Monday, March 19, 2012. Chaos and violence continue, Barack tries to
squeeze a cheap campaign buck out of the blood and bones of the dead, the Abu
Ghraib torture queen weighs in with her thoughts, and more on this 9th
anniversary of the start of the Iraq War.
AFP's Prashant Rao Tweets on this evening's violence:
prashantrao violence: a half-dozen
bombings in Baquba, Diyala province, have killed two people and wounded 25
today, according to officials.
Reuters adds the death toll has climbed
to 3 with over thirty injured and that the "bombings all took place after
sunset." On the topic of violence, AKE's John Drake Tweeted:
johnfdrake At least 26 people were killed and 22 injured in violence last
week.
I'm confused by Peter Juul's post at Think Progress. Is
he reporting? Is he offering his opinion? What the hell is that last
pargraph? If it's a summary of what Antony Blinken (National Security Advisor
to Vice President Joe Biden) said? If so, it should state that. If it's a
quote from Blinken, it should be in quotations. It reads like it was a
paragraph that kept getting moved down as the piece was written until finally it
was forgotten and left in while posting by mistake. (And if that's what it is,
I've done that dozens of times myself.) But why would you run Blinken's nonsense
unchecked?
First off, just because you're nothing but a partisan, don't push it off on
other people. There are many people who care about Iraq in the US and will tell
you how Barack Obama screwed it up that do not and did not want more troops on
the ground in Iraq. Stop lying. Stop whoring.
Second, why quote Blinken on violence being down if you use the sectarian
fighting/ethnic cleansing as your base? First off the dates are wrong. It's
2006 to 2007 and I'm surprised to have to point that out to Peter Juul because,
back in December, writing with Matthew Duss, he had the dates
correct. Of course, in that article, instead of quoting an idiotic Blinken's
nonsense about violence, Juul and Duss noted, "Iraq still endures a level of
violence that in any other country would be considered a crisis." What
happened? How did that not get tossed in when 'reporting' on what Blinken
said?
Third, what does Barack have to do with 2006 - 2007 levels of violence?
He's not president then. He's not president when Bully Boy Bush implements the
"surge" and the violence goes down (mainly because the ethnic cleansing has
taken place with thousands and thousands dead and 4.1 million refugee crisis).
Why would you use that as a baseline to judge Barack?
Fourth, if you're going to use that as a baseline, try remembering Barack
opposed the surge. If I thought there was honest bone in Barack's body, I'd go
into his summer 2008 interview that, if he had enemies at Saturday Night Live,
could have been the 'hoot' Sarah Palin's was. He came off very uninformed and
very testy. But everyone looked the other way.
Blinken lied. Does it even qualifies as news at this late date? The
government lies and whores over and over. And so much of the press goes along
with it.
Iraq is a failure. And it's worth noting Blinken said it wasn't only
because reality loves to slap these liars in the face.
He insists that the current political crisis is like the one in 2007, "In
the end, the main difference between the two episodes [2007 and today] was that
in 2007/2008, the boycott lasted eight months -- at a time when the United
States had more than 150,000 troops on the ground. In 2012, we had no troops on
the ground, and the boycott ended after less than two months."
When you lie like that, you really should be fired. There's no excuse for
that kind of lying. The 2007 issue wasn't a crisis and it was various members
boycotting the Cabinet. They didn't leave the Parliament. Right now, it's a
crisis and the boycott of Parliament and the Cabinet (both) really wasn't the
issue. To lie like Antony Blinken's doing should really get you fired. There's
no excuse for it. The political crisis has been going on for some time. The
briefest explanation goes like this.
1) March 2010 elections are held. Nouri's State of Law comes in second to
Ayad Allawi's Iraqiay. Per the Constitution, Iraqiya should have first dibs on
forming a coalition.
2) Nouri bitches, whines and moans and has the US backing him so he's able
to be a big baby for eight long months as Iraq cannot move forward, cannot do a
thing. This is Political Stalemate I and this is where Barack Obama made the
mistake and owns the tragedy that is Iraq.
