Wednesday, December 20, 2017

Bill Clinton's popularity has dropped


Yes, we made it to Atlanta.  No problems.  The airport had electricity!!!   I should have blogged last night but there was last minute packing (my daughter, not me).
 
Sorry for not blogging.  Let’s talk Bill Clinton.  Not Hillary, but Bill. 
 
I liked Bill as president.  I really did.  You could say I loved him even.  I was happy when he was president.
 
But . . .
 
Then Juanita Broaddrick.   In 2016, she was around.
 
As I’ve written before, in real time, I didn’t give her a chance.  NBC aired their report (the only one that did so of the networks).  It was right after Bill was censored and the whole Bill and Monica and Bill and Paula seemed behind us and had exhausted us.
 
I didn’t give her a chance.  And I think a lot of Americans were the same but I can speak for me and I was just tired and worn out. 
 
So she shows up in 2016 and that’s when I read the transcript of her 90s NBC interview.
 
That’s when I felt she deserved more attention. 
 
So I streamed the video on YOUTUBE and she seemed honest and direct.
 
And I believe her.  And I wrote that here in 2016, when I
 
I wouldn’t have said that immediately – I’m being honest here – I would have mulled it over except for one thing: Bill Clinton has never spoken about it.
 
He had a spokesperson, in a press conference, deny it.
 
He once was asked and said a spokesperson had spoken for him.
 
 
Well, no, that’s not how it works.
 
You’re a sitting president and someone accuses you of rape, you respond.
 
He did not.
 
And he has not since.
 
So, not only is she believable but Bill’s actions come off as guilty.
 
With that in mind, this is from Philip Wegmann (WASHINGTON EXAMINER):
 

The numbers bear this out. Polling from Gallup shows that Clinton has dropped 5 points from 50 to 45 percent in just one year. It’s the most unpopular he has ever been since leaving the White House. By comparison, Clinton is now less popular than former President George W. Bush. Despite the wars and the economic collapse, that neo-conservative cowboy has a 59 percent approval rating — numbers Clinton would kill for.
This is a new low for the old president and a death blow for his new image. The makeover just can’t work anymore. In the Weinstein era, Bill is just an old creep in a new suit.
 
I’m not surprised.  And I bet it will drop even lower.  Juanita Broaddrick is publishing a book next year and I plan to read it.   I’m sure I won’t be the only one.
 
He should have spoken a long time ago.  And Hillary Clinton should not have been allowed to run for president in 2016 without being asked by the press (repeatedly) about Bill.
 
But the media didn’t ask her. 
 

How does that happen?



"Iraq snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):
Wednesday, December 20, 2017.  Twitter censors the prime minister of the KRG, AP reveals many more civilians have been killed during the battle of Mosul than the governments have revealed, Burn Pits 360 explains how the government is still not helping veterans, and much more.



The effects from burn pits?  An issue we have covered since Bully Boy Bush occupied the White House.  And in all the time since, the US government still cannot address the issue despite a lot of pretending otherwise.  BURN PITS 360 has issued the following:
5 Reasons the VA Doctors' Guide to Burn Pits is Totally Inadequate

In March 2016 – a full seven years after burn pits were discontinued in Iraq and Afghanistan - the Department of Veterans Affairs published a guide for VA doctors meant to inform them of the potential health effects of exposure to burn pits. But the “Clinician’s Guide to Airborne Hazards” conveniently leaves the phrase “burn pits” out of the title and fails to give doctors the information that might actually help them evaluate patients with burn pit-related illnesses.

Want to see for yourself? Check out the VA’s “Clinician’s Guide to Airborne Hazards” here.  There are at least five reasons this four-page “Clinician’s Guide to Airborne Hazards” packet just doesn’t cut it when it comes to the information doctors really need to help veterans exposed to burn pits.
  1. The Clinician’s Guide does not say what a burn pit is.
That’s right. The guide to airborne hazards and open burn pits does not even describe what burn pits looked like, how large they were, or the wide variety of items burned in the pits. The VA’s only ‘explanation’ of the burn pits is as follows:

The use of burn pits was a common waste disposal practice at military sites overseas, exposing thousands of service members to potentially harmful substances, including elevated levels of particulate matter (PM). 

Without an idea of the sheer size of burn pits and the way they were tended, doctors would not be able to appreciate the extent of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans’ exposure.  Ten pounds of trash burnt in an open barrel produces as much smoke pollution as a modern incinerator burning 400,000 pounds of trash per day. So the amount of smoke produced by a football field-sized open pit burning several hundred tons of unregulated waste per day certainly warrants at least a sentence in a guide meant to help doctors evaluate the significance of potentially toxic exposure.

