Friday, January 14, 2011

The ex-factor of Lauryn

From John Bream of the Minneapolis Star-Tribune:

If her 2001 meltdown on MTV's "Unplugged" wasn't enough to raise concerns about Hill, it was topped by a 2003 Vatican Christmas concert where she delivered a tirade about abuse by Catholic priests. Since then, Hill has mostly been MIA except for a few concerts with the Fugees (in 2004-05) and a few solo gigs, many of which have received less-than-enthusiastic reviews.

Even on her current comeback tour, which started last month, the reports haven't always been flattering. Crowds have been frustrated by extremely tardy starts and a lack of new material (although a new tune, "Repercussions," was leaked last year). One thing that has impressed is her bold honesty onstage.


Also true, and this is all over Black radio, her voice keeps cracking during most concerts.

Have drugs destroyed her?

I have no idea. She's lucky to have had her Amy Winehouse antics take place before the net was the force it is today.

Lauryn's become a joke.

If she can put together a new album, I'll listen to it at least once. But she doesn't have a new one coming out. That's because Sony can't believe how much money she's already wasted on recording sessions with nothing to show for it. Nor did they want to release her 2001 MTV album. They were right. The problems with her voice were first obvious there.

In addition, her new songs were beyond weak. And one appeared homophobic.

Lauryn Hill has serious image problems.

When her solo album came out, the image problem some forced on her was, "She's a woman, she can't do hip-hop without the two men from the Fugees." She proved them wrong and proved she could shape and influence music.

And that gave her the standing to do a song like "Doo Wop" without getting slaughtered.

Getting slaughtered?

I don't wear a weave. Many Black women I know do. So when Lauryn's off on her 'fake nails' and fake hair screed, she's actually going to piss off a lot of black listeners.

She'll pull in a few who might be more political at the same time; however, when she goes off into homophobia, as she did on the MTV album, she pushes them away as well.

So the point I'm making is Lauryn can give it up. No one gives a damn anymore. If she does an album in the next three years, it will most likely debut at number one and then set a record for quickly sinking out of the top forty.

It's too bad because she had a great deal of talent and, before the drugs, an amazing voice. "The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill" was the finest work she'd done -- on her own or with the group. It still stands. But she's weakened it with her antics since and I hope she doesn't further weaken it. I expect to hear her delivering a rap (speech) from the stage against gays next. She's gotten so nutty.


"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):