3) Ayad Allawi may be a monster, may be Ned Flanders from The Simpsons, I
don't know and I don't care. I do care that we have free and fair elections. I
do care that when we tell Iraqis that they can solve their problems at the
ballot box, we listen to what their votes say. Nouri's second place showing
wasn't a surprise. Iraqis were moving towards a national identity and that was
reflected in the 2009 provincial elections. The 2010 elections merely confirmed
the trend.
4) A national identity would go a long way towards healing the rifst and
allowing the country to come together. Instead of encouraging that, instead of
respecting the votes of the Iraqi people, the White House backed Nouri al-Maliki
-- already known for running secret prisons as documented time and again by the
outstanding reporting of Ned Parker for the Los Angeles Times. They could have
backed the Iraqi people. Without the US support, Nouri wouldn't have been able
to dig his heels in for 8 months.
5) Backing Nouri included telling Iraqiya and the Kurds and others that it
really was best for Nouri to stay on as prime minister and, if you'll agree to
that, you'll get this. "This" was outlined in the US-brokered Erbil Agreement
that the political blocs signed off on in November 2010. This ended Political
Stalemate I. Parliament finally had a real session. Jalal Talabani was named
President, Tareq al-Hashemi and Adil Abdul-Mahdi were named Vice Presidents.
(All three held those positions before the 2010 election.) Nouri was named prime
minister-designate. This is why Iraqis, in the immediate press that followed,
began asking (and would continue for months after to ask), "Why did we even
bother to vote? Nothing changed." Was to piss on the promise democracy, Barack
Obama. Way to instill a belief in the power of the vote.
7) Nouri does what he always does, stalls. And after a month, he's wrongly
moved from prime minister-designate to prime minister (he did not name a full
Cabinet, the Constitution says you name a Cabinet, not part of one, not half of
one, a Cabinet) or someone else is immediately named prime minister-designate.
At this point, Political Stalemate II has started. Nouri is not holding the
Kirkuk census and referendum as promised to the Kurds to get them on board with
the Erbil Agreement, Nouri is not naming Allawi to an independent security
committee as promised to get Iraqiya on board with the Erbil Agreement.
8) He stalls and he stalls. And has no intention of living up to the Erbil
Agreement. If you want to talk about violence -- three ministries are security
ministries: Interior, Defense and National Security. Nouri makes himself the
head of all three by refusing to nominate people for the three posts. That's 13
months -- during which violence has increased -- that Iraq's three security
posts have been empty.
9) Over the summer, the Kurds get tired of Nouri's excuses and call for him
to return to the Erbil Agreement. Iraqiya joins the call. Other elements
including Moqtada al-Sadr join the call.
10) With Nouri ignoring that call, Iraqiya announces their boycott, he
calls for Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq (Sunni and a member of Iraqiya)
to be stripped of his office, Vice President al-Hashemi goes to the KRG on
business, Nouri insists that al-Hashemi is a terrorist and swears out an arrest
warrant. (Adil Abdul-Mahdi bailed on the nonsense over the summer noting the
corruption in Nouri's government after Nouri asked for 100 days to address the
corruption -- another stall tactic from Nouri -- and then 100 days later
attempted to pretend like something would be done. Abdul-Mahdi has used the
time since to play diplomat, traveling throughout Iraq and meeting with various
groups.) This is when the press pays attention. December 19th. Now on
December 16th, Nouri had tanks circling the homes and offices of various members
of Iraqiya -- a detail only the Washington Post's Liz Sly
bothered to report. ("In recent days, the homes of top Sunni politicians in
the fortified Green Zone have been ringed by tanks and armored personnel
carriers, and rumors are flying that arrest warrants will be issued for other
Sunni leaders.")
11) Iraqiya called off their boycott when Blinken begged them to and
promised them that the Erbil Agreement would be honored. A detail Blinken
leaves out. It's not one history will leave out. It's cute the way he erases
his own involvement, isn't it? He got a boycott ended. That's it. The
problems still remain and if he and Joe Biden can't make good on this round of
promises, Iraqiya's going to start talking as badly about the administration as
the Kurds are. (And, like the Kurds, they will have good reason to do
so.)
The only thing that ends the crisis is a return to the Erbil Agreement.