Additionally, the guide does not mention any of the items burned in the pits. Listing (or simply mentioning) these items – which include plastics, metals, ion batteries, human feces, and much more – would give doctors information about the types of chemicals to which veterans may have been exposed. This brings us to our next point…
  1. Besides particulate matter (PM), the Guide does not list any chemicals or toxins detected in burn pit smoke.
The Department of Defense (DoD) measured levels of particulate matter (PM) that exceeded limits set by U.S. agencies. The VA Clinician’s Guide acknowledges this and briefly notes that toxicology research has already linked high PM levels to cardiopulmonary effects.
However, the VA neglects to mention any of the hundreds of chemicals detected in burn pit smoke.  The chemicals – many of them known carcinogens – include dioxins, the same potent toxin found in Agent Orange.  These chemicals are scientifically known to be hazardous on their own, but likely have even greater, “synergistic” effects when burned together.
  1. The Guide does not include important aspects of particulate matter (PM) and its toxicity.
Even on the subject of particulate matter, the Guide provides little helpful information.  The size of the PM - which is not included - is important information for doctors because the smaller the PM, the deeper the particles are able to travel into the lungs.
 
Additionally, the particles act as carriers of harmful chemicals in the air, so the toxicity depends on the composition of the particulate matter itself.  Without information about the chemicals carried by the PM, doctors’ ability to gauge the severity of the exposure is diminished.
  1. The Clinician’s Guide does not provide any specific information about the rare conditions (such as constrictive bronchiolitis) that are occurring at higher rates in veterans exposed to burn pits.
Illnesses such as constrictive bronchiolitis and eosinophilic pneumonia are mentioned only as examples of the self-reported “unexpected conditions.”  Though the Guide devotes a whole page to conducting an initial evaluation and deciding if a specialty consultation is warranted, neither section mentions these conditions by name.
 
This is a dangerous omission given that constrictive bronchiolitis can be fatal and often goes undetected until it has progressed too far.  Constrictive bronchiolitis can only be diagnosed with a lung biopsy.  So the spirometry and bronchodilator tests, which the Guide recommends to assess pulmonary function, may not indicate a problem when there is a very serious one.
  1. Directions on how doctors can view a veteran’s Burn Pit Registry self-assessment and how to document an evaluation using the Registry are buried in an unrelated section of the Guide.
The Clinician’s Guide spends almost the entire first page talking about the purpose of the Airborne Hazards and Open Burn Pit Registry and how medical support staff will explain it to veterans.  Intuitively, it doesn’t make much sense for this information about the Registry and the role of Medical Support Assistants and Environmental Health Coordinators to take up such a large and prominent space in the packet.  Especially while the two-paragraph section about research on the health effects of burn pit exposures is the very last section and takes up about a third of the page.

But most perplexing is the fact that the Registry information actually relevant to clinicians is hidden on the last page (which otherwise does not discuss the Registry).  At the bottom of an unrelated box called “Talking to Veterans about Exposure Concerns,” there is a small note.

The note tells doctors how to access a veteran’s self-assessment from the Burn Pit Registry.  Such information can be used by doctors to get a more complete understanding of a veteran’s proximity to the burn pit, their health concerns during deployment, and other important information that might not be covered in-person.

The note also tells doctors how to document a burn pit-related medical evaluation.  This information is critical because burn pit exposure is such a new phenomenon.  If VA doctors do not track the symptoms and illnesses their patients are experiencing, there is no way to see if trends are emerging or if certain treatments are more effective than others.

The Guide instructs clinicians to “rely on their own evidence based knowledge, expertise, and skills.” But without the facts – the size and scope of burn pits, the items burned, the chemicals released, how to diagnose the related illnesses – doctors are simply unable to apply even the most basic knowledge or skills to the issues their patients are experiencing.  Given the very serious medical conditions at play and the need for more detailed information about the effects of exposure, the VA’s Clinician’s Guide to Airborne Hazards is, frankly, irresponsible.

This article was written by Chisholm Chisholm & Kilpatrick.  CCK is on the cutting edge of burn pit and other toxic chemical exposure issues that veterans face.  CCK has extensive experience helping veterans win their VA disability compensation claim appeals.  Contact CCK for help if your VA disability compensation claim has been denied.  Visit CCK onlineor by phone at 844-291-8569 for more information. 

