Dorothy West

Do you know Dorothy West?



Dorothy West - (1901 - 1998) West was active in the Harlem Renaissance movement as a teenager and was the last surviving member of the period. West, best known for her short stories, debuted with The Living Is Easy in 1948.
The following Biography excerpted from AFAMNet:
In 1926, shortly after she graduated from Girls' Latin School in Boston, West tied for second prize in a short story contest with Zora Neale Hurston. Her first novel, "The Living Is Easy,'' about the black middle class in Boston, came out in 1948.Hurston befriended West and brought her to New York, where she was adopted by the more established writers of the Harlem Renaissance, including Richard Wright and Langston Hughes. "We didn't know it was the Harlem Renaissance, because we were all young and all poor,'' West told The Associated Press in 1995. "We had no jobs to speak of, and we had rent parties'' to raise rent money.
West published her second novel, "The Wedding,'' at the age of 88, nearly 50 years after her first in 1926. It was so successful that Doubleday quickly brought out a collection of her short stories and reminiscences, "The Richer, The Poorer.''

The Last Leaf Of Harlem is another collection of Dorothy West's writings. The full title is The Last Leaf Of Harlem: Selected and Newly Discovered Fiction By The Author Of The Wedding. Lionel C. Bascom is the editor.

My favorite was "Ghosts" (and, after that, "Pluto"). This is a section of "Ghosts:"

In the apartment in which she had lived before moving to her present address, Mrs. M hadhad a strange experience upon moving. She had placed her baby's playpen in a certain corner in her living room. Soon after she had settled in the apartment, she noticed that the baby began to cry a lot, unnaturally, as if in terror.

She would go to the playpen, and none of the physical things, which irritate a baby to the point of crying, would be apparent. The baby was in good health and there was nothing to cause the constant terrified screaming. Mrs. M found it very difficult to understand the change in the baby's disposition as it had formerly been an even-tempered child.
One day she mentioned the baby's behavior to her next-door neighbor. This friend listened, and then with some reluctance, asked where the baby's playpen was. Mrs. M told her. The neighbor then explained that another baby's crib had stood in that identical spot. The mother of this child had died, and the family had moved away. Mrs. M had almost immediately moved in.
The neighbor's explanation was that the dead woman, the baby's mother, was coming back to see her child, not knowing that it had been taken away, and that it was this strange spirit form that was frightening Mrs. M's child. She advised Mrs. M to move her baby's playpen to another corner of the room. She did and the baby did not cry anymore.

And then what happened? I guess you'll have to pick up the book to know that.

Yesterday's theme was poetry and tonight's is books.



Cedric's Big Mix
Secrets of Arianna and Barack
20 hours ago

The Daily Jot
THIS JUST IN! ARIANNA'S POO AND BARACK'S TOO!
20 hours ago

Thomas Friedman is a Great Man
Wanda Coleman
20 hours ago

Mikey Likes It!
e.e. cummings, Iraq
20 hours ago

Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude
julia alvarez, elizabeth schulte
20 hours ago

SICKOFITRADLZ
"Straight Talk" (Judith Moss)
20 hours ago

Ruth's Report
Gwendolyn Brooks
20 hours ago

Oh Boy It Never Ends
Melvin B. Tolson's "Napoleon Hannibal Speare"
20 hours ago

Like Maria Said Paz
Ramon Guthrie, force-feeding
20 hours ago

Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills)
LoVerne Wilson Brown
20 hours ago

Cedric's Big Mix
Secrets of Arianna and Barack
20 hours ago

The Daily Jot
THIS JUST IN! ARIANNA'S POO AND BARACK'S TOO!
20 hours ago

Thomas Friedman is a Great Man
Wanda Coleman
20 hours ago

Mikey Likes It!
e.e. cummings, Iraq
20 hours ago

Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude
julia alvarez, elizabeth schulte
20 hours ago

SICKOFITRADLZ
"Straight Talk" (Judith Moss)
20 hours ago

Ruth's Report
Gwendolyn Brooks
20 hours ago

Oh Boy It Never Ends
Melvin B. Tolson's "Napoleon Hannibal Speare"
20 hours ago

Like Maria Said Paz
Ramon Guthrie, force-feeding
20 hours ago

Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills)
LoVerne Wilson Brown
20 hours ago





"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Wednesday, March 25, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, Barack Obama's nominee for US Ambassador to Iraq Chris Hill had an embarrassing Senate debut today, England will have a public inquiry in August -- well, maybe not in August -- well, maybe not public, well . . .

This morning the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a hearing on the nomination of Christopher Hill to be US Ambassador to Iraq. Committee chair John Kerry spoke of what he termed a need to move the nomination through the process quickly and noted that Hill has stated he will immediately depart for Iraq "within a day of his Senate confirmation." In his opening remarks, Kerry explained:

Ambassador Hill, all of your considerable skills will be called upon in Iraq. And among the many challenges you will face there, I would like to focus on several which I believe will be critical to our success:
First, resolving the status of Kirkuk and other disputed territories. Arab - Kurdish tensions run high in Kirkuk, which remains a potential flashpoint for violence, and meaningful efforts to reach agreement on Kirkuk's final status cannot be put off indefinitely. In Mosul, a strong showing in recent provincial elections by an anti-Kurdish coalition illustrated rising tensions there, as did a tense military standoff in Diyala province last summer between the Iraqi army and Kurdish peshmerga . If progress is not made in defusing Arab-Kurdish tensions while American forces remain in Iraq, the window for a peaceful resolution of Kirkuk and other disputed territories may close.
Second, passing the oil laws. Despite repeated assurances that an agreement was near, negotiations to finalize a series of laws regulating Iraq's oil resources appear to be no closer to completion now than they were two years ago. The fundamental issue is a disagreement between Baghdad and the Kurds on the Kurdish region's ability to enter into oil exploration and production contracts. Though the Iraqis, to their credit, have been sharing oil revenues, the country still lacks an overarching legal and political framework for its oil industry, the lifeblood of the country's economy. Again, time is of the essence because developments on the ground will only make a solution more difficult.
Third, involving Iraq's neighbors in stabilizing the country. I have long encouraged vigorous, sustained diplomacy to encourage Iraq's neighbors, including Iran and Syria, to play more constructive roles in Iraq. The Arabs have begun to cautiously engage with Iraq, and they should be encouraged to do more. I believe that as Ambassador to Iraq, you will have an important role to play in this process. Your predecessor, Ambassador Crocker, had three rounds of meetings with his Iranian colleague in 2007. I hope that the Administration will strongly consider restarting these talks.
Fourth, full integration of the Sunnis. Although some progress has been made in incorporating Sunni Arabs into Iraq's new political structure, December's parliamentary elections can play a key role in consolidating this process. Integrating the Sunni militias which played such a key role in turning the tide in Iraq remains a major concern: According to recent press reports, only five percent of the "Sons of Iraq" have been hired into the Iraqi security forces or otherwise given the government jobs they were promised, and the debaathification process remains stalled. If this situation is not addressed, it will significantly increase the possibility that Iraq's Sunni Arab population could again take up arms against the central government.
Fifth, addressing refugees and internally displaced persons. Millions of Iraqis - perhaps as many one in six - have been forced to flee. The unwillingness or inability of the vast majority to return to their homes is an indicator of Iraq's continuing instability and a potential source of future conflict. Iraqi's religious and ethnic minorities are particularly at risk. This is a problem that will only grow worse if it not addressed.
Finally, the importance of training Iraq's security forces cannot be overstated if they are to be fully capable of independent action once we leave. This highlights the importance of achieving a high degree of civil-military cooperation between our diplomats and soldiers in Iraq. I strongly believe that one of the principle reasons that General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker were able to accomplish so much is because they worked together so closely.

Sentor Richard Luger, ranking Republican offered a few thoughts (none worth quoting and all straying from agreed upon Iraq press reality to paint an even rosier picture). "We are awfully proud of him in Rhode Island," declared Senator Jack Reed who appeared before the committee (he doesn't sit on the committee) to vouch for Hill, "I first got to know Chris in 1985 when he was the Ambassador to Macedonia. . . . And Mr. Chairman and Mr. Luger, I can think of no one more qualified for this job."

A nice statement that could have been a strong introduction . . . if Hill had been ready to appear before the committee. First up, Kerry asked him to summarize his opening statement (noting the prepared statement would be put into the record). Don't read your prepared statement, summarize it. Hill stated he would; however, he then went on to read -- word for word -- from his statement including making a show of turning the page on "very real accomplishments". Word for word. Dramatic page turn after dramatic page turn. He also had hair sticking up all over the top of his head and even worse in the back.

So you don't comb your hair before your hearing and you say you'll do something and then ignore it. Turns the page and then goes on to 'resposibilities.' John Kerry was visibly bothered by the reading. (With Kerry, the clue is his spine gets very stiff and he gathers his mouth to the left while cutting his eyes. If you ever see that, know he's ticked. All present at today's hearing saw it though some might not have grasped what they were seeing. And we'll focus on that and let Fox and others run with Kerry's yawning as Hill read his prepared remarks.) Turn the page to talk about his privilages. Turn the page "I know that maintaining" Turn the page "for each of these . . ."

It was a bad opening and an early portent. He's very lucky that Democrats on the committee are pulling for him because he made a fool out of himself in his exchange with Senator Chris Dodd. He walked into a scheduled hearing knowing there was a controversy about his nomination and he didn't prep? Dodd asked about the "Awakening" Councils and that wasn't a curve ball question. It's been in the news. It was always going to be asked. Hill repeatedly referred to Anbar and, around the fourth or fifth time, it became obvious that he believes all "Awakenings" are in Anbar Province. That is troubling. Any diplomat, regardless of where they were stationed, should have had a better grasp of the issue just from casually following the press over the last years.

Dodd noted that "at some point we're going to have to stop funding these Awakening Councils . . . how much of a risk does that raise?" The question was how much of a risk was that? Hill never answered that question. He babbled on about how he thought the "Awakenings" were "very key and I think we wisely took on the task and make the payroll of this" -- at least he was correct about the payroll. That one time.

Hill then went on to declare that al-Maliki's government has been progressing and "doing so in terms of taking over the payments that these 'Sons of Iraq' receive. And I think, more importantly in the long run, incorporating them into the Iraqi forces." If your jaw dropped, hold on. He went on to reword himself, "I think the fact that they took over the financing of this and that it's going very well is a testament to them and I think it's been working."

al-Maliki has not, NOT, assumed all payments. The US made the payments at the start of the month to over 40,000 "Awakenings" (approximately 42,000 says M-NF). The US hopes -- HOPES -- al-Maliki will be making that payment at the start of next month. Hopes. It hasn't happened yet. And Usama Redha and Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times)
reported yesterday that the ones al-Maliki is supposed to be paying aren't being paid: "The latest hiccup has been the budget woes of the Iraqi government, with bureaucratic snafus resulting in a failure to pay many of the Sunni paramilitaries, called the Sons of Iraq, in Baghdad for just over a month." For over a month. Reported yesterday by the Los Angeles Times. And Hill has no idea. Hill comes to hearing and praises al-Maliki for paying the "Awakenings" and he doesn't know what he's talking about.