Friday, January 14, 2010. Chaos and violence continue, a group of Iraqis demonstrate against continued war and occupation, Diane Rehm wonders "But what about what the American people have been told?," Christians in Baghdad are attacked and eye witnesses state the police were among the attackers, Barack Obama finally has a statement about the attacks on Iraqi Christians, and more.
This week US Vice President Joe Biden visited several countries including Afghanistan and Iraq. On the second hour of today's The Diane Rehm Show, the visit was discussed and we're emphasing the Iraq section but picking up at the end of the Afghanistan discussion. Diane's guests were NPR's Tom Gjelten, NBC News' Courtney Kube and UPI's Martin Walker. Excerpt:
Diane Rehm: Courtney?
Courtney Kube: Yeah, on Vice President Biden's remarks in Afghanistan, I-I had to laugh when I read that the other day because he's made so many comments about the withdrawal -- the deadline in Afghanistan -- in the past few months. Just three weeks ago, he told Meet The Press -- NBC's Meet The Press -- that-that the US was going to be out of Afghanistan in 2014 come hell or high water. So three weeks later he's standing with President Karzai and says they're going to stay there. Now if you read through his remarks, it's plausible that he was specifically referring to supporting an Afghanistan nation-building plan and that-that it's possible he was talking more about the US would be there in a support role for nation-building -- that's sort of how his aides were spinning it afterwards. Whether that's what he meant or not, you got to ask Vice President Biden, though.
Tom Gjelten: You have to wonder, Diane, whether President [Barack] Obama sent Vice President Biden on this trip to Afghanistan precisely to force him into that situation to clarify his remarks. I think it was -- You know, we were -- everyone was -- looking for the magic words from him about the withdrawal and he did say to them -- he said that the withdrawal of US forces would be "conditions based" and that is not his position before. Clearly, he had gotten the message from President Obama that he needed to get on the same page as the rest of the administration in supporting the policy. That's one point. The second point is, as Martin eluded to, no one could better project the-the credibility of this message than the very figure of the administration who had been most skeptical of it. So, if you have Vice President Biden saying the United States is ready to stay after 2014, you can assume there are no more dissenting voices that are going to detract from that message.
Diane Rehm: But what about what the American people have been told? Namely that we are gonna get out [of Afghanistan] in 2014? Does that matter at all?
Martin Walker: It depends what you mean by "out." And I think this is Courtney's point, but -- as we're seeing in Iraq -- it's one thing to withdraw combat troops.
Diane Rehm: Sounds like the definition of the word "if."
Martin Walker: Exactly. That's the echo I was seeking. But there is a difference between having combat troops engaged in combat aggressive operations and having a number of support troops [who are] training troops and so on. And I think we're going to see that distinction blurred as creatively as possible by the administration over the next couple of years.
Tom Gjelten: You know, Diane, I'll go out on a limb here, I think what really concerns American people more than anything else is casualties and if you can --
Diane Rehm: Exactly.
Tom Gjelten (Con't): -- come up with a presence that does not produce a lot of casualties, there's gonna be a lot more tolerance for it. The United States still has a lot of combat troops in Iraq and will continue to have for a long time. But casualties there have gone way, way down. And I think that probably means the United States would be inclined to accept it -- the people of the United States would be inclined to accept it.
Diane Rehm: But what about Moqtada al-Sadr and his comments that he wants the US out of Iraq right now?
Martin Walker: Well he's back and he seems almost as feisty as [in] the past. What he was not saying was that he would perhaps lead any kind of military action to drive the Americans out. What is really striking is that his joining the government means that the deal that was reached with [Ayad] Allawi to bring the Sunnis on board by making him [Allawi] chairman of this new national strategy council -- that deal now looks hollow. In other words, the stability of Iraq in the future -- which will depend upon Sunni support -- now looks a great deal less certain than it was looking just two weeks ago.
Since Diane raised the issue of Moqtada al-Sadr, we'll move first to him and his supporters. Khaled Farhan, Khalid al-Ansary, Michael Christie and Tim Pearce (Reuters) report that approximately 2,000 followers of Moqtada al-Sadr marched through Kufa protesting that Joe Biden had visited and, P.S., they don't want him coming back. Of course the protest might not be so damn laughable if they'd managed to stage it while Joe Biden was actually in Iraq. In what should be a show of strength or at least moderate influence, the Sadr movement looks incredibly sad as their protest takes place after Biden leaves. So much for the talk of 'powerful' Moqtada and his 'powerful' movement. Azzaman reports that the followers "chanted anti-Ameircan slogans" and quoted follower Mohammed Abbas ("day-laborer") stating, "We demand no repeat visits to Iraq by Biden and we demand the departure of the occupier."
In the midst of a series of high profile meetings with Nouri al-Maliki, Grand Ayatollah Sayyed Ali al-Sistani and Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, Moqtada al-Sadr presumably wanted to "stay on message." The protest knocked him off that and, in fact, got far more attention than did any of his photo-ops. It's doubtful al-Sadr's sanctined, let alone called for, the demonstration which only further indicates the problems he will be experiencing in the coming months as he tries to strike the pose of leader of a civil and engaged political body. His years and years in exile has allowed his 'movement' to engage in a variety of activities and, as Kufa's protest demonstrates, they still think that is appropriate -- even when it knocks al-Sadr off message and, in fact, upstages him and forces him to spend Saturday addressing the topic of the protest. So much for 'fearless' or 'fearful' leader Moqtada al-Sadr. Whether these are merely initial growing pains as the 'movement' and the man re-embrace or if they are signs of a natural split emerging will be determined in the coming months.
Moqtada al-Sadr wasn't the only one visiting al-Sistaning, also visiting him was Iraq's President Jalal Talabani. Al Mada reports that al-Sistani stressed that Iraq was a place for all Iraqis regardless of "religion, doctrine or nationalism, they are all brothers and we stand as one" and that Talabani told reporters after the meeting that he discussed with al-Sistani the suffering of Iraqi Christians and that al-Sistani repudiates the attacks and calls them crimes that do an injustice to all of Iraq. However, approximatley at the time Talabani was speaking to reporters, the Christian Association of Ashurbanipal in Baghdad was under attack and their property was damanged by unknown assailants and by, according to eye witness, Baghdad police officers. Abdul-Karim, speaking for the police, denied that they were connected to the attack. One eye witness reports that the Baghdad police could be seen with the assailants and exclaiming, "We are an Islamic state!" and "No place for Christians and Yazidis in Baghdad!" Iraqi Christians have long been targeted throughout the Iraq War and the latest wave of attacks started October 31st with the assault on Our Lady of Salvation Church in Baghdad leading to the deaths of approximately 70 people with approximately 70 others left injured.
In November, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton became the highest ranking US official to speak out on the ongoing attacks. Joe Biden quickly followed. Today President Barack Obama issued the following proclamation:
Our Nation was founded on a shared commitment to the values of justice, freedom, and equality. On Religious Freedom Day, we commemorate Virginia's 1786 Statute for Religious Freedom, in which Thomas Jefferson wrote that "all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinion in matters of religion." The fundamental principle of religious freedom -- guarded by our Founders and enshrined in our Constitution's First Amendment -- continues to protect rich faiths flourishing within our borders.
The writ of the Founding Fathers has upheld the ability of Americans to worship and practice religion as they choose, including the right to believe in no religion at all. However, these liberties are not self-sustaining, and require a stalwart commitment by each generation to preserve and apply them. Throughout our Nation's history, our founding ideal of religious freedom has served as an example to the world. Though our Nation has sometimes fallen short of the weighty task of ensuring freedom of religious expression and practice, we have remained a Nation in which people of different faiths coexist with mutual respect and equality under the law. America's unshakeable commitment to religious freedom binds us together as a people, and the strength of our values underpins a country that is tolerant, just, and strong.
My Administration continues to defend the cause of religious freedom in the United States and around the world. At home, we vigorously protect the civil rights of Americans, regardless of their religious beliefs. Across the globe, we also seek to uphold this human right and to foster tolerance and peace with those whose beliefs differ from our own. We bear witness to those who are persecuted or attacked because of their faith. We condemn the attacks made in recent months against Christians in Iraq and Egypt, along with attacks against people of all backgrounds and beliefs. The United States stands with those who advocate for free religious expression and works to protect the rights of all people to follow their conscience, free from persecution and discrimination.
On Religious Freedom Day, let us reflect on the principle of religious freedom that has guided our Nation forward, and recommit to upholding this universal human right both at home and around the world.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim January 16, 2011, as Religious Freedom Day. I call on all Americans to commemorate this day with events and activities that teach us about this critical foundation of our Nation's liberty, and to show us how we can protect it for future generations here and around the world.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this fourteenth day of January, in the year of our Lord two thousand eleven, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-fifth.
Returning to the topic of Joe Biden's visit and the ongoing Iraq War, Al Mada reports that both US and Iraqi officials are "calling for" some sort of "small American force" to remain in Iraq "in order to provide air support and military assistance" and notes Labid Abawi, Iraq's Deputy Foreign Minister, says the security agreement will be worked on by "a high joint committee" and numerous subcomittees and that any amendment extending it "depends upon the request of one of the parties and the approval of the second party." Jack Kenny (New American) notes Biden's "hints" at a longer US presence and offers:
Whether al-Sadr and the 40-member Shi'ite faction in the nation's parliament could block an extension of the deadline is not known. What may be of greater concern to the United States is the link to Iran al-Sadr represents after spending the past four years there, and the growing influence Tehran may exert on the politics of neighboring Iraq. Iran, along with Saddam's Iraq and North Korea, was labeled part of the "axis of evil" by President George W. Bush and hostility between Washington and Tehran has continued over Iran's alleged efforts to develop nuclear weapons. While U.S. officials in both the Bush and Obama administrations have not ruled out a military strike against Iran, another war in the Middle East is something the United States can ill afford, both financially and militarily, while it is still fighting a nine-year-old war in Afghanistan and winding down its mission in Iraq. As Biden recalled in a speech to American troops in Baghdad yesterday, that mission has so far resulted in more than 4,000 American dead and some 32,000 wounded.
Whether the US is leaving or not, 12 escapees left a Basra prison today. AFP reports, "A dozen suspected members of Al-Qaeda's front group in Iraq escaped from a prison in the south of the country on Friday morning, police said." Reuters quotes Ali Ghanim al-Maliki, "head of the security committee of Basra's provincial committee," stating. "All of the men are linked to the Islamic State of Iraq, that is linked to al Qaeda. Some of them were arrested eight months ago, and three of them were arrested a month or less than a month ago. All the guards securing the compound have been detained for investigation. Of course, there was collusion from within the compound, but we do not know who is involved at this moment." Al Mada reports that photos of the escapees have been distributed to checkpoints throughout Basra.
Reuters notes today's violence includes a Tikrit sticky bombing which claimed the life of 1 city worker and a Mosul sticky bombing which claimed the life of 1 police officer.
Meanwhile Fadel al-Nashmi (Niqash) examines the politics of Iraq or the way politicians posture at any rate:
Three months have passed since the publication of US secret documents by the Wikileaks site, which included 400,000 documents relating to Iraqi political affairs. So far, there has been no serious Iraqi response.
Instead, the two main political forces in the country, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's State of Law Coalition, and Ayad Allawi's Iraqiya list, initially tried using these documents to further their own interests.
The Iraqiya list demanded investigations over allegations that Maliki had commanded squads that killed and tortured his opponents.
Maliki denied these accusations, saying they were "tricks and media bubbles planned to serve certain political goals."
But since the two parties joined forces and agreed on the formation of a new government at the end of December 2010, they have both ignored the Wikileaks documents.
Yesterday, we noted that spin on Iraqi refugees that's being advanced. Strange, isn't it? At a time when the White House should be explaining the number of refugees admitted to Iraq, instead there's a 'press' 'movement' about to insist that there were never that many Iraqi refugees. We called out those lies yesterday and the chief liar. Turns out Thomas E. Ricks' online equivalent of a sex toy, Joel Wing, is advancing the lies as well. In a lengthy post that says so very little, he advances every lie in the book and then -- to back up his lies or make it appear that they have been -- he lists 12 sources. But only two of them apply to "Not so many refugees!" and they're both the bad 'reporting' of Nicholas Seeley. Seems to me if you're including Works Cited for a piece claiming that the number of Iraqi refugees was much smaller than reported, you'd need more than one source for that claim but Nicholas Seeley is Wing's only source. Joel Wing may not be lying, he may truly be that stupid. Stupid tends to attract stupid and that would explain that Wing-Ricks online loving. But if you're so damn stupid that you don't grasp that most refugees in the country are not going to register -- especially in countries where they are not legally allowed to work -- or the issues of 'visiting' which requires some Iraqi refugees to cross the border back into Iraq and then return to get their passports stamped, then maybe you should find another subject to write about?
Staying on the topic of lies, BBC News reports the Iraq Inquiry will again take testimony from War Hawk Tony Blair on January 21st. Chris Ames (Iraq Inquiry Digest) notes:
This page on the Hutton Inquiry website provides a great deal of detail on the redrafting of the September 2002 Iraq dossier, including the dates and times that drafts of Tony Blair's foreword were circulated.
At 10.01 on 17 September 2002, Alastair Campbell, who wrote the foreword, circulated this first draft.
"I am in no doubt that the threat is serious, and current; that he has made progress on WMD, and that he has to be stopped; that he does not want the UN inspectors in precisely because he has a great deal to hide."
But Saddam had already agreed to the return of UN inspectors. For example, at 02.39 that morning, the Guardian had reported that:
"Saddam Hussein last night caved in and agreed to the unconditional return of weapons inspectors to Iraq."