Burn Pits 360 News
 

Research:  The Burn Pits 360 Registry is a research study collecting data on burn pit exposures and related illnesses.  The goal is to prove the connection between burn pit exposure and illness.  Before now, this information was only available to the Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs.  So far, over 5,000 individuals have participated.  Your data will enable Burn Pits 360 to advocate and lobby on behalf of the veterans’ community for VA benefits, policy change, and specialized health care. Join the Burn Pits 360 Registry research study.  To participate, visit us on our website.
 
Outreach:  Burn Pits 360 team is building a new website to better serve you.  The new site will launch in 2018.  We’ve also been busy preparing for the grand opening of our Burn Pits 360 Warrior Support Center.  The grand opening will be in early 2018.  Stay tuned for more details!
 
Advocacy:  Burn Pits 360 recently requested a Congressional hearing on the use of burn pits in Iraq and Afghanistan.  On December 1, we received a letter denying our request.  Burn Pits 360 plans on writing an open letter to the President of the United States regarding this issue.  We will continue to fight on behalf of veterans suffering from the invisible toxic wounds of war.  Support our cause here. 
Legal Help for Veterans

Disability Benefits:  If VA has denied your disability compensation claim, assigned you the wrong impairment rating, or if you are entitled to an earlier effective date, contact Chisholm Chisholm & Kilpatrick for assistance.  CCK is also experienced at helping eligible veterans get VA benefits for special monthly compensation (SMC) or total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU).  Contact CCK toll free at 844-291-8569 or visit CCK online at https://cck-law.com.
Take Action to Prove the Connection Between Burn Pit Exposure and Illness by Participating in the Burn Pits 360 Registry Research Study

The Burn Pits 360 Registry is a research study, collecting data on burn pit exposures and related illnesses.  The goal is to prove the connection between burn pit exposure and illness.  Before now, this information was only available to the Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs.  So far, over 5,000 individuals have participated.  Your data will enable Burn Pits 360 to advocate and lobby on behalf of the veteran community for VA benefits, policy change, and specialized health care. To participate, visit us on our website here.
PARTICIPATE NOW
Burn Pits 360 Needs You! 

The success of our mission depends on the generosity of individuals like you.  We ask you to consider a monthly donation to help us advocate for our community and its needs.
DONATE TODAY!
Connect with Burn Pits 360 on Facebook

Burn Pits 360 is community of veterans with burn pit-related illness, their families, and advocates with the common goal of exposing the harms of toxic burn pit exposure and obtaining benefits and policy change.  Join us onFacebook!
Meet the Burn Pits 360 Team

Founder: CPT (Ret.) Le Roy Torres
Executive Director: Rosie Torres
Secretary: Tammy McCracken
Program Manager: Will Wisner
Legislative Liaison: Cindy Aman
Director of Development:Daniella Molina

Advocates
Rocio Alvarado (California)
Diane Slape (Texas)

Advisory Board
Ret. Colonel David Sutherland
Dr. Steven Coughlin
Ret. Lt. Col Gregg Deeb
Dr. Robert Miller
Ret. Lt. Col. Brian Lawler
Kerry Baker 

 
Copyright © 2017 Burn Pits 360 Veterans Organization, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you submitted your contact information via the Burn Pits 360 website.

Our mailing address is:
Burn Pits 360 Veterans Organization
P.O Box 1475
Robstown, TX 78380





Turning to Iraq . . .

 1 hour ago
A second day of anti-government protests in Iraq's semi-autonomous Kurdish region has killed at least six people and injured over 70
3 replies11 retweets19 likes
 
 



  1.  3 hours ago
Security forces kill at least five demonstrators in a rally against the Kurdish Regional Government in northern Iraq
33 retweets30 likes
 
 




IRAQI NEWS notes:

 The Iraqi government could remove the Kurdistan Region leadership following violent anti-government protests over the past two days, a newspaper reported, quoting presidential sources.
Saudi newspaper Okaz, quoting “trusted sources” at the Iraqi presidency, said Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi is mulling various options to address the crisis in the autonomous, northern Iraq region, including the removal of Nechirvan Barzani’s cabinet based on the 78th article of the constitution, which empowers the prime minister to appoint and remove ministers after parliament approval.

Abadi, speaking during his weekly press conference on Tuesday, urged Kurdistan’s government to “respect the peaceful protests” as the region closed a second day of violent protests decrying delayed employee payments and poor services.



