|
Friday, January 27, 2012. Chaos and violence continue, a Baghdad funeral
is targeted with a bombing, the media keeps undercounting the dead in Iraq since
December 18th, new conditions of a national confrence in Iraq, and more.
Today in Baghdad, a funeral procession was attacked by a suicide bomber. Mohammed Tawfeeq and Joe
Sterling (CNN) quote Hamit Dardagan, Iraq Body Count, stating, "The
situation is worsening. Sectarian politics in Iraq in Iraq is setting the stage
for armed conflict."
Throughout the Iraq War, there have been non-stop waves of Operation Happy
Talk. Efforts which have consistently failed leaving the US official who
produced the spin looking like an idiot. Reality will always slap you in the
face, when it comes to Iraq. That is the lesson of every year of the Iraq War
and occupation. As Iraq's former Ambassador to the UN Feisal Istrabadi explained December 13th to Warren Oleny on KCRW's To the
Point: The critical mistake the Obama
administration made occurred last year when it threw its entire diplomatic
weight behind supporting Nouri al-Maliki notwithstanding these very worrisome
signs which were already in place in 2009 and 2010. The administration lobbied
hard both internally in Iraq and throughout the region to have Nouri al-Maliki
get a second term -- which he has done. Right now, the betting there's some
question among Iraq experts whether we'll ever have a set of elections in Iraq
worthy of the name. I mean, you can almost get odds, a la Las Vegas, on that
among Iraq experts. It's a very worrisome thing. What can they do in the future?
Well I suppose it would be helpful, it would be useful, if we stopped hearing
this sort of Happy Talk coming from the administration -- whether its Jim
Jeffrey in Baghdad, the US Ambassador or whether it's the president himself or
other cabinet officers. We're getting a lot of Happy Talk, we're getting a lot
of Happy Talk from the Pentagon about how professional the Iraqi Army is when,
in fact, the Iraqi Army Chief of Staff himself has said it's going to take
another ten years before the Iraqi Army can secure the borders. So it would
help, at least, if we would stop hearing this sort of Pollyanna-ish -- if that's
a word -- exclamations from the administration about how swimmingly things are
going in Iraq and had a little more truth told in public, that would be a very
big help to begin with.
"We're getting a lot of Happy Talk," Istrabadi noted. And it's not helpful
no matter what US official it comes from -- whether its James "Jeffrey in
Baghdad, the US Ambassador, or whether it's the president himself or other
cabinet officers." And it was the US Ambassador to Iraq, James Jeffrey, who got
slapped upside the face by reality today due to insisting, in an interview Gulf News published yesterday, that
the political crisis had nothing to do with the current wave of violence, "These
attacks are not a result of the political crisis as they are planned months in
advance; they are very carefully put together by Al Qaida." Operation Happy Talk
is just one of the many things Barack's administration has continued from the
Bush administration. It was laughable during the previous administration, it's
just pathetic now. Nine years of continuous lies from the government and Jeffrey
is supposed to be the face of the United States in Iraq. (If you're
confused, the attack on today's funeral procession was not "planned months in
advance." Nor is most of the violence.) Adrian
Blomfield (Telegraph of London)
reports, "A suicide bomber killed at least 32 people on Friday by
driving an explosives-laden vehicle into a Shia Muslim funeral procession in
Baghdad, heightening fears that Iraq is in the grips of sectarian conflict." KUNA
notes, "The car exploded on Markaz street, targeting a funeral of a
man who was killed in Al-Yarmouk district on Thursday, a police source said." Kareem
Raheem, Patrick Markey and Myra MacDonald (Reuters) quote an unnamed Baghdad
security official stating, "The suicide car bomber failed to arrive at the
Zaafaraniya police station so he blew himself up close to shops and the market."
The Daily Mirror
notes, "Half of the victims were policemen guarding the march". Raheem Salman and Patrick J.
McDonnell (Los Angeles Times) add, "Among those killed Friday,
witnesses reported, was a woman who sold fish from a cart at the intersection.