Turning to the US, Wil Cruz (Fox News Latino) reports on the journey home of the bodies of Sgt Jose M. Cintron Rosado and Spc Jose Delgado Arroyo who became the two most recent US military deaths in Iraq January 2nd. Cruz notes, "The deaths of CintrĂ³n Rosado and Delgado Arroyo, the third and fourth soldiers from the Puerto Rico National Guard killed since Sept. 11, are a somber reminder of the sacrifice Puerto Ricans and Latinos have made to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In all, 593 Latino members of the military have been killed since Oct. 7, 2001, when U.S. soldiers and Marines first landed in Afghanistan, according to the Department of Defense. And that number doesn't include casualties who have committed suicide after returning from their tours."

Larry Copeland (USA Today) notes
that it's not just people, things are also coming back from Iraq, the unmanned drones are itching to come to your neighborhood:

One of the chief obstacles to widespread use of UAVs is their inability to "see and avoid" other aircraft as required by federal regulations, a key to flight safety. Davis says he believes operators on the ground can comply with federal rules if they can see the aircraft and the surrounding environment. Wesley Randall, principal investigator on an FAA grant awarded last year to researchers at Auburn University to study the risks associated with unmanned aircraft, predicts drones will be used by police departments in five to 10 years. Randall predicts that much larger unmanned aircraft will be used to transport cargo within 15-20 years.
No local police departments have been authorized to use unmanned aircraft, although police departments in Houston and Miami have conducted field tests of such planes, Dorr says.

Also home from Iraq is of Bradley Manning. Monday April 5th, WikiLeaks released US military video of a July 12, 2007 assault in Iraq. 12 people were killed in the assault including two Reuters journalists Namie Noor-Eldeen and Saeed Chmagh. Monday June 7th, the US military announced that they had arrested Bradley Manning and he stood accused of being the leaker of the video. Leila Fadel (Washington Post) reported in August that Manning had been charged -- "two charges under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The first encompasses four counts of violating Army regulations by transferring classified information to his personal computer between November and May and adding unauthorized software to a classified computer system. The second comprises eight counts of violating federal laws governing the handling of classified information." Manning has been convicted in the public square despite the fact that he's been convicted in no state and has made no public statements -- despite any claims otherwise, he has made no public statements. Manning is now at Quantico in Virginia, under military lock and key and still not allowed to speak to the press. Paul Courson (CNN) notes Bradley is a suspect and, "He has not admitted guilt in either incident, his supporters say." War Is A Crime's David Swanson passes on:

DIFFENDING DISSENT FOUNDATION
Founded in 1960 as the National Committee to Abolish the House Un-American Activities Committee
CONTACT: Sue Udry, 301-325-1201 sue.udry@defendingdissent.org


Martin Luther King Day is Monday, January 17, 2011

Invoking the spirit of Dr. Martin Luther King, peace and justice activists to descend on Quantico prison to protest torture of Bradley Manning

MLK Day plans call for noon demonstration at FBI headquarters in Washington followed by caravan to Quantico Marine Base

"Some of us who have already begun to break the silence of the night have found that the calling to speak is often a vocation of agony, but we must speak."
- Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

We'll celebrate Martin Luther King Jr. Day in a way that would make the great man proud. We embrace his legacy. Martin will be with us in the streets.

Noon: Protest at FBI Headquarters - 935 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Washington, DC, to demonstrate our outrage and indignation against police state surveillance, infiltration, and attempts to entrap peace, environmental, animal rights, civil rights, and solidarity activists.
Renowned "whistleblower" Coleen Rowley, a FBI special agent for almost 24 years, who testified to the Senate Judiciary on FBI's pre 9-11 failures, will address the crowd at the FBI headquarters. Ms. Rowley describes FBI abuses, "Instead of safeguarding our freedom and security, the FBI has become a growing danger to those trying to exercise our Constitutional rights. It is alarming to see the FBI revert to the abuses of the Vietnam era."

1 pm: Convoy to Quantico - We'll take off from the center of the American police state in a caravan to Marine Corps Base Quantico where military authorities are holding our brother Bradley Manning in an inhumane condition of solitary confinement. (Quantico is 45 minutes south of DC.)