It's interesting to hear a prime minister of Iraq claim the need to "respect peaceful protests."  It was Hayder al-Abadi's predecessor Nouri al-Maliki who was responsible for the Hawija massacre.  The April 23, 2013 massacre of a sit-in in Hawija which resulted from  Nouri's federal forces storming in.  Alsumaria noted Kirkuk's Department of Health (Hawija is in Kirkuk)  announced 50 activists have died and 110 were injured in the assault.   AFP reported the death toll eventually (as some wounded died) rose to 53 dead.   UNICEF noted that the dead included 8 children (twelve more were injured).


Though there have been annual demonstrations to remember those killed, Hayder al-Abadi has never commented on this massacre.  Hayder, after all, is a member of State of Law -- Nouri al-Maliki's political coalition -- and he is a member of the Dawa Party (Nouri's political party).

Suddenly, he's concerned about "peaceful protests"?

And how does what's taken place qualify as peaceful?  The offices of political parties are being set on fire.


Kurdistan Regional Government Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani Tweeted the following:


  1.  16 hours ago
My message to the protesters These are challenging times for our region. Your frustrations are understandable, and I hear them. Peaceful expression of views is of course a legitimate and democratic right...
45 replies125 retweets393 likes
 
 
 16 hours ago
پەیامم بۆ خۆپیشاندەران ھەرێمەکەمان لە ئێستادا بە دۆخێکێ ھەستیاردا تێپەڕ دەبێت. من لە داواکارییەکانی ئێوە تێدەگەم و ھاوسۆزم لەگەڵتان. دەربڕینی ئاشتیانەی بیروبۆچوون مافێکی شەرعی و دیموکراسییە. بەڵام توندوتیژی ھیچ کاتێک پەسەند نییە...
40 replies63 retweets413 likes
 
 


Use the second link.  The first link takes you to this:

https://goo.gl/oQSqnK – this goo.gl shortlink has been disabled. It was found to be violating our Terms of Service. Click here and here for more information about our terms and policies respectively.


Really?

An official statement from an elected leader is found to be violating the Terms of Service?

That was rat f**king and that's all it was -- disabling the link.  It was targeted with complaints so that it wouldn't be accessible to those who read English only.

Here's the statement that Twitter will not currently link to:

My message to the protesters
These are challenging times for our region. Your frustrations are understandable, and I hear them. Peaceful expression of views is of course a legitimate and democratic right.
But violence is never acceptable. ​I call on all of you to conduct your protests peacefully.
We must also remember that we still live in a violent and fragile region. Just in the last day our Peshmerga have fought a skirmish with Daesh terrorists. Of even more concern is that we are tracking movements by Iraqi forces in Makhmour.
We are stronger when we are united. I appreciate your resilience and patience in this difficult period. We have got through much worse in the past, and I still believe that, together, we will build a better future.


Again, censoring a statement by an elected leader -- just on the face of it -- is wrong.

But read over the above and ask how that got censored?

The answer?

Complaints to Twitter.

About actual content?

No, just a mass of complaints made with the knowledge that it would get the link disabled (at least temporarily).

There's a great deal going on here.

And in social media, it's being noted that it's awfully lucky for some that the Kurds are facing this.  Who benefits?  The age old question is asked and the answer most often given is the US government.

In part because the US government has (again) turned its back on the KRG.  In part because the moves of the political party Goran appear to increase turmoil (and Goran was fueled by CIA seed money).


Gorran (change) movement (second largest group in parliament) and Islamic Group (fifth largest group in parliament) withdraw from the Iraqi Kurdish regional cabinet.
4:23 AM - 20 Dec 2017
2 replies9 retweets2 likes
 
 
The change movement will also leave top regional parliament position and suspend it's 'strategic' agreement with the PUK.
1 reply1 retweet2 likes
 
 
  1.  41 minutes ago
Replying to 
When have they contributed for the sake of KRG? Let these traitors go to Baghdad parliament. With their violent terror protestors.
 
 

 28 minutes ago
These ‘protestors’ are not hungry for bread, but for blood. These are the that sold . Now they want whole and follow their master . Hope the forces will teach and educate them, because their parents forgot to do that.
1 retweet1 like
 
 



The protestors may be genuine but there are some who question that and those questioning may have reason to do so.

 21 hours ago
Hey, you know what! Let’s protest and riot against KRG and their leadership for not giving salaries. Let’s chant Abadi’s name.
Iraqi PM Haider al-Abadi: "We cannot pay the salaries of the public employees in the Region."
2 retweets5 likes
 
 



 19 hours ago
The weird thing is; they riot against KRG for salaries, but everyone knows Abadi has cut the money for this. Still they chant his name. Besides, ISIS, Iraqi army and PMU are attacking Kurdistan. This all happened in last 2-3 days. Betrayal of 16 october is still pending...
2 likes
 
 
Show this thread



If this protests contain any outside elements, it's most likely as key instigators.