Senator Johnny Isakson gave Hill the opportunity to clarify those statments asking if he'd heard Hill correctly that al-Maliki had taken over all the payments of the "Awakenings"? Hill replied that was his understanding.

Hill also claimed al-Maliki was absorbing the "Awakenings" into the government. Yesterday's snapshot noted Rod Nordland and Alissa J. Rubin's New York Times article where the reporters explained, "After months of promises, only 5,000 Awakening members -- just over 5 percent -- have been given permanent jobs in the Iraqi security forces." Five percent. Chris Hill was slobbering over Nouri and praising him for things that have not happened. He was ill prepared throughout and even with the softballs lobbed by the Democratic majority committee, he wasn't able to answer the questions. He was prepped. Senator Edward Kaufman asked a question and Hill was bragging about his prep there. The question was about Kirkuk and Hill wanted the committee to know that, just days ago, he had a special briefing: "I had the briefing. It turns out it is a very complex issue."

"It turns out it is a very complex issue." That statement is frightening. It's all the more frightening that Hill needed the briefing because, as he stated, he couldn't understand what the hold up re: Kirkuk was. It was just a land dispute! (Kirkuk is oil-rich, the Kurdistan Regional Government says it belongs to them and that Saddam diluted Kurdish power and control. The central government wants it as well.) Kirkuk is a great deal more than a land dispute. It goes to history, it goes to long-standing grievances, it goes to resources and it goes to control. That Hill couldn't grasp that as a casual observer is frightening. His remarks on Kirkuk were all over the place throughout the hearing and, had he not informed he'd been briefed on Kirkuk, one would assume he'd never given the matter more than ten seconds thought.

It's not a pressing issue, he insisted. The hydrocarbons law is the pressing issue. Not Kirkuk. Even when he thought it was a mere land dispute, he should have grasped how important Kirkuk is. At times, his answers indicated the US would decide what to do (bad move -- Iraqis need to make that decision because it's their land; the US doesn't need to be involved) and at other times he seemed to think the United Nations. Never once did he seem aware that maybe an regarding Iraqi land should be decided by Iraqis (either just within the province or throughout the country). His grasp of the United Nations work was also troubling because he seems to believe they have this huge team of workers on the ground and that they've always been working on the issue of Kirkuk. Reality, the UN got invovled in the Kirkuk issue last year only because it threatened to derail the provincial elections (and almost did). Hill seems completely ignorant of those realities. He thinks the KRG is the equivalent of Bosnia and Kosovo. He would tell Senator Russ Feingold that the issue of Kirkuk was "just old fashioned land dispute." Told him that today after also claiming that's what he used to think before his briefing days ago. Hill appeared to have no short term memory at all and no record of what he'd said to one senator before answering the other.

We're talking mainly the facts -- the basic facts -- above. But the peace movement should be concerned by the bulk of his testimony. He places huge emphasis on the hydrocarbons law and that's really not his to be involved with. Yes, the US tried to push through several versions under the previous administration, but weren't we supposed to see a change? He is obsessed with the hydrocabrons law ("'This is a law about hydrocarbons the way Moby Dick is a story about a whale .. .. There's a lot more going on with that law.'") and that was evident not just by the fact that every other answer he gave worked itself around to that law but also by the fact that he named it as his most pressing issue he would face as the Ambassador to Iraq (if confirmed). That should worry the hell out of the peace movement. Why is an ambassador nominee stating his most pressing issue is a hydrocabrons law?

The peace movement should be troubled by a number of things. But first, congratulations to Senator Jim Webb. He reads. He actually does his own reading and he's smarter than all the reporters the New York Times has stationed in Iraq. That paper was one of the worst when it came to the Status Of Forces Agreement. (The Washington Post's reporting was the best, then the Los Angeles Times'. McClatchy's was actually worse than NYT's.) Unlike so many fools and idiots, Jim Webb read the Status Of Forces Agreement -- the treaty negotiated by the previous administration.

Wait. We need to clear up something. The snapshot's dictated. I've got one phone I'm dictating into and I'm rotating cells to the other ear. I'm being told little Spency Ackerman -- who wet dreams of Barack Obama nightly -- has distorted this exchange. No surprise. Spencer got his ass fired from The New Republic. How bad of a reporter do you have to be in order to have The New Republic fire you? It took three years for them to catch on to Stephen Glass (even with nonstop complaints and proof for two of those three years). Ackerman cheerleaded this illegal war and then, when public opinion began to change, did his mini mea culpa. (That wasn't genuine. That's become obvious.) This is the 'reporter' who covered the first day of Peteraeus and Crocker hearings -- with three presidential contenders questioning the two -- by ignoring Hillary Clinton. Had time for John McCain, had time for his Dream Lover Barack, but ignored Hillary. (Hillary's questioning was the hardest of anyone's that day and Petraeus has never gotten over that questioning and continues to carry a grudge. A real reporter would have covered it. Ackerman's not a real reporter.) So to be clear, Ackerman's written his usual fantasy garbage. Maybe he was microwaving himself a snack during the bulk of the exchange? Who knows, who cares, he's a hack and search out his garbage only to laugh at the little War Hawk punk.