2 pm: Rally at the Iwo Jima statue, Quantico Marine Base -
The statue is at the southwest corner of Rt. 1 (Jefferson Davis Hwy) and Rt. 619 (Fuller Rd.) From I-95: Take exit 150, Quantico/Triangle. Take route 619 east to the entrance of the base.

Activists will descend on Quantico to protest the isolation and torture of Bradley Manning at Marine Corps Brig Quantico. This treatment is designed to break Manning's mind and reduce his ability to defend himself. Manning has been kept in 23 out of 24 hour solitary confinement for 7 months in a 6 foot by 12 foot cell. He is not allowed any meaningful exercise, has his sleep and day-night cycles disrupted by constant light, and is harassed by what the military calls "prevention of injury" measures. These require a guard to ask him every 5 minutes "are you ok?" which requires an affirmative response.

We call on Adm. Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. George W. Casey Jr., Army Chief of Staff, Gen. James F. Amos, Commandant of the Marine Corps, and Colonel Daniel J. Choike, Base Commander, Marine Corps Base Quantico, to end the inhumane, degrading conditions of pre-trial confinement and respect Bradley's human rights. Specifically, we are calling on Pentagon officials to lift the "prevention of injury" watch. This would allow Bradley meaningful physical exercise, uninterrupted sleep during the night, and a release from isolation.

See the Letter from Psychologists for Social Responsibility to Defense Secretary Gates

Dan Ellsberg captures our sentiments regarding Bradley, "I spent years [during Vietnam] keeping my mouth shut as presidents lied to us and kept these secrets. I shouldn't have done that. And that's why I admire someone like Bradley Manning, or whoever the source was, for actually risking their own personal freedom in order to tell us the truth. I think they're being better citizens and showing their patriotism in a better way than when they keep their mouths shut."

(See our letter attached hereto.)

"Power at its best is love implementing the demands of justice. Justice at its best is love correcting everything that stands against love."

- Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Endorsed by: Backbone Campaign, Bill of Right Defense Committee, Bradley Manning Support Network, CodePink, Courage to Resist, DC Bill of Rights Coalition, DC National Lawyers Guild, Defending Dissent Foundation, Democrats.com, Friends of Human Rights, Jobs for Afghans, Montgomery County Civil Rights Coalition, National Accountability Action Network, National Campaign for Nonviolent Resistance, Peace Action, Peace of the Action, Progressive Democrats of America, United for Peace and Justice, Voters for Peace, WarIsACrime.org, Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility, Witness Against Torture, World Can't Wait
That's only one action this month. Another is scheduled for Tuesday, January 25th and this is from Stop FBI Repression about the January 25th actions:
In December 2010, under the direction of U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, the FBI delivered nine new subpoenas in Chicago to anti-war and Palestine solidarity activists. Patrick Fitzgerald's office is ordering the nine to appear at a Grand Jury in Chicago on January 25.
In response we are calling for protests on Jan. 25 across the country and around the world to show our solidarity. Hundreds of organizations and thousands of people will be protesting at Federal Buildings, FBI offices, and other appropriate places, showing solidarity with the nine newly subpoenaed activists, and with all the activists whose homes were raided by the FBI.
Fitzgerald's expanding web of repression already includes the fourteen subpoenaed when the FBI stormed into homes on September 24th, carting away phones, computers, notebooks, diaries, and children's artwork. In October, all fourteen activists from Chicago, Minneapolis, and Michigan each decided to not participate in the secret proceedings of Fitzgerald's Grand Jury. Each signed a letter invoking their Fifth Amendment rights. However, three women from Minneapolis -- Tracy Molm, Anh Pham, and Sarah Martin -- are facing re-activated subpoenas. They are standing strong and we are asking you to stand with them --and with the newly subpoenaed nine activists -- by protesting Patrick Fitzgerald and his use of the Grand Jury and FBI to repress anti-war and international solidarity activists.
Defend free speech! Defend the right to organize! Opposing war and occupation is not a crime!
  • Tell Patrick Fitzgerald to call off the Grand Jury!
  • Stop FBI raids and repression!

Take Action!

Please organize a local protest or picket in your city or on your campus on Tuesday Jan. 25 and e-mail us at stopfbi@gmail.com to let us know what you have planned.
The Committee to Stop FBI Repression www.StopFBI.net
Please e-mail stopfbi@gmail.com or call 612-379-3585
Here is a flyer you can use for your local protest (pdf). Just fill in the time and location of your local protest, and local contact information if you want.
We'll note two other actions. First, this is the upcoming Iraq Veterans Against the War event:

February 25, 2011 9:30 - 10:30 am
Busboys & Poets, Langston room
14th & V st NW Washington DC
This report back will be to answer questions from media and the peace movement about the recent trip back to Iraq by members of Iraq Veterans Against the War. The war is not over but it is not the same as it was in years past. What is the humanitarian situation in Iraq?
How can we do reparations and reconciliation work?
Speakers are all returning from this delegation and include:
Geoff Millard (IVAW) Hart Viges (IVAW) Haider Al-Saedy (Iraqi Health Now)
Richard Rowely (
Big Noise Films)
The following month, A.N.S.W.E.R. and March Forward! and others will be taking part in this action:

March 19 is the 8th anniversary of the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Iraq today remains occupied by 50,000 U.S. soldiers and tens of thousands of foreign mercenaries.

The war in Afghanistan is raging. The U.S. is invading and bombing Pakistan. The U.S. is financing endless atrocities against the people of Palestine, relentlessly threatening Iran and bringing Korea to the brink of a new war.

While the United States will spend $1 trillion for war, occupation and weapons in 2011, 30 million people in the United States remain unemployed or severely underemployed, and cuts in education, housing and healthcare are imposing a huge toll on the people.

Actions of civil resistance are spreading.

On Dec. 16, 2010, a veterans-led civil resistance at the White House played an important role in bringing the anti-war movement from protest to resistance. Enduring hours of heavy snow, 131 veterans and other anti-war activists lined the White House fence and were arrested. Some of those arrested will be going to trial, which will be scheduled soon in Washington, D.C.

Saturday, March 19, 2011, the anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, will be an international day of action against the war machine.

Protest and resistance actions will take place in cities and towns across the United States. Scores of organizations are coming together. Demonstrations are scheduled for San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington, D.C., and more.

Click this link to endorse the March 19, 2011, Call to Action.

Descent Into Madness
"60 Minutes" talks to Jared Loughner's friends and classmates and to ex-Secret Service, to reconstruct the pathway to mass murder he allegedly took in Tucson - a pattern this agent who once guarded the president could write a textbook about. Scott Pelley reports.

Yemen
Steve Kroft reports on the U.S.'s new partner in the war on terror, Yemen, a known al Qaeda hideout and recently the source of several explosive packages sent to America.