The salary issue is genuine.  It has been going on for some time.  Whether it is being used by certain forces to manipulate is the question.  And the answer may very well be: No.  It may be that this is Kurdish-grown and no outside influence is shaping it.  But the question is being raised repeatedly.

The Kurds have other pressing issues to deal with.

Among them?

Reports that the Islamic State continues to battle in Iraq.



 16 hours ago
Our gallant repelled an offensive in Makhmour, who left 8 bodies behind.They were morethan 30 . Although are ever prepared to defend Kurdistan, this indicates instability and insecurity in Iraq, despite Iraqi PM’s announcement of ISIS defeat
14 replies25 retweets189 likes
 
 



And there's also the continued threat from the Baghdad-based government of Iraq.


  1.  51 minutes ago
Region’s Security Council warns of Iraqi military buildup outside of city, and around Makhmour.
0:03
536 views
1 reply8 retweets10 likes
 
 
 2 hours ago
Iraqi military buildup in and around Makhmour, South West Erbil, has continued for over a week. In this position, armored vehicles and Humvees have been deployed.
3 replies59 retweets85 likes
 
 
  1. Show this thread








As noted above, the Peshmerga is still fighting the Islamic State.  That news is troubling -- especially when you factor in Iraq's Prime Minister Hayder al-Abadi's repeated claims of victory over ISIS.

Kamal al-Ayash (NIQASH) reported on the 13th:

 Last week the Iraqi government declared victory over the extremist group known as the Islamic State. But, according to locals and military personnel living in the Anbar province, that declaration was premature.
“I have seen no genuine indications that this province is rid of the Islamic State group,” says Ayad al-Nimrawi, a 43-year-old who runs a restaurant in the Kilo area, about 160 kilometres along the road between Baghdad and the Syrian-Jordanian border. “I still see commercial trucks accompanied by security details when they come along here. Even the security forces cannot travel down here alone, they require extra protection.”
“I will only feel that we have won the final victory when I see life returning to this road as it was before the Islamic State came. We used to travel here at night without any fear of armed groups but today this international road is almost completely closed. As soon as dusk falls, this road is a death trap.”  


Equally troubling is the victory dance Hayder's been doing when you consider what the so-called victory has cost.

AP reports:
An Associated Press investigation has found that between 9,000 and 11,000 civilians died in the final battle to drive Islamic State extremists out of the Iraqi city of Mosul. 


That’s a civilian casualty rate nearly 10 times higher than what has been previously reported.  The deaths are acknowledged neither by the coalition, the Iraqi government nor the Islamic State group’s self-styled caliphate. 


On civilian casualties, Belkas Wille (Human Rights Watch) writes:

 In its latest civilian casualty report, the US-led coalition in Iraq said that after reviewing “available information” there was insufficient evidence to find civilians were harmed in an April 2017 airstrike it carried out on the Sakkak neighborhood in Mosul. Yet Human Rights Watch previously documented that the strike killed 13 civilians.
I wondered what the “available information” reviewed had been. I wrote on behalf of Human Rights Watch to the coalition’s media contact, asked the question, and offered to share our information – the contact for an eyewitness to the strike, a man who personally knew the victims, and the names of the 13 civilians who he told us were killed.
A spokesperson emailed back and – without taking up our offer of information – claimed they had considered “all reasonably available evidence.”

The email pointed to abuses by ISIS and “the Russian-backed regime” in Syria, noting that “unlike ISIS, the Coalition works extensively to reduce the risk to civilians on the ground.”
Yes, the coalition is clearly more transparent. But since when is ISIS the standard against which coalition countries measure their actions?