Nouri doesn't want to do that. When he doesn't want to do something he stalls
and stalls some more. He wasn't supposed to become Prime Minister without a
full Cabinet, but he's 15 months into this term and still has never appointed a
Minister of the Interior, a Minister of Defense or a Minister of National
Security.
While Blinken lies and claims success and wants to insist that Iraq's
reaching out to neighbors, let's look at what that really means for the US.
Nouri al-Maliki wrapped up a recent visit to Kuwait and wanted everyone to know
he didn't leave empty handed. Saturday, Dar Addustour reported Kuwait had
agreed to release 9 Iraqi prisoners -- including the one who allegedly plotted
to assassinate George H.W. Bush. Today Al Rafidayn explains that Raad
al-Asadi is one of the nine -- he's the one arrested in Kuwait in 1993 for
attempting to assassinate George H.W. Bush. You might think would warrant
attention from the US press. When Bully Boy Bush was mentioning the alleged
attempt in his speech to the UN General Assembly in September 2002, the press
was happy to cover it. Whenever Bush mentioned it, the press was happy to cover
it. When he didn't, the press was still happy to cover it. Not to mention that
June 26, 1993, Bill Clinton ordered a missile attack on downtown Baghdad as a
result of the alleged assassination attempt. Andrew Glass (POLITICO) reported on that attack
two years ago noting:
In all, 23 Tomahawk
missiles were fired from the USS Peterson in the Red Sea and from the cruiser
USS Chancellorsville in the Persian Gulf, destroying the building and, according
to Iraqi accounts, killing at least eight civilians.
The Sunday morning
American missile attack was meant to retaliate for an Iraqi plot to assassinate
George H.W. Bush during the former president's visit to Kuwait, where he was to
be honored for his role in leading the coalition that drove Iraqi invaders from
that country during the 1991 Persian Gulf War.
So was it all just
another government lie? If not, it seems rather strange that there's no US press
interest in the deal Nouri made. It seems strange that Blinken wants to tout
Iraq's success at the same time Nouri's securing the release of Poppy Bush's
alleged assassin.
Blinken insists that the US Embassy in Baghdad and US Ambassador James
Jeffrey have a strong relationship with Nouri. Jeffrey's been repeatedly
rebuffed by Nouri since December 19th. And last month, Tim Arango (New York Times) reported the
truth which includes:
After the American troops departed in December, life became more
difficult for the thousands of diplomats and contractors left behind. Convoys
of food that had been escorted by the United States military from Kuwait were
delayed at border crossing as Iraqis demanded documentation that the Americans
were unaccustomed to providing.
Barack chose badly. He chose to get in bed with a thug. That's on him.
People can try to lie and pretty it up but no one forced Barack to do the nasty
with Nouri.
Today -- no link to that garbage -- Barack wants to use Iraq to help his
re-election campaign and he's got this site that you can fill in a message of
thanks to a vet -- and Barack will have your e-mail and zip code to use for his
re-election. That's beyond tacky. There just aren't words for that.
I'm sorry for anyone who had to fight in the illegal war, I'm sorry to the
families and friends who lost a loved one, I'm sorry to those who came back
injured, I'm sorry to those who had to put their lives on hold, I'm sorry the
United States government didn't value the lives of its own citizens (we always
knew they didn't care about Iraqis -- after all that was the message of the
Clinton-era sanctions). As for thanks, I believe Barack Obama should be kissing
the ass of everyone in the antiwar movement -- a movement he co-opted and rode
to the White House. The Iraq War was based on lies and illegal. And the US
occupation of Iraq has not ended.
I'm sorry Barack lied to the American people and said the first thing he
would do when he was sworn in was to start the withdrawal process, that we had
his word on that. I'm sorry that Barack lied and that when Samantha Power let
the truth slip in March 2008, she was forced out and John Nichols and all the
other whores tried to distract the American people. I'm sorry Barack's a liar
and killer. I'm sorry he was ordering a drone attack upon being sworn in.
As we 'celebrate' the illegal war that cost (conservative estimate) 2
million Iraqi lives, I'm sorry to Iraq and the children of Iraq who will live
with the fallout for decades to come (we'll go into that tomorrow). I'm sorry
that Mr. Pretend To Be Against The Iraq War Barack Obama has never said a damn
word about all the Iraqis killed and wounded in this illegal war. I'm sorry for
the wounded because they have to continue to live in a country the US government
destroyed.