The Gambler
Las Vegas sports betting legend Bill Walters has never had a losing year - a winning a streak that's made odds makers call him the "most dangerous sports bettor in Nevada." Lara Logan reports. |
Watch Video

60 Minutes, Sunday, Jan. 16, at 8 p.m. ET, 7 p.m. PT.


Thursday, January 13, 2011

Thursdays

"Arizona Boycott Ends With Chicago Vulgarity And Surrender" (Hillary Is 44):

It had all the dignity of a Filene’s Basement bridal gown sale. It was as uniting as a Westboro Church rally. It was as inspirational as the golden arches of a McDonald’s fast food franchise. It was Obama’s “Let’s Make A Deal” moment.

Many Republican/conservative writers today reacted not with revulsion but with applause for Obama’s remarks. Why shouldn’t they applaud? Obama and his thugs tried all week to sell the notion that Sarah Palin and the Tea Party were to blame for the Arizona shootings. The Big Blog Boys collaborated with the Obama White House to perpetuate the smear. Last night Obama waved a surrender flag on that carefully calculated ploy.

For the truth is none of us can know exactly what triggered this vicious attack. None of us can know with any certainty what might have stopped these shots from being fired, or what thoughts lurked in the inner recesses of a violent man’s mind. Yes, we have to examine all the facts behind this tragedy. We cannot and will not be passive in the face of such violence. We should be willing to challenge old assumptions in order to lessen the prospects of such violence in the future. (Applause.) But what we cannot do is use this tragedy as one more occasion to turn on each other. (Applause.) That we cannot do. (Applause.) That we cannot do.”

Poof. The White House strategy of smear and fear went up in a puff of Obama. The Big Blog Boys and the Hausfrau auxiliaries had the propaganda carpet pulled out from under their feet.

How stupid is what passes for the left these days? They have not yet noticed how Obama pushed them under the bus in this latest publicity stunt. Consider: The left has been denouncing Obama’s “moves to the center” since December’s surrender/acceptance of the Bush tax cuts. The left has been denouncing Obama’s lack of fight for two years now. Yet what passes for the left these days is so stupid that it is unable to even see that Obama’s “unity” speech of last night is one further move into the land of surrender.

For Obama not fighting makes a great deal of political sense because it is the right move for a careerist interested only in what advances himself. For the left Obama’s “go along to get along” strategy is a disaster. Call it the politics of the wet noodle. Most people don’t like fighting and name calling and it makes public figures popular when they are seen as uniters not dividers.

So typical of Barry, to show up at the last minute after his cult has been fighting his battle for them and, instead of showing them thanks, pissing all over their shoes.

Apparently into water sports, they cheer him on and beg for more.

"Left Establishment Censorship in the Age of Obama" (John Halle, Dissident Voice):

The following takes on the admittedly delicate topic of what is and is not seen as fit for publication on those internet outlets which most would recognize as being on the left of the political spectrum. I will do so by relating some of my own experiences following my having drafted (along with Josh Frank and Paul Street) the “Open Letter to the Left Establishment”.

I should mention here that the open letter was only the latest in a series of numerous letters to the editor, blog comments, and long and short articles submitted for publication in internet and print outlets going back three years or more, all of which attempt to raise awareness about the essentially reactionary nature of the Democratic Party generally and the Obama campaign and presidency specifically.

In the course of these efforts, certain websites moved to eliminate my participation either as a front page poster or in their comment sections where I had previously been a frequent contributor.


Here's my suggestion to Halle: Issue an invitation or challenge for as man sites to republish the letter as possible in one day or one week or whatever.

"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):