Rescuers put the woman's corpse in her cart and took the remains to the
hospital, a witness said." Mohammed
Tawfeeq (CNN) reports, "Authorities believe Col. Norman Dakhil may
have been the target of the bomber. Dahkil and his family were in the procession
making their way to the hospital to collect bodies of three relatives, including
his brother, when the bomb exploded, police said." Ali A.
Nabhan and Munaf Ammar (Wall St.
Journal) add, "The suicide bomber rammed his explosives-laden
vehicle into the crowd, which included the pallbearers at a funeral for an Iraqi
army commander's brother, who was assassinated along with three others on
Thursday, according to a Ministry of Interior official." Sebastian Usher ( BBC News) was on the NPR hourly news break
this morning stating that many details were not clear at this time and that the
funeral was for a real estate agent. Al
Bawaba notes, "The funeral was held for an Iraqi man, his wife
and son who were killed yesterday in the predominantly Sunni Yarmouk district of
the capital." Al Rafidayn identifies the realtor
as Mohammed al-Maliki (they do not give the names of his wife and son who were
also buried after being killed last night "by gunmen." Salam
Faraj (AFP) provides this
view of the attack, "Helicopters flew overhead as a heavy security presence
cordoned off the site of the explosion, while distraught witnesses screamed in
anguish, surrounded by the remains of the dead, their clothes and shoes, and
chunks of twisted metal. Outside the hospital, groups of men called out names,
searching for missing relatives." Bushra
Juhi (AP) notes that the
death toll has risen to 32 (per hospital officials) and quote grocer Salam
Hussein describing "human flesh scattered around and several mutilated bodies in
a pool of blood." Lu Hui
(Xinhua) reports hospital
sources state the toll might rise, " Many of the injured are in serious
condition, which could make the death toll higher, said the official.
"
Tom A. Peter (Christian
Science Monitor) states, "The attack Friday was the deadliest in a
month and came as part of a wave of attacks that has left more than 200 people
dead since US forces withdrew on Dec. 18,
reports Al Jazeera." Doesn't that seem like an undercount?
It is one. All this week that claim's been made. So let's take a look at it
because, on its face, it doesn't seem correct (because it's not). We're
referring to the violence covered by the press and noted in the snapshots. We'll
start with December 19th but only reported violence from the 19th (on December
19th, the press was also reporting violence from the night of December 18th,
we're leaving that out of the count). In addition, we're ignoring the Turkish
bombing on the border of Iraq that left 5 dead -- that's not in the count.
We're focusing on the dead in Iraq from violence (other than Turkish war plane
bombings) and in parenthesis is the number injured, FYI. Also 'credited' for the
"more than 200"? The Los Angeles Times
today credits AFP for that (false) figure.
December 19th, 2 were
reported dead (5). December 20th, 0 were
reported dead (0). December 21st, 3 were
reported dead (4). December 22nd, 75 were
reported dead (213). December 23rd, 0 were
reported dead (0). December 24th, 5 were
reported dead (5). December 25th, 3 were
reported dead (12). December 26th, 8 were
reported dead (37). December 27th, 2 were
reported dead (1). December 28th, 2 were
reported dead (15). December 29th, 0 were
reported dead (0). December 30th, 0 were
reported dead (0). December 31st, 0 were
reported dead (0). January 1st, 9 were
reported dead (21). January 2nd, 0 were
reported dead (3). January 3rd, 3 were reported dead
(13). January 4th, 9 were
reported dead (17). January 5th, 75 were
reported dead (80). January 6th, 3 were
reported dead (20). January 7th, 7 were
reported dead (25). January 8th, 3 were
reported dead (20). January 9th, 20 were
reported dead (59). January 10th, 12 were
reported dead (3). January 11th, 6 were
reported dead (14). January 12th, 6 were
reported dead (25). January 13th, 6 were
reported dead (32). January 14th, 53 were
reported dead (157). January 15th, 21 were
reported dead (0). January 16th, 0 were
reported dead (0). January 17th, 10 were
reported dead (5). January 18th, 6 were
reported dead (5). January 19th, 4 were
reported dead (8). January 20th, 6 were
reported dead (5). January 21st, 7 were
reported dead (1). January 22nd, 7 were
reported dead (6). January 23rd, 2 were
reported dead (5). January 24th, 20 were
reported dead (86). January 25th, 1 was
reported dead (1). January 26th, 14 were
reported dead (8).