In the real world, Jim Webb went over the basics. He noted he'd read both the SOFA and the Strategic Framework Agreement, "I read them last fall when I think they were wrongly categorized as restricted information -- when you had to go to a room to read the documents that were not classified because the previous administration was trying to keep them from public debate." Webb noted that he read the SOFA again "ten days ago." He then pointed out that Barack Obama's "administration is talking more of the drawing down of forces rather than the withdrawal and I think that's a pretty important distinction when you're looking at the agreement." He pointed out that Joe Biden [then chair of this committee, now the Vice President of the United States], Kerry and himself "were among the ones saying it should have had the approval of Congress -- it had the approval of the Iraqi Parliament. . . . This agreement was basically done through executive signatures, it wasn't brough before the Congress." So he wanted to discuss what that meant and what the terms meant. On what that meant, since the Congress never passed it, did that mean Barack's administration could just choose to ignore the SOFA? Spensy Ackerman's insisting Hill said this and that and blah blah. Reality, Webb was framing his questions and points and Hill didn't say much of anything. When he did speak, Hill said he thought, he thought, the administration . . . but he'd get back in writing. So for Spensy to insist Hill said US forces out in 2011 is the usual sort of b.s. that gets little Spensy's fired from their outlets. Fortunately, he's no longer at a real outlet so he'll probably remain employed.

This is a paraphrase of Webb on that first issue, "Well the agreement can now be made since the Congress was not part of the document . . . an executive branch could now say we're not going to be out by December 31, 2011' and listening to the discussion of residual forces I'm not really hearing clearly that it is the intent of the administration to have a full withdrawal of US forces by the end of 2011." Hill responds -- pay attention, Spency -- that he "would prefer to get back to" Webb about the administration's position.


Okay, so that's Webb's first concern. Is it binding to the administration -- particularly the part about all US forces out by 2011? And Hill doesn't know. But will get back to him. The second aspect (which Spensy ignores because it doesn't fit the LIE and PROPAGANDA Spensy wants to sale) is what the SOFA actually says. Webb went through this at length. He noted Articles 2, 24, 27 and 30 seemed to be in conflict "with the defintional phrases" and the claims being made about the SOFA and "there really seems to be quite loose language when we're talking about a full withdrawal by the end of 2011." He noted that "any member of the United States forces means any individual who is a member" according to the defintion of terms but this definition is less precise in Article 24. He notes the wording and how "must withdraw" was changed to "shall withdraw." Then he zooms in on Article 27 where "there are two fairly lenthy paragraphs but they basically talk about if there's any external or internal threats to Iraqi sovereignty or political independence that we will take appropriate measures." Hill -- the diplomat who can't grasp Kirkuk -- had no idea. And seemed forever on the verge of saying, "I wasn't aware I'd be tested on this."

Webb is correct about the secrecy the previous administration placed on the treaty masquerading as a SOFA. They refused to publish it until after the Iraqi Parliament passed it (Thanksgiving Day) at which point they rushed to post it online -- and thanks to Barack, lots of luck finding it online at the White House website but here's the copy of it (non-PDF format). For more on some of the issues that Senator Webb was raising, you can see Luke Savage's "Iraq's Prolonged Occupation" (The Varsity):First, Article 27 of the Status of Forces Agreement negotiated by the Bush Administration in 2008 gives the United States leave to "take appropriate measures, in the event of any external or internal threat or aggression against Iraq." The ambiguity of this rhetoric is worrisome. After all, Iraq's Shiite majority is likely to form closer ties with Iran, a nation hostile to U.S. interests in the region. The government of Nouri Al-Maliki could easily be replaced by a less pro-Western administration that would formalize these ties. What constitutes "aggression" may thus be a point of contention, and the text of the SOF Agreement is distinctly vague about the nature of any American response. It might, for example, take the same form as the "appropriate measures" carried out in 2003 to protect the American people from the "imminent threat" of Iraq's non-existent stockpile of destructive weapons.
Savage notes the issue of contractors and this came up during the hearing when Senator James Risch raised the issue. He was told by Hill that contractors would be used to protect diplomatic staff and the embassy's parameter. He mentioned none by name but alluded to Blackwater (now Xe) and stated there were others which could be uitilized. Risch is a Republican and the bulk of the Republicans on the committee were mainly concerned with whether or not the record indicated Hill was honest (qualified wasn't a Republican concern -- but when has it ever been?). Senator Richard Luger read the following into the record from Kirk Victor's March 23rd "Brownback Promises Battle On Iraq Nominee" (National Journal):

President Obama's nomination of Christopher Hill to be ambassador to Iraq has prompted fierce criticism from a handful of senior Republican senators in what is likely a prelude to a bruising battle on the Senate floor. Critics including Sen. Sam Brownback charge that Hill, a career diplomat, misled Congress in testimony last year when he was handling the six-party talks dealing with North Korean nuclear disarmament.
Brownback charges that Hill failed to follow through on his promise to confront North Korea on its human rights record. The Kansas Republican, joined by four other GOP senators -- Christopher (Kit) Bond of Missouri, John Ensign of Nevada, James Inhofe of Oklahoma and Whip Jon Kyl of Arizona -- recently urged the president to withdraw the nomination not only because of what they see as Hill's misleading testimony but also because of his inexperience in dealing with Iraq. Sen. John McCain of Arizona, last year's Republican presidential nominee, also opposes the nomination.
Obama and Senate Democratic leaders counter that as a seasoned diplomat, Hill is well-suited for this key post. Hill also has won a key endorsement from Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, the senior Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, who said that Hill had "demonstrated extraordinary diplomatic and managerial skills in dealing with an isolated and inscrutable North Korean regime." Lugar's panel is scheduled to hold a hearing on the nomination Wednesday.
Brownback adamantly disagrees with Lugar. Last year, the Kansan even held up President Bush's nominee to South Korea until Hill agreed to take steps to make North Korea's human rights record part of the negotiations. But the senator says that Hill went back on his word. In an interview with National Journal last week, Brownback discussed his determination to do everything he can to kill the nomination. Edited excerpts follow. NJ: What do you intend to do when Christopher Hill's nomination to be ambassador to Iraq reaches the Senate floor?
Brownback: We are going to fight hard against Chris. I met with him [on March 18] in my office and he did not allay any of my concerns. When he was conducting six-party talks, I asked him to involve the special envoy for human rights. He didn't want to do it. So I held up an ambassadorial nominee to South Korea. The State Department really wanted that ambassadorial nominee.
Finally [former Virginia GOP Senator] John Warner brokered a deal in the Armed Services Committee where Chris Hill was testifying and Warner had me ask questions. One of them was, "Will you invite the special envoy for human rights to the six-party talks?" He said yes, he would. That didn't happen. On his word of doing that, in front of open committee, I lifted my hold on the South Korea ambassador. So he misled me.