Thursday, January 13, 2011. Chaos and violence continue, the refugee crisis continues and efforts to illuminate it by the under-informed do not help, the plight of Iraqi Christians receives some attention (leading to jealousy among the most petty), some in the press are still not getting the SOFA and more.
Starting out with refugees. Tuesday on NPR's All Things Considered (link has audio and text), Kelly McEvers noted Rasul whose grandfather purchased the family home in Baghdad approximately 40 years before -- a home that Rasul and the family had to all but abandon when a family member was kidnapped (later found dead). Now they're in danger of losing the family home because it's not safe for them to live in it. McEvers explained, "This is the dilemma of hundreds of thousands of Baghdad families who were forced to flee during the sectarian war. The value of the old house is going down, but rents are going up. That means the family's worth is disappearing. Pollster and sociologist Ahmed Qassim says more than half of the city's displaced families once identified themselves as upper or middle class. But 82 percent of a recent sampling of displaced Baghdadis said they were barely making ends meet. Qassim says one portion of Baghdad's middle is withering away, while another one -- the newly formed political class -- is taking its place."
The Iraq War created a refugee crisis -- internally and externally. A clod by the name of Nicholas Seeley has been popping up in a number of publications of late, the Christian Science Monitor last week. We're not interested in his creative fiction. For those who don't know, Seeley, like far too many, has a price. Slide your bills in his g-string and watch the potato head dance. After the appearane in Wilson's Quarterly, none of his reports on Jordan should be running in news sections. For those who don't read Wilson's Quarterly (consider yourself blessed and to be in the majority of the population), his article is used to argues that poor Bully Boy Bush was attacked by lying Democrats who were part of the inflation of a non-existant refugee crisis.
Little Nicky arrived in the MidEast some time ago, full of himself, if lacking in knowledge. As a general rule, a 'writer' who tells me that he ate at a Thai establishment where a Coldplay concert was on the television reminding him of America is one I puzzle over because Coldplay is, of course, a British band. Facts is hard for Nicky regardless of the topic. He's going around with claims that money's been wasted in Jordan -- US tax payer money. If true, he's the last one to make the case because he's not only a poor writer, he's a bad one.
First off, is money has been wasted why are you boring me with USAID (US Agency for International Development)? Only a know nothing on this topic would go there. Truly, if you're qualified remotely to speak on this, let alone write about it, you damn well know that the US money flowing into Jordan has primarily gone through the US State Dept's Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration. Do you have figures on that, Little Nicky? No, you don't because from your bad writing, you've obviously never heard of them. Could money have been wasted? If it wasn't wasted it would be a first. Could a lot of money have been wasted? Possibly but we'd need someone who knows a thing or two about how US aid flows into foreign countries.
Little Nicky's trying to rewrite the refugee crisis (and save poor put-upon Bully Boy Bush) with his revisionary tactics. If Jordan's Iraq population was wrong, others would be calling out. Jordan's population has gone down somewhat (as has Syria's and Lebanon's) but that's due in part to the refugees leaving for other countries (and tiny sliver returning to Iraq). Equally true, the population is most often based on the registration figures -- Iraqi refugees who register with the United Nations. Not all register (many feel that register documents them making it easier for them to be forced out a country). Jordan, however, did a census. They did that with Fafo which is seen as a legitimate organization. Kristin Dalen, Marianne Daehlen, Jon Pedersen, Age A. Tiltnes and Akram Atallah were the Fafo researchers on that project and you can click here to review their work. As with any such survey, there will be detractors but the sampling method utilized is standard in the social sciences. (Among the detractors are a group that insists the government of Jordan used their influence to increase the numbers. Their influence, the rumors go, was in paying. However, most of the detractors are unaware that the census was sponsored by more than just the government of Jordan. See the foreword for a listing of all the funders.) The "study concludes that there are between 450,000 - 500,000 Iraqi residents in Jordan as of May 2007."
Depending upon the outlet he's publishing in, Little Nicky's feelings towards FAFO shift and change indicating we might need to ask Nicholas Seeley, "Which of your personalities are we speaking to?" Someone needs to ask the Christian Science Monitor if it's their job to waive through any freelance work submitted without a fact check?
Little Nicky types (for the Monitor), "A 2007 survey found only 161,000 Iraqis in Jordan, a fraction of whom appeared to be poor or persecuted. Other data have backed up the low estimate of the survey [. . .]" He's blathering on about the stud we're already discussing and he clearly has no grounding in the social sciences. He swipes the figure of 161,000 from page 7 of the report: "The sample survey conducted by the Norwegian research Institute of Fafo in cooperation with the Department of Statistics (DoS) estimated Iraqis at 161,000." Little Nicky doesn't understand methodology but someone at the Christian Science Monitor damn sure should have. He's fudging the figures and ignoring the model. He's an idiot and shouldn't be allowed to publish on any population model until he gets an advanced degree in that area.
When you don't understand projection models, when you fail to grasp the basics on who does and who does not register, when sampling is beyond your limited abilities, you don't need to be offering guesses about the number of refugees in any country. And when you repeatedly demonstrate that you're lost in nearly every other area no outlet should allow you to explore any area other than that Lizzie McGuire movie you love so much.
He has no idea whether funding was wasted or not because he also has no idea of the needs which, yes, did include improving the schools in Jordan. Unlike some host countries, Jordan admitted Iraqi children to their country's schools. When Nouri was making his promises -- that he never kept -- in his first term to use some of the profits from the Iraqi oil to send money to the neighboring countries hardest hit by the refugee crisis, that money would have gone into infrastructure as well (repeating, Nouri didn't keep his promise -- which is the default position for Nouri al-Maliki). One day after running Little Nicky's garbage, the Christian Science Monitor ran a piece by Tarek Fouda who did have a grasp on realities in Syria.
Yle reported last week, "Finland will no longer return Iraqi asylum seekers to Baghdad. The Supreme Administrative Court has decided that Baghdad is not safe place. In Finland, asylum seekers from Baghdad are therefore entitled to residence permits on the basis of subsidiary protection." Iraq is not safe and forced returns should not be taking place which is why the European Union has condemned the practice. Asia News notes, "The plight of Iraqi refugees immigrants in Northern Europe continues, where authorities are pressing ahead with forced returns. Britain, France, Netherlands, Norway and Sweden, in different ways and forms, see this as the 'quick fix' to the drama of Iraqi asylum seekers whose applications have been rejected. Now the Iraqi government seems intent on finding a solution."
We're back on people who don't know what the hell they're talking about. In this case Columbia professor Joseph Massad who can't hope for better than freebie 'publishing' at CounterPunch apparently. Massad supposedly's writing about Christians in Egypt but instead Joseph Nasty wants you to know that "Europe and America's media chracteristically feature with much fanfare the equally horrifying violence against Iraqi Christians, as if the latter are somehow specifically and solely targeted among Iraq's sects and ethnic groups for such violence." If no one's gotten it yet, the last thing in the world I want to ever write about (or dictate about -- these snapshots are dictated) is Christianity. I have no interest in public conversation on that topic. But it is people like Massad that especially make it necessary that the topic is covered here because their petty hatreds bleed through the page as they tell one lie after another. American media has not covered "with much fanfare" the attacks on Iraqi Christians. The only "fanfare" coverage out of Iraq in the last eight months has been Moqtada al-Sadr's return. American media doesn't cover the attacks on Iraqi Christians because American media IS NOT IN IRAQ for the most part. The New York Times has covered it (not nearly enough), the Los Angeles Times has, the Washington Post has and McClatchy's done even less than the New York Times. Those are the print outlets with people on the ground in Iraq. Broadcast? CNN is the only US TV outlet that has reporters in Iraq. Radio that has reporters on the ground in Iraq? That's NPR. Attacks on Christians do get noted frequently in the hourly news brief. But in terms of filing stories on them, actual reports, how many reports has NPR filed on this issue? Since October 31, 2010, NPR has filed three reports. That's it.
Joseph Massad and people like him need to get over their petty hatred of Christianity. It wouldn't have flown in the US in the sixties and we actually had real movements then. In Chris Hedges new book Death Of The Liberal Class a number of movement leaders from that period speak to him about the absence of a spiritual factor (I'm using the term "factor") to the movement and how the movement has become soul-less. These are leaders who have made the social justice movements their entire lives. Why are they seeing that? Maybe because people like Massad can't let go of their petty jealousies and covetry even when supposedly covering a subject. There was no reason for him to bring Iraqi Christians into the story. But he did and revealed how jealous he was. Three stories on NPR is not a great deal of reporting. Not at all. Sounds a lot like someone consumed with hatred and jealousy is speaking.
Iraqi Christians are now being targeted because they are Christians. That was made clear in the al-Qaeda linked group that claimed credit for the October 31st attack. You don't have to believe in Christianity or even like Christians to play fair. But you do have to play fair. October 31st, Our Lady of Salvation Church in Baghdad was attacked with approximately 70 people killed and approximately 70 people wounded. An attack on a place of worship will always be news. Attacks followed including, in November, eight to twelve bombings in Baghdad in one day injuring scores of Iraqis and killing two. Multiple bombs in Baghdad will be news. NPR's third story covered the exodus of Iraqi Christians from Baghdad and Mosul to the Kurdish territories (and some Iraqi Christians also went outside the country). NPR offered one story after the attack the Church, one after the bombings and one post-flight. That's is not "much fanfare." Your claiming that it is goes to your ignorance and your hatred and no one needs it. There are many different aspects we have to cover in the snapshots and sometimes I don't care for a group that's at risk. That doesn't mean I attack them. That doesn't mean I mock them and their personal struggles. Everytime someone like Joseph Massad gets to be bitchy on this subject without being called out, you draw a line -- intentionally or not -- between the left and those who believe in Christianity and you draw a line within the left between those who are left Christians and those who are not. It is counterproductive, it is hateful, it is bitchy and it needs to stop. And, if no one ever told you, Joseph Massad, you have neither the body nor the sex appeal to pull off a grudge f**k.
Far from the crazy, Daniel J. Gerstle (UN Dispatch) reported at the end of last month on Iraqi Christians how had gone to the Kurdistan Region, specifically in Erbil. He concluded, "While many governments, donors, and aid agencies have moved on from responding to crises like that of Iraq, troubles for local displaced families remain. As in the case of Ankawa, many host communities absorb the shock during the height of the crisis -- relieving the burden on governments and donors -- only to have their homes become overloaded and their pocketbooks, as well as those of their displaced guests, turn empty well after the crisis has climaxed in the media. The tragic flight of minorities from central Iraq to the north has not only been a larger crisis than anyone anticipated. It has also created a new, secondary crisis for host communities that governments, donors, and aid agencies are only beginning to figure out how to address." Reporting this week from Erbil, Hemin Baban (Rudaw) details how a "defense force" of Christians is being trained there per the Ministry of Defense and that Kirkuk's Archbishop Louis Sako calls the move a mistake. Still in the Kurdistan region, Rhodri Davies (Aljazeera) reported last week visited a Church in Ainkawa and found that it was staffed with "four guards carrying Kalashnikov rifles on the gates to the church compound." Human Rights First issued the following release by Jesse Bernstein and Sara Faust:
As religious minorities in the Middle East continue to face rising levels of violence, the U.S. should urgently undertake a series of reforms in its resettlement program to remove unnecessary processing delays which leave Iraqi Christians and members of other vulnerable groups who choose to flee stranded in difficult and sometimes dangerous situations. As Human Rights First outlined in a recent report Living in Limbo: Iraqi Refugees and U.S. Resettlement, religious minorities from Iraq are one of several groups who continue to face a heightened level of systematic violence and persecution despite a decrease in overall violence in Iraq.
Christians in Iraq remain at serious risk. In coordinated attacks in late December 2010, militants left bombs on the doorsteps of Iraqi Christian homes in different parts of Baghdad, killing an elderly couple and injuring at least thirteen people. This incident follows a wave of attacks directed at religious minorities in Iraq, including an attack on a Baghdad church in which approximately 50 individuals were killed, including priests and infants. The UN Refugee Agency – UNHCRreported that its offices in neighboring Syria, Jordan and Lebanon are registering an increasing number of Iraqi Christians arriving for assistance and help.
The recent bombing of a Christian Coptic church in Alexandria, Egypt highlights the increased hostility and targeted violence of religious minorities in the region and an overall lack of protection for Christians who are targeted and/or forced to flee their homes in the face of mounting violence.
Despite the ongoing U.S. troop drawdown and the shift to a civilian-led operation in Iraq, many Iraqis, including religious and sexual minorities, Iraqis who are affiliated with the United States and women at risk of honor crimes, continue to face persecution and violence, circumstances that cause them to flee to different regions of Iraq or to seek refuge in countries such as Syria, Jordan, and Turkey. In 2010 alone, UNHCR registered just over 31,000 Iraqi refugees in the region. As of October 2010, a total of 195,428 Iraqi refugees are currently registered with UNHCR in the region, while an unknown number of additional refugees have not registered or let their registrations lapse. As documented through Human Rights First research in the region, lengthy delays in U.S. processing leave Iraqis slated for U.S. resettlement languishing for months -- even years -- in countries where they have limited opportunities to support their families and some -- particularly those within Iraq -- face life-threatening circumstances.
Human Rights First's report, based on independent research and interviews with Iraqi refugees as well as government officials and UN staff, offers a series of recommendations to strengthen the U.S. resettlement program, including by ensuring timely and effective processing. Our primary recommendations to the U.S. Government include:
* Reduce unnecessary delays in the security clearance process. The National Security Council should, together with the Departments of State, Justice, Homeland Security and intelligence agencies, improve the inter-agency security clearance procedure to enable security checks for refugees and U.S.-affiliated Iraqis to be completed accurately and without unnecessary delays within a set time period;
* Develop and implement an emergency resettlement procedure for refugees facing imminent danger. The Department of State should continue to work with other relevant federal agencies to develop and implement a formal and transparent resettlement procedure for refugees who face emergency or urgent circumstances;
* Remove other impediments which continue to delay the applications of U.S.-affiliated Iraqis and Iraqi religious minorities. The Department of State, working with other agencies, should – in addition to addressing delays in security processing – continue to take other steps to eliminate case backlogs and address inefficiencies in the current Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) processing procedures; * Provide information necessary for refugees to submit meaningful Requests for Reconsideration. The Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should implement reforms to improve the fairness and effectiveness of the resettlement process, including by revising the current Notice of Ineligibility for Resettlement to provide case-specific factual and legal reasons for denial.
Through implementing these reforms, the Obama administration will ensure its resettlement program offers safe and secure passage for religious minorities and others who face persecution and are left with no choice but to flee their home countries.
To review Human Rights First's full report, Living in Limbo: Iraqi Refugees
and U.S. Resettlement, click here.
To review the report's summary and key findings, click here.
To review a two page fact sheet, click here.
Meanwhile Lebanon's Daily Star reports, "A Hizubullah delegation offered 700 aid packages to displaced Iraqi Christians in Mount Lebanon during a visit Wednesday to the Archbishopric of Chaldean Assyrians." Reuters notes that a meet-up took place in Baghdad today among Iraq's Muslim and Christian leaders (this is not the Copenhagen summit which is also going on, they plan to hold a press conference tomorrow) and quotes Ahmed Abdul Ghafour al-Samarrai stating, "Iraqis are one body. If the Christian part suffers, he rest of the Muslim body will respond to it. Iraqi blood is sacred, you cannot cross a red line." And Madison's Capital Times features a column which touches on these subjects and more by United Church of Christ Pastor Phil Haslanger.
Yesterday US Vice President Joe Biden arrived in Baghdad. This morning Aaron C. Davis' "Contours of a large and lasting American presence in Iraq starting to take shape" (Washington Post) captured reality better than any other article:
Despite Iraqi leaders' insistence that the United States meet its end-of-2011 deadline for withdrawing all troops, the contours of a large and lasting American presence here are starting to take shape.
Although a troop extension could still be negotiated, the politics of Iraq's new government make that increasingly unlikely, and the Obama administration has shown little interest in pushing the point.
Instead, planning is underway to turn over to the State Department some of the most prominent symbols of the U.S. role in the war - including several major bases and a significant portion of the Green Zone.
One outlet seems able to get it correct, Liz Sly (still Washington Post) notes Biden's visit was to discuss post-2011:

Maliki, embarking on his second term of office, publicly insists that he wants all the troops to leave on time, and the Obama administration also says it is planning to pull them out on schedule.
But Iraqi military commanders have said they would prefer at least some form of continued U.S. military presence to help deter external threats from Iraq's neighbors until Iraq has its own conventional defense capabilities.
Although Iraq's security forces have proved themselves able to sustain security gains since the formal end of American combat operations last August, they will also need help with training and logistics for several more years, U.S. and Iraqi officials say.
And then there are the ones who just can't get it right -- a theme threading through this snapshot. John Leland (New York Times) opens with the 'news' that Joe "told officials here Thursday that the United States remained committed to the agreement that calls for all American troops to leave Iraq by the end of the year." First, as Aaron C. Davis has already demonstrated, that's not happening. But Joe told officials that? Okay. Leland was present for this? No.
What is he talking about then? This single-sentence sixth paragraph of the article 'explains': "In a statement, Mr. Maliki said Mr. Biden assured him that the United States was 'serious about activating the strategic framework agreement,' which includes the deadline for troop withdrawal." I have no idea what Nouri said but, if he said that, he's as lost as John Leland. The Strategic Framework Agreement was signed off on November 17, 2008. It has no withdrawal date in it.
Go to the November 27, 2008 snapshot for the SOFA passing the Iraqi Parliament. That's the SOFA. That's November 27, 2008. Not only does the Strategic Framework Agreement not contain a withdrawal date -- how could it when it is signed off on before the SOFA? The SOFA is the Status Of Forces Agreement. The Strategic Framework Agreement is not the same thing and if, like Leland apparently, you've never read it, you can click here. Voice of America cannot broadcast over the US airwaves because it is a US government propaganda outlet. Therefore, we try to avoid them but please note that Meredith Buel (Voice of America) -- working for the US government -- doesn't make the mistake that Leland did. She quotes his speech and notes, "Biden said while Iraqi security forces, trained by American soldiers, are continuing to improve, they are likely to need U.S. assistance in the future.
On that Iraq military, as noted in yesterday's snapshot, "A bit more on the issue of weight, Al-Kala'a Weekly reports that 60% of Iraq's military officers and soldiers suffer from obesity according to an unnamed officer and that the Minister of Defense will be addressing the issue. Alsumaria TV notes the assertion that the country's 'security forces have been infiltrated and intellegence has been leaked'." Those would also impact Iraq's military readiness.
On Joe Biden's speech today, Karen Travers (ABC News) reports and also offers video.
Meanwhile, Aljazeera explains, "At least two people have been killed in bomb blasts in Iraq, shortly after the US vice-president arrived in the capital for talks about the future of American troops there. Three separate explosions shook the capital, Baghdad, on Thursday, Iraqi interior ministry officials said. One person was killed and at least two others wounded in the first attack near a Shia Muslim mosque in the Karrada neighbourhood, while a roadside bomb killed one civilian and wounded four others near a Sunni mosque elsewhere in central Baghdad." Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) adds, "At least two people were killed and 14 wounded when four roadside bombs exploded Thursday in different neighborhoods in Baghdad, the Interior Ministry said. The attacks came the same day the U.S. Vice President Joe Biden arrived on an unannounced visit. Iraq's Interior Ministry says the attacks appeared to be by members of al Qaeda and were related to an interfaith group that was trying to quell recent attacks against Christians in Iraq." In addition, Reuters notes a goldsmith was shot dead in Baghdad.
Lolita C. Baldor (AP) reports that a written exchange between the Pentagon's Michael Vickers and the Senate over the US military's use of cyber warfare. "Nowhere," Baldor reports, "does the brief Senate exchange obtained by The Associated Press detail the cyber activities that were not disclosed. But cyber experts suggest they may have involved secret operations against insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan, and could possibly include other hotspots such as Yemen or Somalia."