So what did we get? Check my math (always). 391 is the number killed from
December 19th through yesterday's reporting cycle. Now add in today's death
totals and you get over 400. Yes, 400 is "more than 200," in fact, it's twice
200. And calling over 400 dead "more than 200 dead" is leaving a false
impression with your reader. Please note, those aren't all the deaths, those
are just the deaths that we noted from press reports (meaning I may have missed
some deaths) and, in addition, all violent deaths do not get reported on in
Iraq. And calling over 400 deaths only "more than 200" is cutting the truth in
half.
Violence didn't end with the bomb attack on the funeral. Barbara Surk (AP)
reports, "Minutes after the explosion, gunmen opened fire at a checkpoint in
Zafaraniyah, killing two police officers, according to police officials." In
addition, Reuters notes 1
electrician was shot dead in Mosul and 1 Iraqi soldier and 1 civil servant in
Mosul.
Prensa Latina
explains, "The current escalation of violence is associated with political
frictions between the government, led by Shiite Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki
and Sunni Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi. Al-Maliki issue[d] a warrant for the
arrest of al-Hashemi, who is under protection of Iraqi Kurdistan, for alleged
terrorist acts in 2009, and also . . . . [is attempting] to make the Parliament
withdraw its vote of confidence on Sunni Deputy Prime Minster Saleh Al-Mutlaq."
Middle East Online adds,
"The United States and United Nations have urged calm and called for dialogue
but oft-mooted talks involving Iraq's political leaders have yet to take place."
The only hope for resolving the political crisis was said to be the
national conference that President Jalal Talabani and Speaker of Parliament
Osama al-Nujaifi have been calling for since the end of December. Last week,
things appeared promising for a national conference at least being held. One
planning meet-up had taken place and another was scheduled for Sunday January
22nd; however, last Sunday's meet-up (which was hoped to be the final planning
session) was postponed due to Talabani having to fly to Germany for spinal
surgery. Since then, Nouri and his State of Law have insisted that if anything
take place, it not be called a "national conference" and that participants be
limited to Nouri, Talabani, al-Nujaifi and the leader of blocs in
Parliament. Al Rafidayn reports that Moqtada
al-Sadr has declared he will not participate and that he can't be forced to.
Whether this means no one from his bloc will participate or not isn't clear. Dar Addustour also covers al-Sadr's
statements which he issued online in reply to a question from one of his
followers. Al Mada quotes Nouri's spokesperson
Ali al-Dabbagh talking down the national conference and stating that it will be
a failure if it raises the issue of Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi. (Nouri
wants him tried for treason; he wants Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq
stripped of his post. al-Hashemi and al-Mutlaq are members of Iraqiya which
bested State of Law in the March 2010 elections.) The report also notes that
State of Law's push to replace Saleh al-Mutlaq with former Speaker of Parliament
Mahmoud al-Mashhadani does not have the full support of the National Alliance (a
Shi'ite coalition made up of many actors including the Sadr bloc and the Islamic
Supreme Council of Iraq). The political crisis has many roots but at the
heart is the failure to follow the agreement that ended the eight month
political stalemate which followed the March 2010 elections. Nouri refused to
allow anyone else to be prime minister. During this time, Iraqiya should have
been allowed to build a coalition but Nouri blocked it. During this time,
Moqtada al-Sadr and others were vocal that they didn't want Nouri to be prime
minister. But he had the backing of the White House so the will of the Iraqi
voters and the Constitution didn't matter. To get the country moving forward,
all political blocs except State of Law made major concessions in the US
brokered Erbil Agreement of November 2010. It allowed Nouri to continue as prime
minister. It was supposed to mean a number of other things but after Nouri was
named prime minister-designate, he trashed the agreement and refused to honor
it. Some online sycophants of Nouri al-Maliki, worshipers of
authoritarianism, insist that the agreement must be trashed, that it's
"unconstitutional." The aspect that's against the Constitution, the only aspect,
is the section that made Nouri prime minister. Not surprisingly, the self-styled
'analysts' never object to that or suggest that section was unconstitutional.