The following community sites -- plus BLACK AGENDA REPORT --  updated:


  • Ann's Mega Dub
    TJ Miller accused of assault
    7 hours ago
  • Trina's Kitchen
    The tax bill
    7 hours ago
  • SICKOFITRADLZ
    Again on DoD's space program
    7 hours ago
  • Ruth's Report
    We not need Al Franken
    7 hours ago
  • Oh Boy It Never Ends
    She knew
    8 hours ago
  • Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills)
    Jinkies!
    8 hours ago
  • Mikey Likes It!
    The trickster
    8 hours ago
  • Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude
    debbie wasserman schultz needs to be judged harshly and sentenced
    8 hours ago

  • Like Maria Said Paz
    Stop scapegoating Jill Stein
    8 hours ago 

  •  Black Agenda Report
    Marikana Massacre Hangs Over New Leader of South Africa’s Ruling Party
    19 hours ago 

    • Posted by at

    Monday, December 18, 2017

    Again on Tavis Smiley

    Tavis?  I did a post last week on this.  He and PBS are pretty much done due to allegations of gender violence. 
    Yeah, I’m using “gender violence.”  “Sexual assault,” as Ava and C.I. have long argued, makes rape and other acts sex and about sex.  Rape isn’t sex.  We need to use assault and abuse or gender violence.
     
    By the way, read Ava and C.I.’s latest – it’s incredible as usual.
     

    Anyway, so Tavis goes on ABC’s GOOD MORNING AMERICA and denies the allegations.
     
    And PBS?
     
     


    In a strongly-worded rebuttal, a PBS spokesperson responded that Smiley "needs to get his story straight," arguing the journalist (who has contributed op-ed pieces to USA TODAY and whose status is currently under review) has been inconsistent as to the number of employees with whom he's had sexual contact and questioning the sincerity of his support for the women who came forward when his company required them to sign non-disclosure agreements. 
    "Witnesses who have bravely come forward to speak with the independent investigators retained by PBS report a fear of retribution for speaking out," the network said, noting, "Additional allegations are continuing to come to light since last week’s announcement. "
    The statement continued, "PBS stands by the integrity of its investigation, which has been conducted by an outside firm with expertise in such matters. Mr. Smiley’s own words today coupled with the information discovered during the investigation confirms PBS’ decision to indefinitely suspend the distribution of  Tavis Smiley."
     
    It is not looking good for Tavis.  I would love for it to turn out differently but it appears he’s guilty.  There’s still time for that to change.
     
    Still time for change? What the heck happened at my local airport?  We were going home for Christmas but the whole thing in Atlanta has me watching.  If it loses power again between now and Wednesday, we’ll stay here.  If there’s not, we’ll go home.
     



    "Iraq snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):
    Monday, December 18, 2017.  The United Nations stands for men only, protests take place in the KRG, and much more.



    In Baghdad, the United Nations Population Fund played at concerns about equality on Sunday.

    UNFPA Deputy Representative Nestor Owonmuhangi was speaking on behalf of women -- because, apparently a woman can't speak on behalf of women -- not even when it comes to the United Nations.

    Maybe Nestor stood in because Matt Damon was otherwise occupied?

    But there was Nestor prattling on about nonsense:

    .
    Through the Women Centres, UNFPA has successfully reached out, in the past 2 years, to more than 286,000 women and girls with gender-based violence services. The Fund has also supported the Department of Health in Dohuk in establishing and operate a center which provides comprehensive medical, mental health and psychosocial care, and the same model of this centre has been replicated in Amriyet al-Fallujah in Anbar governorate.

    He insisted that the UN supported gender equality.

    Apparently, to the United Nations, gender equality will be achieved by using men to speak for women?

    It was all a bunch of garbage from a  weakened UN that has refused to stand by the call that the Iraq War is illegal and that has refused to stand up for Iraqi women and girls.

    Repeatedly refused.

    Remember this:

    The Special Representatives of the United Nations Secretary-General (SRSG) on Sexual Violence in Conflict (SVC), Pramila Patten, and for Children and Armed Conflict, Virginia Gamba urged Iraq to reconsider the draft amendments to the Personal Status Law that alter fundamentally the legal provisions governing marriage. It is a matter of concern that these draft amendments are silent on the minimum age of consent to marriage and do not apply to all components of Iraqi society.
    [. . .]

    “The boys and girls of Iraq, already victims of grave violations resulting from years of conflict, are now at risk of being deprived of their childhood. The Government of Iraq must take all necessary actions to protect every child by preventing the adoption of policies that can harm children already exposed to armed conflict,” SRSG Gamba added.

     See the December 6th Iraqi snapshot for the UN's full response.  But it never got better.

    We posted that cowardly garbage in full that day without comment.

    Boys were not part of the proposed law.

    But the UN couldn't be troubled with speaking up for Iraqi girls.

    If they couldn't include "boys" in it, it wasn't worth making a statement.

    They have repeatedly failed Iraqi women and girls.

    They should be ashamed of themselves.