Bradley Manning, a 22-year old US army private, is being tortured by the US state.

He is accused of leaking classified documents to the Wikileaks website. Manning has been held at the US Marine jail in Quantico, Virginia, for five months—and for two months before that in a military jail in Kuwait.

The US is torturing Manning to get him to say that he gave secret files to Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. This will make it easier to prosecute Assange for espionage.

Assange is on bail in Britain as the Swedish government attempts to extradite him on charges of rape, which he strongly denies.

There were protests in defence of him and Wikileaks outside the court in London at the end of last year.

Manning is held as a "maximum custody detainee", which is the most repressive level of US military detention.

According to his lawyer, "He is being held in intensive solitary confinement.

"For 23 out of 24 hours every day—for seven straight months—he sits completely alone in his cell.

"Even inside his cell, his activities are heavily restricted; he's barred from exercising and is restrained if he attempts to exercise.

"He's being denied a pillow or sheets for his bed and access to news reports in any form.

"He is not allowed to have any personal items in his cell.

"If he attempts to do push-ups, sit-ups, or any other form of exercise he will be forced to stop.

"He does receive one hour of 'exercise' outside of his cell daily. He is taken to an empty room and only allowed to walk.

"Private First Class (PFC) Manning normally just walks figure eights in the room for the entire hour. If he indicates that he no long feels like walking, he is immediately returned to his cell.

"When PFC Manning goes to sleep, he is required to strip down to his boxer shorts and surrender his clothing to the guards.

"His clothing is returned to him the next morning."

Manning is sleep deprived and is now taking anti-depressants.

He was arrested after allegedly confessing in an online chatroom to leaking a video of a US air raid in Iraq.

Gunning

The graphic and disturbing video shows the events of 12 July 2007.

As a group of men stroll down a Baghdad street, two US army helicopters open fire, repeatedly shooting at them and gunning one down as he tries to flee.

They killed 12 people, including two journalists who worked for the Reuters news agency. Two children were wounded.

One shooter says, "Ha, ha, ha, I hit 'em." Another comments, "Look at those dead bastards."

"Nice," another responds.

Later a van comes past and Iraqis stop to try to help one of the wounded.

The helicopter opens fire again. Two children inside the van were wounded and their father was killed.

When US ground troops arrive they discover the children.

One of the crew says, "Well it's their fault for bringing kids into a battle."

The army claimed the dead were all insurgents and that they had been killed in battle.

But a supposed rocket-propelled grenade was in reality a camera lens. What the US claimed was an AK47 was in fact a camera.

This is just one example of the violence of US imperialism.

The US has committed countless atrocities during its occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. But getting the information out has led to Bradley Manning being jailed.

The other information Manning is accused of leaking includes a video of a 2009 US airstrike in Granai, Afghanistan, which killed as many as 140 civilians.

The US suspects he leaked a cache of nearly 100,000 field reports from Afghanistan, about 260,000 diplomatic cables and as many as half a million documents relating to the Iraq war.

Politicians globally professed gradations of outrage at the publication of the material.

Some in the US even called for Wikileaks to be treated as a terrorist organisation.


The following should be read alongside this article:

Wikileaks reveals British government trained death squad

© Socialist Worker (unless otherwise stated). You may republish if you include an active link to the original.