Yet they expect to be taken seriously as analysts and honest brokers. Only in
your all male circle jerk, boyz, only there. Al Mada notes that a spokesperson
for KRG Prime Minister Barham Salih that the Erbil Agreement must be part of the
national conference and that it must be followed. The Kurdish blocs have been
calling for that for months. In other news of announcements, Al Mada notes that the Badr Brigade
(Shi'ite militia) has declared that there are still people who need to be
targeted in Iraq, foreigners and embassies, and has called on the Promised Day
Brigade, the League of Righteous and the Hezbollah Brigades not to lay down
their arms but to stand with the Badr Brigade agasint the foreign countries with
embassies in Iraq. The Turkish Embassy in Baghdad was attacked last week. The
United States has the largest embassy in Baghdad (it's a compound) as well as
consulates throughout Iraq. Kuwait is specifically mentioned in the article. In
addition, many other countries -- including France, England, Australia and
Russia -- have embassies in Iraq and many foreign dignitaries visit. In
another sign of risks, Alsumaria reports that a US helicopter was forced to
make "an emergency landing this morning" and that "another US helicopter landed
and evacuated it. On diplomacy, the White House received a visitor this
week according to Al Mada but there's no
release on it from the White House. Al Mada reports that Iraq's new
envoy to the US, Ambassador Jaber Habib Jaber, spoke with Barack and that Barack
was full of praise for Nouri and "convinced" that Iraq would resolve the
political crisis.
QUESTION: Good morning, Madam Secretary. My name is Behar Gidani,
and the last time I stood before you I was an intern, and now I'm a program
analyst, so it's quite an honor to be here before you again today.
(Applause.)
SECRETARY CLINTON: Good, good.
QUESTION: My question is regarding foreign policy, if I may. As a
Kurdish American, much of my interest focuses on the current state of Iraqi
political affairs. Given what's going on or what's happened since the American
troop withdrawal, with Hashimi fleeing to the Kurdistan region, I was wondering
what the role of U.S. diplomacy is right now with that situation, and what you
hope you will see in the future to ensure Iraqi security and democracy and
stability continue.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, first, I'm delighted that you've gone from
intern to full-fledged employee in such a short period of time, and we're
delighted, and that's exactly the kind of movement of young people into our
ranks that I'm thrilled to see.
Look, there is no doubt -- all one has to do is follow the media --
that there's a lot of political contention in Iraq right now. The United States,
led by our very able, experienced Ambassador Jim Jeffrey -- I don't know if the
man has slept more than an hour or two, because he is constantly, along with his
able team, reaching out, meeting with, cajoling, pushing the players, starting
with Prime Minister Maliki, not to blow this opportunity. Let me just be very
clear: This is an opportunity for the Iraqi people of all areas of Iraq, of all
religious affiliation, of all backgrounds -- this is an opportunity to have a
unified Iraq, and the only way to do that is by compromising.
And one of the challenges in new democracies is that compromise is
not in the vocabulary, especially in countries where people were oppressed,
brutalized over many years. They believe that democracy gives them the
opportunity to exercise power and, even though it's not the specific individual
-- Saddam Hussein is gone -- he oppressed the Shia, he terribly abused the
Kurds, including chemical attacks -- he's gone, but people's minds are not yet
fully open to the potential for what this new opportunity can mean to them. And
unfortunately, there's a lot of line-drawing going on and boundary-imposing
between different political factions.
So we are certainly conveying in as strong a message as we can that
these political difficulties and disagreements have to be peacefully resolved
for the good of all Iraqis, and that everyone has a chance to grow the pie
bigger, to have more freedom, more economic prosperity by working
together.