Hill's reply was basically that he told Senator Brownback (who doesn't sit on the committee) that things would happen but they were conditional, dependent upon other things. Hill noted Senator Brownback's July 31, 2008 press release ("Brownback Lifts Hold On Stephens Nomination") and stated "we never got bi-later talks" so the promises he made to Brownback were never reached. Senator Roger Wicker would raise the issue as well. We'll note this exchange:

Senator Roger Wicker: This assurance [to Brownback] took place in public testimony is that correct?

Chris Hill: Yes, there's a record public record.

Senator Roger Wicker: Have you gone back and reviewed the transcript>

Chris Hill: Yes, I have.

Senator Roger Wicker: You're a career diplomat, professional career servant, words are very important. Did it occur to you that you needed to get back to Senator Brownback and clear it up when [the person was not brought in]?

Chris Hill: I said in the testimony when we get to the next phase [. . .] In retrospect, senator, you're right I probably should have briefed Senator Brownback.

This topic would come up repeatedly from various senators on the Republican side and be expanded to include others. Was it then-Secretary of State Condi Rice's fault? Truly that was a line of questioning and unless the Republicans intend to produce Condi (to say, "Yes, I did yell at him about talking to the North Koreans after the Chinese left the room!"), there was really no point to that entire, long-winded line of questioning. (Though it did get an article from The Weekly Standard introduced into the record and did allow Chris Hill to make a nasty little remark about a CNN reporter.)

There is more from the hearing (and more that should alarm the peace movement). We'll continue on that tomorrow (or the entire snapshot will be nothing but the hearing). ...


In England, e-mails were released by the government this month adding further proof to how the 'intelligence' was fixed to sell the march to illegal war. The e-mails were only the latest in a series of revelations. Recent polling found that the bulk of the British favor a public inquiry into the Iraq War. Today the Guardian runs some letters on the topic including this one:


Our sons were all killed in the Iraq war. Together with many other bereaved families we have campaigned for nearly five years for a full independent inquiry into the reasons why we went into Iraq. We believe our country was taken to war on the basis of lies and that our sons gave their lives to support a corrupt relationship between our prime minister and George Bush. There needs to be a proper accounting for this to cleanse our political system. Today there is a parliamentary debate calling for a real inquiry into the war. We will be in the chamber of the Commons to watch our democracy in action and we will be going to Downing Street to urge Gordon Brown to do the right thing. It is time.Rose Gentle Mother of Fusilier Gordon Gentle Reg Keys Father of Lance Corporal Thomas Keys Peter Brierley Father of Lance Corporal Shaun Brierley Military Families Against the War

Also weighing was MP David Baker who quotes Jack Straw from the July 25, 2002 Downing Street Memo stating, "We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force." Today in the House of Commons, Foreign Secretary David Miliband was asked by MP Edward Leigh whether or not "he can give a committment today can he that we will set up this inquiry as soon as practical after the 31st of July? " and replied "Yes." (Video here.) Gordon Brown has long played kick the can (for well over a year) stating that no inquiry could take place while British troops were on the ground in Iraq (because they'd be so outraged they'd walk off the battlefield?) and his whisperers have repeated that to the press in recent days but Miliban's "yes" was the first on the record, in public statement. The Scottish Herald notes that the announcement was made as Labour "fended off a Tory call for an imediate inquiry" and that Miliband's remarks do not seem to indicate the public inquiry but instead a private one. Andrew Sparrow (Guardian) states Miliban hinted the inquiry would be in private. Andrew Porter (Telegraph of London) places the confirmation in context of the upcoming elections noting that tht Conservatives have long pushed for an inquiry and that Labour [the party in control since before the start of the illegal war -- under Tony Blair, now under Gordon Brown] is concerned about shoring up the "voters who turned away from the part after the 2003 invasion". Porter also notes the July 'withdrawal' of British forces will leave behind an additional 400. Ian Dunt (Politics) quotes an unnamed Labour MP who insists, "This is all about the Tories playing politics. They're somersaulting all over the place. It's something for nothing because anyone can argue for an Iraq inquiry, but that doesn't show you real position." The Tories are the conservative party and they released a statement today noting that Shadow Foreign Secretary William Hague said the inquiry should have taken place "long ago":

"It is alarming that by setting a date of 31st July, when Parliament will have adjourned for the summer, the Government is now dragging out the setting up of an inquiry until the autumn. This is unacceptable."
He called on the Government to "ensure that the inquiry is announced before the summer recess, that its remit is set out in a statement to Parliament and that without any further delay the Leader of the Opposition and Privy Councillors in Opposition parties are consulted about establishing the Inquiry."

