself, and this raised signs of surprise among officials in the province, in light of the security situation ."


    Iraq Times also notes the surprise and quotes council member Suhaib al-Rawi stating that the proposal is strange and raises many questions. Strange that it raises so many questions and objections but AP missed all that and presented it as normal.

    Not only is not normal, it's leading others to make requests.  NINA reports:

    Hundreds of Khanaqin district of Diyala province , demanded the central government to transfer their district to a province in accordance with the law and the Constitution.
    The head of the municipal council in Khanaqin said to NINA reporter ,that citizens believed that their demand is a legal and a constitutional entitlement.



    The following community sites -- plus Dissident Voice, Cindy Sheehan,