And it's not easy. It's unfortunately one of the challenges we face
everywhere in the world right now. With the great movement toward democracy,
which we welcome and applaud, it has upended a lot of the historical experiences
that people have held onto, and there is a need to get moving beyond that. But
it will take time. The United States will be firmly in the role of advising and
mentoring and playing the go-between in every way that we possibly can. But at
the end of the day, Iraq is now a democracy, but they need to act like one, and
that requires compromise.
And so I'm hoping that there will be a recognition of that, and
such a tremendous potential to be realized. Iraq can be such a rich country --
it's already showing that with the oil revenues starting to flow again -- but
problems have to be resolved. They cannot be ignored or mandated by
authoritarianism; they have to be worked through the political process.
(Applause.)
Now let's turn to the issue of women and former Minister of Women's Affairs
Nawal al-Samarraie who publicly stood out and decired the discrimination within
the government during Nouri al-Maliki's first term as prime minister. February
6, 2009, she was in the news when she resigned because her ministry
was not properly funded (a meager monthly budget of $7,500 a month was slashed
to $1,400) and she states, "I reached to the point that I will never be able to
help the women." That was very embarrassing for Nouri. So naturally the New York
Times worked overtime to ignore it. (See Third Estate Sunday Review's " NYT goes
tabloid.") NPR's
Corey Flintoff covered it for Morning
Edition (link has text and audio).
Nouri didn't care for Nawal al-Samarraie or the needed attention she
raised. Which was reflected in his second term when he tried to erase women
completely. From the December
22, 2010 snapshot: Turning to Iraq, Liz Sly and Aaron Davis (Washington Post) note, "A special gathering of the nation's parliament endorsed Prime Minister
Nouri al-Maliki for a second term in office, with lawmakers then voting one by
one for 31 of the eventual 42 ministers who will be in his cabinet." AFP notes that
all but one is a man, Bushra Hussein Saleh being the sole woman in the Cabinet.
And they quote Kurdish MP Ala Talabani stating, "We congratulate the government,
whose birth required eight months, but at the same time we are very depressed
when we see the number of women chosen to head the ministries. Today, democracy
was decapitated by sexism. The absence of women is a mark of disdain and is
contrary to several articles of the constitution. I suggest to Mr Maliki to even
choose a man for the ministry of women's rights, as you do not have confidence
in women." Ala Talabani is the niece of Iraqi President Jalal Talabani.
Imran Ali (Womens Views On News)
reminds, "The new constitution stipulates that a
quarter of the members of parliament be women and prohibits gender
discrimination." Apparently concern about representation doesn't apply to the
Cabinet (and, no, Nouri's attempts at offering excuses for the huge gender
imbalance do not fly).
42 posts to fill and Nouri couldn't think of a single woman? And
wouldn't have if Iraqi women hadn't gotten vocal on the issue. (And note that
Nouri increased the Cabinet from 31 in his first term to 42.) December 22nd, AFP
reported on women's status in Iraq and how it has fallen from a
high for the region to a nightmare (my term) today. Excerpt:
Safia al-Souhail, an MP who ran in
March 2010 elections on Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's State of Law slate but
has since defected and is now an independent, said US forces made some progress,
but did not do enough in the immediate aftermath of the invasion.
"They were
always giving excuses that our society would not accept it," she said. "Our
society is still wondering why the Americans did not support women leaders who
were recognised by the Iraqi people."
She lamented that Maliki had completed
a recent official visit to Washington without a single woman in his delegation,
describing it as a "shame on Iraq". Indeed, only one woman sits in Maliki's
national unity cabinet, Ibtihal al-Zaidi, the minister of state for women's
affairs.
We bring that up because Nouri did finally find a woman and named her to be
Minister of the State for Women's Affairs. The woman is Dr. Ibtihal al-Zaidi.
And Al Mada reports the lovely doesn't
believe in equality stating equality "harms women" but she's happy to offer
government dictates on what women should be wearing. No, she's not a minister.
She's many things including words we won't use here but she's not friend to
women and that's why Nouri picked her. A real woman fighting for other women?