The Scottish National Party issued their own statement today following "this afternoon's vote on an inquiry into the Iraq War" which cites the party's Angus MacNeil:

The SNP have led demands for an inquiry into the Iraq war, and secured the first substantive debate in October 2006 -- at that time the vote was narrowly lost by just 25 votes -- with 12 Labour rebels. It was backed by all Tories and Liberal Democrats.
Mr MacNeil said:
"David Miliband's announcement of a timetable is farcical. It is a desperate attempt to play for time by a discredited government.
"An inquiry into the Iraq war is long overdue, and the process should begin right now, not be delayed for another day.
"Labour's plans for an inquiry to begin post July mean parliament will be in recess, by automn everyone will be looking at the economy and Pre-Budget Report, and then it will be buried under the General Election.
"This inquiry should have been held years ago, not held on ice by those politicians who dragged us into an illegal war on the basis of false information.
By every measurement this has been the biggest foreign policy disaster in modern times, and those responsible for it have never answered the most fundamental questions about why we were led into this mess.
"The claim that the war was about weapons of mass destruction was a blatant lie, a mere cover story unsupported by the facts, which has cost the lives of thousands of civilians and hundreds of our brave soldiers.
"The SNP have been pressing for years on this issue, and the UK Government to tell us the truth right now."

The Respect Pary issued a statement quoting their MP George Galloway who calls for an immediate inquiry:

No one has worked harder to force this inquiry than Rose Gentle, Reg Keyes, Peter Brierley and the Military Families Against the War network.
They deserve to know why their loved ones were sent to their deaths in Iraq. The British public deserves to know how and why the government fabricated a false case for a war that has now cost well over a million lives.
Everything the anti-war movement said has turned out to be right and everything claimed by the government has turned out to be either wrong, or a downright lie.
The question at issue is not whether it was right to go to war -- that has long been settled in the court of public opinion, so much so that you are hard pressed to find one of the majority of MPs who voted for it who will still defend doing so. The issue is instead precisely how government ministers and officials launched a war that they were told was unnecessary, unjustified and illegal.
This was a war of aggression that broke international law.
This inquiry must consider those questions and not be limited in scope to how the war was conducted and what happened afterwards. The public will simply not accept another establishement whitewash.
Nor, I predict, will people accept an inquiry that has no consequences. The war was based on a mountain of lies. But the only people to have lost their jobs over it are the former editor of the Mirror, the former director general of the BBC and one of its lead reporters.

As all the non-Labour parites speaking out make clear, no one has been held accountable. Tony Blair passed the governmental reigns onto Gordon Brown (who was his lackey in the lead up to the war and beyond). Jack Straw -- so eager to fix the intel in the lead up -- went from being the Foreign Secretary to becoming Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain and the Secretary of State for Justice. Yes, that is laughable. And in his present post, Straw abuses his power, as the BBC reported last month, to block Freedom of Information Act requests regarding the Iraq War. Most recently, Straw whimpered about "serious damage" being done "to cabinet government." That would be the cabinet he served in. Refusing the most recent request meant Straw was overruling the Information Tribunal. He's never been punished for his part in the illegal war but the Iraqis are punished daily for the 'error' of attempting to live.

Bombings?


Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Mosul roadside bombing which claimed the lives of 3 "little girls, injuring seven others," a Baghdad roadside bombing which left five Iraqis injured, another Baghdad roadside bombing which left four Iraqis injured (both roadside bombings were attacks on American convoys), a Diyala Province bombing attack on Azbar al Azawi ("civil society official") which wounded his brother and "several others" and Turkey began bombing northern Iraq (Dohuk) as did Iraq (Qindeel Mountain in the northwest).

Shootings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Mosul home invasion that resulted in the death of 1 woman.

Corpses?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 corpse discovered in Bashiqa (a jerwler kidnapped over the weekend) and the corpse of a young man was also discovered.

Monday's snapshot noted Ivan Watson (CNN) reporting on Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's offer that the US could use Turkey during the draw down. Today David Rising (AP) quotes US Army General Carter Ham stating, "I'm not aware that there are any plans from Central Command to move troops through Turkey but the fact that the (Turkish) prime minister said he would consider that is a positive sign." UPI observes that Walid al-Muallem, Syria's Foreign Minister, is in Baghdad today for a two day round of talks. And Waleed Ibrahim (Reuters) notes that al-Muallem has declared that, "Syria is ready to offer whatever help is necessary" for a US departure from Iraq. This week Abudllah Gul became the first Turkish president to visit Iraq since 1976 (Fahri Koruturk was the president who visited in 1976) and he has wrapped up his visit. Today's Zaman declares: the visit a "landmark" and notes raised expectations over the PKK being addressed by Turkey and Iraq. The PKK is a Kurdish group that's labled a terrorist organization by Turkey, the US, the UK, the European Union and Nouri al-Maliki. Turkey shells (as they did today) and bombs northern Iraq areas where they think/suspect the PKK is. They are a Kurdish group who seek an autonomous Kurdish region in Turkey. With that in mind, Hurriyet reports:The Turkish president's denial of using the term "Kurdistan" while describing the administration in northern Iraq created confusion with all but one of the journalist traveling with Abdullah Gul insisting he used the term "Kurdistan." Gul paid a two-day landmark visit to Iraq on Monday, the first Turkish head of state to visit Iraq in 33 years, at a time of changing relations between Turkey and northern Iraq amid calls for increased efforts to eradicate the presence of the terror organization PKK. Turkish newspapers reported on Tuesday that Gul had become the first Turkish official to define the northern Iraqi administration as "Kurdistan" when he told reporters during the flight to the neighboring country that the "Kurdistan regional administration" in Iraq was the main actor in efforts to end terror activities against Turkish territory. Turkey does not recognize the semi-autonomous administration in northern Iraq by its official name due to concerns that doing so would eventually lead to the establishment of an independent Kurdish state involving Turkish territory.Seven Turkish journalists of the eight traveling with Gul say he used the term "Kurdistan," while Milliyet daily columnist Hasan Cemal defended a different version.