I'm sorry that there was no honest examination of the Iraq War by the press
that dropped it like a hot potato after they sold it or by the Democratic Party
that used it as an election booster and then quickly got on board with it. I'm
sorry that War Hawk and War Criminal Barack Obama thinks he has some higher
ground to stand from and issue apologies for what those under him do. From
Sherwood Ross' " Obama Apologizes for Kandahar Massacre -- But Not His
Own Killings" ( Scoop):
How shall the world view the apology by President Obama for the
massacre of 16 Afghan villagers allegedly by a lone U.S. serviceman in Kandahar
Province when the President is himself personally responsible for the
extra-judicial killing of hundreds of civilians by means of drone aircraft
strikes whose crime he defends? Army Staff Sgt., Robert Bales, of Lake Tapps,
Wash., is being held in prison in Fort Leavenworth, Kan. Mr. Obama is free to
travel the campaign trail.
"We're heart-broken over the loss of innocent life," the president
said of the Kandahar massacre. His seeming expression of contrition rings
hollow, though, particularly if one considers how Mr. Obama goes about his daily
routine ordering drone strikes and seemingly is unaffected by the "loss of
innocent lives" they cause, as well as by the hated companion night raids
on Afghan homes, also the result of his policy.
I'm sorry that elected Democrats seem to think their going along with the
Libyan War will be forgotten. I'm sorry that the party has sold out whatever
scraps of ethics it had to get behind Barack in all of his destruction. His
tantrum baby, smashing everything in sight from public financing during the
general election, to humanity.
Today Barack Obama declared of Iraqis, "Their lives are better. They got
the better end of the deal." Oh, wait, that was his doppelganger Lynddie
England -- whom AFP reports on today. Like Barack, the
torture queen of Abu Ghraib has nothing to say about Iraqis who were hurt or
killed, she's only focused on "people on our side." Heaven help anyone whom
Lynddie England believes is on her side.
I'm sorry that pompous asses think international law can be trashed -- both
with starting the Iraq War and then walking away from the promise made to Camp
Ashraf residents in Iraq. I'm sorry that idiots and asses seem to think rights
are only granted to those we approve of. That's how you get so much prison
abuse in the US, that thinking. 'There's prisoners, who cares what happens to
them.' Either human rights and the law matter or they don't.
How did the Holocaust happen? Over six million Jews were murdered also
killed were gays and lesbians, gypsies, disabled or challenged people, civilians
and soldiers of the USSR and others. How did it happen?
Because I don't care about the gypsies, or I don't care about the disabled
or . . .
That's how it happened. Don't pretend, don't kid. It happened because a
comfortable people -- often in the US -- were able to look down on other human
beings. They didn't do the cleansing, but they damn well made sure they didn't
do any defending of the targeted populations.
Peter Certo's garbage at Foreign Policy In Focus
reads like a primer of how to allow the Holocaust. Never once does Peter Certo
express even a bit of concern for the residents of Camp Ashraf, never once does
he note the legal obligations to Camp Ashraf, never once does he even mention
Camp Ashraf but damned if he doesn't attack people who've spoken out for the
Camp Ashraf residents.
As I've explained before, I had no idea who the residents of Camp Ashraf
were until well into the Iraq War and then I asked disinterested parties
(friends at the United Nations -- the UN was a disinterested party at that time,
that's not true today) to walk me through. This is a legal issue and legal's
what everyone wants to avoid. Because the legal issue is clear: The residents
are protected under international law and the Geneva Convention.
It's also a humanitarian issue and either you believe all people have a
right to protection or you don't believe that. And if you don't believe that,
we're back to the days where the fact that you hate Jewish people means it's
okay if the Nazis kill them -- that's it's okay if the Nazi's kill a 1,000
Jews, or 10,000 Jews but somewhere after it reaches 6 million, well then all the
sudden you've got a few concerns -- too damn late, you've got a few concerns.
It's cute the way IPS's Foreign Policy in Focus has time to yack
about others. Were I Foreign Policy in Focus, I think I'd be on my
knees before the world begging forgiveness.