    Saturday, Human Rights Watch noted:


    Iraq’s parliament has rejected proposed amendments to Iraq’s Personal Status Law (PSL) that would allow religious judges to impose discriminatory law on family matters, Human Rights Watch said today.
    The amendments would have covered areas including inheritance and divorce, and, by giving powers to impose family laws to certain religious communities, would have allowed girls to be married as young as age 8 under some of these laws. The head of the women’s rights committee in parliament rejected the initiative in mid-November, blocking the bill. However, two leading women’s rights organizations say that some parliament members have threatened to continue to push for the amendments to secure votes in some parts of the country in the May 2018 parliamentary elections.

    “Parliament’s women’s rights committee has made a great contribution to Iraqi society in rejecting this effort to scuttle Iraq’s family law protections,” said Belkis Wille, senior Iraq researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Threats by lawmakers to dismantle protections under the current law and restore discriminatory laws would be devastating to women’s rights.”
    Parliament members from several Shia Islamic parties, spearheaded by the Fadhila Party, to which the justice minister belongs, proposed the amendments on November 1. The proposed amendments would enshrine Shia and Sunni religious establishment control over marriage-related matters and require courts to make exceptions to existing legal protections.
    Hanaa Edwar, founder and general secretary of Al-Amal Association, a leading Iraqi human rights organization, and a member of the Human Rights Watch Middle East Advisory Committee, said the members also threatened to continue to push for the amendments unless the women’s rights committee dropped key protections in a domestic violence bill pending before parliament since 2015.

    “The proposed amendments seek to establish sectarianism and undermine the principle of citizenship and national identity of Iraq,” Edwar told Human Rights Watch. “The amendments would violate key rights enshrined in Iraq’s constitution and laws, and would treat women as inferior to men.”




    Get it?  Get who was under attack?

    But for the UN to make a statement -- a late coming statement at that -- they had to include "boys" when it wasn't even effecting/targeting them.

    How shameful.

    "Your world," the United Nations' slogan claims.

    Yet in their actions, they repeatedly make clear that the "your" is aimed at boys and men.

    No wonder the UN finds itself in so many rape scandals and so repeatedly.

    As Azad Essa (ALJAZEERA) noted last August:

    UN peacekeepers are sent to the most war-ravaged countries on Earth, ostensibly to help them transition to peace. 
    But some stand accused of committing crimes against the very people they are supposed to protect. 
    According to a recent investigation by the Associated Press (AP), between 2004 and 2016, the United Nations received almost 2,000 allegations of sexual exploitation and abuse against its peacekeepers. 
    The UN says it has a zero-tolerance policy on sexual exploitation and abuse, but survivors, activists, lawyers and human rights organisations say such crimes have been allowed to continue with impunity.
    You'd think, with that reputation, the United Nations would be working overtime to address the problem as well as any and all appearances that they do not value female lives equally.

    But they've done little to nothing.

    In April of this year, Pasiley Dodds (AP) noted, "An Associated Press investigation of U.N. missions during the past 12 years found nearly 2,000 allegations of sexual abuse and exploitation by peacekeepers and other personnel around the world -- signaling the crisis is much larger than previously known. More than 300 of the allegations involved children, the AP found, but only a fraction of the alleged perpetrators served jail time."

    Whose UN?



    Do you have to let it linger, Cranberries?

    Yes, let that question ("Whose UN?")  linger -- the United Nations certainly has.


     In other news . . .


    1.  7m7 minutes ago
    ties aid to peaceful resolution of conflict with Kurds -
    0 replies0 retweets0 likes
     
     
     2h2 hours ago
    FM continued: Our support goes to a united Iraq. Since 2014, Germany has provided more than 1 billion Euros for reconstruction in Iraq.
    3 replies11 retweets13 likes
     
     




     53m53 minutes ago
    Protesters have set fire to KDP, PUK, KIU and Goran political party offices in Sulaymaniyah Kurdistan north . A journalist have been injured after security forces opened fire.
    0 replies6 retweets5 likes


    Andrea Shalal (REUTERS) reports, "Germany on Monday said its continued support for Iraq and the semi-autonomous Kurdistan Regional Government was contingent on peaceful efforts by both sides to resolve their differences."  Shalal quotes Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel stating, "Our support is for Iraq as a unified state. We want to continue that, but the precondition is that Iraq solves its internal conflicts peacefully and democratically, and that we find a way out of the tense situation we are in now."