Nouri can't handle that. A simpering idiot who states that women should only act
after their husband's consent? That gender traitor gets a ministry. She's
currently at work devising a uniform for Iraqi women. We noted American
gender traitors in a snapshot this week and
Trina's " Diane," Rebecca's
" continuing c.i., i grab goodman,"
Elaine's " Grab
bag" and Ann's " 2 women, 4
men" followed up on that. We were noting silences of American
women who should have been speaking out for Iraqis especially now that a new
Human Rights Watch report had found that Iraq was turning into a police state.
Along with that major finding (which we noted earlier this week), the
report, [PDF format warning] World Report: 2012 also noted
realities for Iraqi women today:
Iraq adjudicates family law and personal status matters pursuant to
a 1959 Personal Status Code. The law discriminates against women by ranting men
privileged status in matters of divorce and inheritance. The law futher
discriminates against women by permitting Iraqi men to have as many as four
polygamous marriages.
On October 6 Iraq's parliament passed legislation to lift Iraq's
reservation to article 9 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women. Atricle 9 grants women equal rights with men to
acquire, change, or retain their nationality and pass on their nationality to
their children.
Violence against women and girls continued to be a serious problem
across Iraq. Women's rights activists said they remained at risk of attack from
extremists, who also targeted female politicians, civil servants, and
journalists. "Honor" crimes and domestic abuse remained a threat to women and
girls, who were also vulnerable to trafficking for sexual exploitation and
forced prostitution due to insecurity, displacement, financial hardship, social
disintegration, and the dissolution of rule of law and state
authority.
Female genital mutilation (FGM) is practiced mainly in Kurdish
areas of northern Iraq and several official and non-governmental studies
estimate that the prevalence of FGM among girls and women in Kurdistan is at
least 40 percent. On June 21 Kurdistan's parliament passed the Family Violence
Bill, which includes several provisions criminalizing the practice, as well as
forced and child marriages, and verbal, physical and psychological abuse of
girls and women.
The rights of women have been destroyed in Iraq. It may take generations
for them to return to the legal rights that they had prior to the US invasion of
Iraq. That story probably won't be told by too many US outlets but you can
always count on the nonsense. Case in point, Michael
S. Schmidt (New York Times)
conducts an interview with Adnan al-Asadi whom Nouri has put in
charge of the Minster of Interior. Not noted in the article -- so probably not
raised in the interview -- al-Asadi has no powers. He was not presented as a
nominee to the Parliament, he was not voted into office by the Parliament.
Legally, he heads no ministry and Nouri can strip him of the post (with no input
from Parliament). He serves at the whim of Nouri, the puppet has a puppet.
Somewhere in an article on violence, Schmidt and the New York Times should have had the guts to
note that the security ministries still have no heads -- Ministry of Interior,
Ministry of Defense and Ministry of National Security. But, as we've already noted this
week, the paper of US-government record has always sucked up to and covered for
Nouri. Al Mada reports that Iraq's
Integrity Commission has released a list of the most corrupt ministries in Iraq.
At number four: Electricity. At number three: Trade. At number one: Defense. And
at number two? Interior. No, Schmidt didn't cover that in his report either. How
does one interview the 'acting minister' of the ministry just ranked the second
most corrupt in Iraq by the independent governmental Integrity Commission and
'forget' to inform readers of the ranking? One manages that feat only when
filing for the New York Times.
Today in Iraq, many look to the US today as a result of yesterday's
sentencing. Stan Wilson and Michael Martinez (CNN)
reports Staff Sgt Frank G. Wuterich, who
entered a guilty plea, will not serve any time for his part in the Haditha
killings which claimed 24 lives November 19, 2005. Raheem Salman and Patrick J. McDonnell (Los Angeles Times)
quote a teacher in Haditha, Rafid Abdul
Majeed, stating, "The Americans killed children who were hiding inside cupboards
or under beds. Was this Marine charged with dereliction of duty because he
didn't kill more? Is Iraqi blood so cheap?" Fadhel al-Badrani (Reuters)
quotes Ali Badr stating, "This sentence gives
us the proof, the solid proof that the Americans don't respect human rights."