Emira Woods: You know, the other laureate, Ellen
Johnson Sirleaf, we hold her up, as well. She is Africa's first democratically
elected woman president. She has long been an icon and a role model for many on
the continent and around the world. I have to say it's a little bit -- it's
interesting, this prize going to her. It is just a few days before the
elections, and she is, as the incumbent, running for president, and the
elections are next week, October 11th, in Liberia. Clearly, women were
fundamental in terms of getting her into office, and, many believe, keeping her
in office on this path to peace for the last six years. But she comes from a
different tradition. And let's remember, you know, it's -- Ellen Johnson Sirleaf
remains, really, the only president on the continent of Africa that offered to
host the U.S. Africa Command, AFRICOM, very
controversial move, not well supported by civil society, or particularly the
Council of Churches and others in Liberia who were not in support of that. So,
really, this award, it comes at a challenging moment, probably for the
opposition in Liberia, but it also, for many of us who are committed to peace,
is a reminder that this should be a clarion call for the President to remember
her commitment to long-term peace and justice, not only for the people of
Liberia, but for all of the African continent and the world.
As Amy Goodman explained, "Emira Woods, co-director of Foreign Policy in
Focus, Institute for Policy Studies". Foreign Policy in Focus is part of IPS.
And the woman lovely Emira was praising? She's in the news today. Tamasin Ford and Bonnie Allen (Guardian)
report:
The Nobel peace prize winner and
president of Liberia, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, has defended a
law that criminalises homosexual acts, saying: "We like ourselves just the way
we are."
In a joint interview with Tony Blair, who was left looking
visibly uncomfortable by her remarks, Sirleaf told the Guardian: "We've got
certain traditional values in our society that we would like to
preserve."
Liberian legislation classes "voluntary sodomy" as a misdemeanour
punishable by up to one year in prison, but two new bills have been proposed
that would target homosexuality with much tougher sentences.
Blair, on a visit to Liberia in his capacity as the founder of the
Africa Governance Initiative
(AGI), a charity that aims to strengthen African governments, refused to comment
on Sirleaf's remarks.
Again, were I Foreign Policy in Focus, I'd be begging for
forgiveness right now for praising a proud homophobe like Sirleaf. March 5th,
we first noted the attacks on the Iraqi youth with " Emo kids in Iraq targeted for death." It's 14
days later and The Nation magazine's never said a damn word about
what's taking place. There is a connection -- there are multiple actually --
Katrina vanden Hevuel is an IPS Trustee. And she's editor and publisher of The
Nation. It's cute the way they all ignore the LGBT issues, isn't it?
Especially Katrina whose family home has many closets -- none of them
unoccupied. But if Katrina ever practiced ethical journalism, she'd have to
disclose things like being an IPS Trustee. I mean you don't write this lengthy column -- as she did last June --
praising IPS through the roof and 'forget' to disclose your an IPS Trustee
unless you're practice the art of concealment.
And The Nation ignores the Iraq War today. The war that saw its
circulation soar (it's long since crashed). Democracy Now! didn't even
note in the headline. According to Democracy Now! back then, the Iraq
War started at 9:30 EST, March 19th. But nothing on it today. Nothing at
The Progressive on the Iraq War though they do want you to know about
Uncle Tom's Cabin being published 160 years ago tomorrow. Tomorrow.
We'll link because it's Kevin Alexander Gray. Uprising Radio didn't have
time for the Iraq War anniversary today. Nor did In These Times.
Those outlets should all be ashamed of themselves.
But that's really it. (Feel free to e-mail -- common_ills@yahoo.com -- if you have
some program I've missed. I haven't been by a TV or radio and am going by speed
listens over the phone and what Pacifica friends are telling me.)
It's handful. Thank goodness for Ann Wright. Thank goodness for David
Swanson. But that's really it today. As of right now, Antiwar.com has
done NOTHING on Iraq today. Their most recent piece is Margaret Griffis Sunday piece on violence.
Lynddie England didn't take the day off from spinning lies. Barack Obama
didn't miss a chance to try to make a buck off the illegal war today. But those
who supposedly gave a damn, they had others things to do and they are a big
reason that not only has the government not gotten honest about the Iraq War but
also why so many wars continue to sprout and flourish under a 'peace'
president.