    That will be difficult.  Kamal Chomani (AL-MONITOR) reported last week:
    Trying to jump-start discussions with Iraq's central government, the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in Erbil recently announced it will respect the Iraqi Federal Court's ecision that the KRG independence referendum was unconstitutional. But Baghdad has amplified its demands for opening a dialogue, which makes negotiations unlikely to happen anytime soon.
    The Kurdish independence referendum, which voters overwhelmingly approved in September, greatly escalated problems between Baghdad and the KRG. However, both sides have called for negotiations to resolve the issues based on the Iraqi Constitution. Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi has said Baghdad is continuing to work toward putting into effect some articles of the constitution that have never been implemented and would benefit the Kurds, while at the same time returning federal sovereignty to all areas of Iraq.
    US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson touched on the subject this week during a speech at the Atlantic Council-Korea Foundation Forum in Washington DC, saying the United States will help officials implement the Iraqi Constitution completely.
    "We have said we’ll stand with the Kurds to support them in the full implementation of the Iraqi Constitution … which, when it is fully implemented, will address a number of grievances that the Kurdish people have had for some time and we hope will lead to that unified Iraq," Tillerson said at the Dec. 12 meeting.
    An Iraqi parliamentary source told Al-Monitor, on condition of anonymity, Baghdad's five recent conditions for opening negotiations.


     In the KRG today, violence aimed at political parties.






    1.  15m15 minutes ago
    : Kurdish protesters set fire to KDP office in northern Iraq
    1 reply10 retweets4 likes
     
     
     36m36 minutes ago
    URGENT: Protesters set fire to Kurdistan Democratic Party office in northern - reports
    2 replies9 retweets3 likes
     
     




     1h1 hour ago
    Protesters have set fire to KDP, PUK, KIU and Goran political party offices in Sulaymaniyah Kurdistan north . A journalist have been injured after security forces opened fire.
    0 replies6 retweets6 likes
     
     

     






    Meanwhile, Molly Hennessy-Fiske and Alexandra Zavis (LOS ANGELES TIMES) report:


    When Ali Thanoon lost more than 50 members of his family in a U.S. airstrike during the battle against Islamic State in Mosul in the spring, he turned to the Iraqi government for compensation.But officials required Thanoon to prove his loved ones had been killed: He could get the necessary death certificates only by digging up their bodies from a mass grave.
    [. . .]
    But there was another hard fact: The Iraqi government’s compensation program for victims of the Mosul campaign, even those with death certificates, had no money.



    This follows Samuel Oakford (AIRWARS) reporting over the weekend:



    Ground fighters on all sides of the conflict in Iraq suffered heavy casualties. US military officials have thrown around large numbers — claiming anywhere from 45,000 to 70,000 or more ISIS fighters killed since Coalition operations began. But analysts have questioned whether the number of ISIS fighters in general has tended to be exaggerated, especially by Western militaries.
    In the fight for Mosul, elite units like Iraq’s Special Operations Forces were so heavily depleted during fighting — by some estimates they suffered “upwards of 50 percent casualties” in East Mosul — that their role in the more densely packed West was severely diminished.
    In March, CENTCOM chief Gen. Joseph Votel said that 774 Iraqi troops had so far been killed in Mosul. US officials have since put the number of Iraqi military dead in Mosul at 1,400. Other estimates place the number even higher: In November 2016, the UN reported that 1,959 members of the Iraqi Security Forces and supporting forces had been killed that month alone in Iraq. After the Iraqi government protested, the UN stopped publishing estimates of government forces killed in the fighting. Many more Peshmerga fighters and irregulars with Popular Mobilization Forces militias also died fighting ISIS.
    Partly as a result of this high Iraqi toll, in December 2016 the Obama administration loosened restrictions on who could call in airstrikes, allowing personnel farther down the command chain to do so. That decision allowed faster approval of attacks, which Coalition officials said would help assist ground troops.
    However some journalists on the ground have said that this led to an immediate rise in civilian casualties, a toll that only grew as operations in Mosul continued into the city’s West and ultimately ended in a hellish assault on the narrowly packed Old City.

    Though civilians, Iraqi forces and members of ISIS were killed in significant numbers, remarkably few Coalition personnel have died during combat operations – a measure not just of battlefield superiority but of how intensively the alliance depended upon remote air and artillery strikes. As of December 15th, just 13 US service members were reported as killed in action during the entirety of Coalition operations in Iraq and Syria going back to 2014. Partners like France have only suffered rare casualties during operations around Mosul, and not from direct fighting.



    New content at THIRD:






    And the following community sites -- plus Jody Watley -- updated:



    Posted by at
    Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)