While the debate rages in Turkey, Paul de Bendern (Reuters) notes, "Turkish President Abdullah Gul's recognition of the Kurdistan government in northern Iraq and his talks with the autonomous region's leader on fighting Kurdish guerrillas mark a breakthrough for regional stability. In just two days Gul has helped reduce tensions and break down barriers between the Turkish state and its ethnic Kurdish minority as well as with neighbouring Iraqi Kurds."
xxxxxxxxxx

iraq
the new york timesrod nordlandalissa j. rubin
luke savage
usama redhathe los angeles timesned parker
hurriyetupidavid rising
mcclatchy newspapers
sahar issa
cnnivan watson

Wanda Coleman

"ONE OF A MILLION"
plainclothed cops chase a half-naked
mulatto man across the palm-studded
beach his arms flail as he strokes the air
his chest bursts through his ribbed white
undershirt his khakis wet with piss. several
yards behind, his wife runs after them. she
screams his name, snot and tears mix
with the sand blown against her cinnamon face
by the wind, a crust forms on her face,
a mask of fear. one cop holds his black
semi-auto stiffly in his left hand as he
zig-zags in front of his partner, the
runaway has been running since youth
authority since since his mother's covert pinches
since truant officers since badder boys
with bigger fists, someone is shouting

"stop police! stop police!"

and it sounds like a prayer
words fly up to the blue where
they strike the gulls who drop dead
on the sand like sun-fried adobe bricks


"ONE OF A MILLIION" appears on page 76 of Wanda Coleman's Bath Water Wine which was published by Santa Rosa's Black Sparrow Press in 1998.

I was going through C.I.'s book cases looking for something poetry wise when one of C.I.'s friends asked me if I needed help? He knows C.I.'s filing system. (C.I. has bookcases throughout the house and there is one room that is little more than bookcases. There are public libraries with less books than C.I. has.) So I explained I was looking for poetry and asked if I had anyone in particular in mind.

No, but I would most likely do a Black man because I did want to highlight someone Black. (I have no problem highlighting someone White but I do try to make sure I've done my part to highlight my own community because I am raising three children very aware of how left Black people are -- so left out that a bi-racial man passes for Black to most Americans.) And I wanted something strong and nothing epic or romantic, something angry or sad, probably.

He mentioned Wanda Coleman and I had never heard of her. So we found the book on the poetry shelves and I spent a few hours digesting it. It's very good. She really has a way with words and you want to read it out loud. So I finally narrowed it down to the poem above.

Poet's Org says this about Wanda Coleman:

Wanda Coleman was born in 1946 and is the author of Bathwater Wine (Black Sparrow Press, 1998), winner of the 1999 Lenore Marshall Poetry Prize. A former medical secretary, magazine editor, journalist and scriptwriter, Coleman has received fellowships from the National Endowment for the Arts and the Guggenheim Foundation for her poetry. Her other books of poetry include Native in a Strange Land: Trials & Tremors (1996); Hand Dance (1993); African Sleeping Sickness (1990); A War of Eyes & Other Stories (1988); Heavy Daughter Blues: Poems & Stories 1968-1986 (1988); Imagoes (1983); and Mercurochrome: New Poems (2001). She has also written Mambo Hips & Make Believe: A Novel, published by Black Sparrow Press in 1999.

Last night, three posts included poetry: Ruth's "Langston Hughes, Isaiah," Elaine's "Iraq, Edna St. Vincent Millay " and my "What Ava and C.I. said, amen!" So we decided to highlight a poem tonight.

I am going to continue reading Bath Water Wine tonight. So let me stop right here so I can enjoy the collection.

"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):