We'll pick back up on this topic tommorrow.
Jonathan Groubert: And then there was the way Iraqi males
viewed Iraqi females running around in shorts and t-shirts
Safa al-Sultani: Like, our boys, they grow up in this cultural
environment and, as a result, they opposed to something like that, they opposed
to something like girls playing basketball or --
Jonathan Groubert: What did they say to you?
Safa al-Sultani: Like, "Don't try to act like American girls."
Like, you should start thinking more and evaluate if that's really appropriate
to be done here. This is the first thing they said. The second thing they said
that 'this is unacceptable' so they won't accept -- some won't accept you in our
groups because you're doing something like we are opposing to.
Jonathan Groubert: And what do you say when they say that to
you?
Safa al-Sultani: I say, first of all, we are not imitating anyone,
this is something that we were wanting to do a long time ago but we didn't have
the chance and the opportunity to do it and you'll get used to it with time,
deal with it.
Jonathan Groubert: And do they accept that? Do they get
angry?
Safa al-Sultani: They got angry. But actually, they accepted it,
after two years or
something like that.
Jonathan Groubert: The very idea of creating a women's sports team
is groundbreaking in and of itself but what makes Safa's team at AUiS really
special is that in a country where ethnic differences have meant tension and
killing as far back as people can remember, this team is ethnically
mixed.
Safa al-Sultani: You have Christian, you have Arab Sunni, you have
Arab Shi'ite, you have Kurdish, you have Turkoman, you have Sabi -- it's
mini-Iraq, you know?
Jonathan Groubert: What did you know about other ethnic populations
in Iraq? Christians, Kurds, what image did you have of them before going to the
AUiS? And let's start with the Kurds.
Safa al-Sultani: This one, I was really negative. I was negative
because, like, Saddam put this bad image of Kurds people in our
heads.
Jonathan Groubert: But what exactly is a bad image? What exactly
were you thinking?
Safa al-Sultani: Okay, the bad image is that they were
people who always challenged his power but he didn't present it that way, he
presented it as challenging "our" power, and Kurds always want to get Arabs
down, like they don't want a good life for them. So, as a result, like
naturally you'd grow up and say that Kurd people are bad.
Jonathan Groubert: So have there ever been ethnic tensions on the
team?
Safa al-Sultani: Sure. I won't lie and say that, 'No, there was
none.' And I created some of them [laughing] actually.
Jonathan Groubert: What do you mean? What did you
do?
Safa al-Sultani: Like, okay, there was an Arab girl who got hurt
and a Kurdish girl of course I would to help the Arab girl first. I would leave
the Kurdish one to suffer for a bit. But then I would help her. Of course, this
is not the case anymore. I am totally different now, don't get me wrong. But
that would happen at the beginning, like there were tensions, we didn't help
each other because, I've seen how people treat me out in the street, so I just
reflected them and the team and of course that wasn't actually
me.
Jonathan Groubert: Did you actually see that happen? Like an
ethnic conflict between two girls on the team? That you would have to deal
with?
Safa al-Sultani: It happens while we're playing. Like, 'She kept
the ball. Why she kept the ball? Why she didn't give it to me to score?' Like
something as simple as that. You know, connected to ethnic background.
Jonathan Groubert: Safa had her reasons to be suspicious of others.
Her mother is a Sunni politician from Baghdad who was on the governing council
in 2004. Her mother and brother were in a car leaving Najaf, a Shi'ite
stronghold, when they were ambushed.
Safa al-Sultani: And my dad said, let's get out of this house and
go to your uncle's house and I was like, 'Okay fine, let's do it.' But I didn't
actually know what was happening. But then I was sitting with them in my uncle's
house and there on the TV they were saying that my mom, she got in an attack. I
was like, "What? No one told me about that." Because they were afraid because
they know that I am like really sensitive so they didn't want to do it because
they didn't even know what happened, like we didn't know about my brother died
until the day after.
Jonathan Groubert: I'm so sorry. What happened?
Safa al-Sultani: They were on their way from Baghdad to Najaf and
they were in their own car and the terrorists who attacked them were like cars
and guns, shooting them, and all this stuff happened.
|