AFP reports, "The
Baghdad government vowed on Wednesday to take legal action after an American
marine was spared jail by a US military court over the massacre of 24 unarmed
civilians in the Iraqi town of Haditha in 2005." James Joyner offers his opinion of the verdict at The
Atlantic while Gulf News' editorial board
concludes, "Prosecutors have just committed a final
indignity against the victims of Haditha." Salman and McDonnell observe,
"Overall reaction in Iraq to Wuterich's plea appeared somewhat muted Tuesday,
reflecting, Iraqis say, an already deeply rooted skepticism about the U.S.
justice system. Iraqis are also distracted by a political crisis that some fear
could result in renewed sectarian warfare: At least 10 people were killed
Tuesday in bombings in Baghdad's Sadr City neighborhood, a Shiite Muslim
stronghold."
Do you see an opinion in there from me? No, you do not. We didn't follow
that case here. What prevents us here from following an Iraq legal case? Not
me knowing anyone on the legal teams of either side but if I act as a sounding
board (only to listen to an idea later not pursued) for a friend who's on that
case. I did that. I did not comment here for that reason. That has always
been the policy here. I have covered cases here where I knew someone on the
prosecution or the defense -- and they never got any slack from me -- but if
I've only agreed to allow someone to bounce something off me, I don't comment on
the case. I have no comment on the above -- so those who keep e-mailing
bothered by my comment better figure out what comment I made because I made no
comment on that case here. (Haditha was addressed here when the story broke.
That's before the just decided case. In terms of the legal arguments, the plea
bargain, etc., I have made no comment.)
We're not done with that case. Aswat al-Iraq
notes that Iraqi Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi is calling for the
case to be reviewed. There's nothing to review now. When statements in the
pargraph from Wednesay were being made (and more were made than what I included
in the paragraph), I understood the emotions involved. But I really didn't
think someone would try to pursue something that couldn't be pursued.
The plea bargain was signed off on by both sides. The judge has
implemented it and done the sentencing. A ruling has been made. He can't be
retried and, unless there's proof that the plea bargain was violated in some
way, there's nothing to re-open. What's more bothersome to me is that there's
talk in Iraqi media -- that I would have thought would have died down by now --
of the soldier being transferred to Iraq for another hearing. That will not
happen. Anyone pursuing that is wasting their time. The US does not allow
double jeopardy. The soldier has been tried and punishment has been handed
out. (Iraq also doesn't allow double jeopardy, per their Constitution, FYI.)
The US government would never transfer the soldier over to Iraq for a trial.
Just as they refused to transfer soldiers over to face charges in Italy for
actions in Iraq, they will not allow it to happen. Even more so with this
soldier, because he's already been tried and, in the eyes of the legal system,
been punished. The only avenue left -- and this is not a comment on the case
which is now closed -- is civil court. In the US, charges could be filed, civil
charges not criminal, requesting payment for damages -- and it would have to be
in the US because the soldier will not go to Iraq (I wouldn't if I were him
either) and it would be very difficult for an Iraqi court to get the US to agree
to a lien on what would be a trial in absentia. Family members could sue for
damages in a US civilian court. They'd no doubt use his confession as
evidence. That's better than just a guilty verdict, he confessed and he made a
statement of remorse that's now in the court record. There is no criminal
avenue that can be pursued now. The only legal option currently would be for
family members to file charges in a civilian court, file for damages as a result
of the loss of the loved ones. That would be the only option left and it could
go either way before a jury. But this nonsense of wasting everyone's time on
this topic as you insist that criminal charges will come about or his punishment
will be changed, that's not happening and you're wasting everyone's time with
your fantasy.
Michael Ratner: Heidi, we all heard the good news over the last few
weeks that Mumia was taken off death row and is no longer facing the death
penalty. I know there are other issues you want to talk about with Mumia and I
know you just had a visit with Mumia. So why don't you tell us what's going on
with Mumia, where is he, how was your visit?
Heidi Boghosian: Mumia was transferred from the facility SCI Greene
where he'd been on death row for 17 years -- 17 of the past 30 years -- in that
facility and he was transferred to SCI Mahanoy which is in Frackville,
Pennsylvania.
Michael Ratner: SCI means?
Heidi Boghosian: State Correctional Institution. It's about two
and a half hours from New York so it makes it a lot easier to visit him than in
the other location.
Michael Ratner: Is that where you visited him? In his new
location?
Heidi Boghosian: I've been to his new location three
times.
Michael Ratner: Wow.
Heidi Boghosian: Yes. And it's actually a medium security
facility. The problem is that Mumia's held in what's called Restrictive Custody
in the Administrative Housing Unit there. So he was literally taken off death
row and moved into solitary confinement where he is shackled and handcuffed
whenever he leaves his cell, his number of weekly visits has been reduced to one
and that's just for one hour -- that doesn't include legal visits which can last
for several hours.
Michael Ratner: Let me ask, and I want you to go on, when you visit
him, he comes into the room or where ever you visit him in
shackles?
Heidi Boghosian: Yes. And it's noteworthy that years ago at SCI
Greene, he also was in shackles until [Bishop] Desmond Tutu visited him a few
years ago and complained that this was inhumane treatment because essentially
he's behind thick plexi-glass in a small 4 by 6 roughly foot holding unit and
there are little perforated holes on the side so you can hear each other. But,
so now he's back in the shackles. His phone call privileges have been
--
Michael Ratner: Wait a second. You talk to him through a
wall?
Heidi Boghosian: Yes, you're sitting on one side of a thick
plexi-glass partition. So you're in the same room but it's divided in half by
plexi-glass. So, anyway, his phone call privileges have been reduced. He can
only have, I think it's ten stamps and envelopes a week. And, as a writer, you
can well imagine that Mumia writes probably at least ten letters a day so this
is a dramatic change. He doesn't have his radio or TV.
Michael Ratner: Books?
Heidi Boghosian: I think he only has four books. At first, he had
none, then they allowed him four. The National Lawyers Guild along with the
Human Rights Research Fund, which is co-chaired by Kathleen Cleaver and Natsu
Taylor Saito, sent a letter to the Department of Corrections on January 11th
calling for him to be moved into General Population as he was supposed to have
been when he left SCI Greene. And we cited, as listeners probably know, that
for over a century the US Supreme Court has recognized the psychological damage
that results from being held in solitary. There was a case in 1890, In re
Medley, Also the Commission on Safety and Abuse in America, a few years ago,
found that the increasing use of punitive segregation is not only
counter-productive but it often results in violence in the facilities and also
contributes to post-release recidivism and Juan Mendez, the UN Special
Rappoorteur on Torture just a few weeks ago called for a ban on solitary
confinement longer than 16 days, reiterating that it amounts to torture or
cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment. As a result, the people's movement has
really been calling the facility. We are disheartened to note that there were
rumors Mumia was going to be moved into general population as of last Thursday
and that has -- of this airing -- not happened.
Michael Ratner: Tell me, Heidi, he's not been moved yet and what
can people do?
Heidi Boghosian: People can call. We'll put a link to the website that
has all this information but they can basically [. . .]
As of 1/27/12, Mumia Abu-Jamal has officially been transferred to
General Prison Population after being held in Administrative Custody ("The Hole"
or Solitary Confinement) at SCI Mahanoy, Frackville, PA for seven weeks. This
is the first time Mumia has been in General Population since his arrest in
1981.
PLEASE NOTE that while this is a victory in transferring Mumia out
of the torturous Restricted Housing Unit (RHU), we call upon the closure of ALL
RHU's! Furthermore, we call upon the IMMEDIATE RELEASE of Mumia Abu-Jamal and
are not disillusioned by this transfer. Free Mumia!
Write to Mumia to
send him some love!
MAILING ADDRESS FOR MUMIA ABU-JAMAL:
Mumia
Abu-Jamal
#AM8335
SCI Mahanoy
301
Morea Road
Frackville, PA 17932
| 