Tuesday, March 24, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the "Awakening"s rise in news coverage (only in news coverage -- remember they don't act unless they get paid), more on the protests over the weekend, Turkey and Iraq attempt to meet up but barriers continue, and more. Yesterday we noted some of the protests taking place over the weekend. Cindy Sheehan was quoted from Fresno reports and Cindy Sheehan now has a new website. Indybay IMC has photos of the Fresno actions and audio. The audio includes Raging Grannies performing and Cindy Sheehan's speech. Cindy Sheehan: We have marched thousands of miles. We've signed so many petitions. We've called Congress 'till our fingers bled. I'm just using hyperbole -- I don't think anybody's fingers really bled. Some of us even ran for Congress to try and make a difference [applause] but you know we had a change in regime in November and that, that's not even helping. You know President Obama has said you know if you're an Obama supporter or not an Obama supporter, I myself voted for Cynthia McKinney -- [applause] yea Cynthia! His foreign policy is abomidable. You know he is only following the Bush Status Of Force Agreement in Iraq that Bush negotiated before he left office with the Maliki government. Even his slow 16-month withdrawal has been extended. And troops are never going to come home from Iraq. You know everybody when McCain said if the troops would be in Iraq for 100 years, he wasn't kidding. Even -- even Obama's just bringing out what he calls combat troops. I'm moving back here, I really don't want to get electrocuted. And he's increasing or 'surging' Afghanistan -- sending more troops there. You don't know how many people e-mail me saying Cindy, you have to tell the president not to send more troops to Afghanistan. And I'm like, "Why are you e-mailing me? Presidents never listen to me." So. But, well, Obama has to know that that's going to be a disaster. Obama knows that that's going to be a disaster. Anybody that has ever gone into Afghanistan has limped out with their empire crumbled. And I think the US empire needs to crumble. I'm all for that. But it should not have to crumble on the heads of the Afghan people, or our soldiers or the families of our soldiers. And not only is our empire -- our military empire crumbling, so is our economic empire and that's effecting each and everyone of us. It's not effecting the AIG executives. It's not effecting the Wall St. robber barons. It's effecting us. It's not effecting Congress, they gave themselves a raise. Congress has 110% health insurance. They're covered 110%. How come we can't get that kind of health insurance? They're our employees. So what would be a better way to have the empire crumble besides it crumbling on innocent people? That would be for President Barack Obama to courageously get up and say, "Today I am declaring an end to the war on terror. I am saying that we have" -- I don't even care if he wants to say that we won. He can say, "I'm declaring victory, we won, I'm bringing our troops home. And not only that but we are going to close most of the 775 bases that we have around the world. And we're going to reduce our military to a size that is for defensive purposes only, not for the size that can spread corporate imperialism around the world. And we're going to use that money we're going to save on the empire and we're going to give everybody that wants to go to college a free education." Not a $2,500 a year tax credit. That -- you know, my daughter goes to San Francisco State. That would only pay for a third of her education. And you know what? To get it she's going to have to do community service. Now I'm all for community service but why do the kids of the robbed class have to do it to not even get their education paid for but the robber class they can afford to send their kids to Yale and Harvard and Stanford and USC. I went to UCLA, so I don't even know why anyone would want to go to USC. But they don't have to do community service. They should do community service and our kids should too but you shouldn't hold our kids education hostage to that. Our kids have the right to go to college too! Our kids have that. It's a basic human right for education. You know what? Many countries have free university education. Cuba has free university education. Cuba has free health care for everybody who lives there. Everybody in Cuba has a roof over their heads. It might not be a mansion, but it's a roof and they can keep themselves dry -- which is relevant today. Yesterday's snapshot noted KITV's coverage of the weekend protest in Sioux City. My apologies because the link did not work. Click here to see the story. Thursday also saw actions. World Can't Wait reports on Thursday's action in NYC: The afternoon began around 1pm in Union Square. Under gray skies and a light rain, about 50 people crowded near the subway entrance in the south end of the square, as [Debra] Sweet and Matthis Chiroux -- a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War who refused to fight in Iraq -- together emceed a rally that preceded a march to the Times Square recruiting center. A group of youth held a large white banner with black letters that said,"You Can't Win An Occupation." Others held orange signs demanding "Stop Occupations and Torture for Empire! The World Can't Wait!" Among the speakers, performers, and participants at the rally, there was a spirit of defiance, resilience, and moral responsibility. Before performing "Nakba," an angry condemnation of Israel's history of genocide and persecution against the Palestinians, 24-year-old rapper Marcel Cartier told the crowd that he had recently renounced his status as an "army brat." "They didn't get me," Cartier said. "But I lived my entire life around the U.S. military until last year." Cartier said he "ruptured" with the military life after deciding he didn't want to spend the rest of his days as an accomplice to crimes against humanity. In addition to Cartier, other musical performers included the Bronx hip-hop group Rebel Diaz, and Outernational, which adjusted well to the lack of amplified sound by playing a stirring acoustic set. Radical attorney Lynne Stewart, who in the past few years has felt the repressive force of the government very directly -- in 2006 she was convicted of conspiracy to provide material support for terrorism and obstruction of justice merely for passing a message from one of her clients to his supporters -- told demonstrators she would not be deterred in resisting the crimes of empire and that they shouldn't be either. "I think we have to ask ourselves, is Obama running out of his Kool Aid? Yes!" Stewart said at the beginning of her speech. "Are we alive and kicking? Yes!" Sunsara Taylor, a writer for Revolution newspaper, said a great number of people in society are under the illusion that Obama will end wars for empire, despite his continuation of the occupation in Iraq, his escalation of the Afghanistan war, his intensifying of missile strikes in Pakistan, and his support for the Israeli massacre of Gaza. "The only way this occupation and these wars are going to end," Taylor said, "is through protest, through resistance, through people taking a stand like we're doing today. Actually going and challenging other people to wake up and act on 'What kind of future do you want to live in?'" In her speech, Taylor took on some of the key arguments that are used to justify U.S. wars for empire. For instance, in response to the notion that these wars make Americans safer, Taylor said this reasoning is not only false but also unethical. "It is immoral to say that American lives are worth more than Iraqi lives, are worth more than Afghani lives," Taylor said. "A million dead in Iraq, I don't care if it did make us safer. It's not worth it. It is immoral, it is unjust, and it has to be opposed." Taylor also slammed the idea that the U.S. military is trying to liberate the women of Iraq and Afghanistan; she pointed out that Iraq was a secular country prior to the U.S. occupation; it is now a theocracy where a man can hire someone for $100 to carry out an "honor killing" against his wife or daughter. World Can't Wait was one of the sponsors of the March on the Pentagon Saturday in DC. A.N.S.W.E.R. was another and they have photos up and a report which includes: The Arlington County Police mobilized in full riot gear in an attempt to block the demonstrators from delivering symbolic coffins at the doorsteps of the war corporations. They brought tear gas, snarling dogs and pointed guns loaded with rubber bullets directly at demonstrators. The Arlington County Police also put out an absurdly low count of the demonstration, which was more than 10,000 people. In Los Angeles, a simultaneous demonstration drew 4,000 people, which culminated with a dramatic die-in at the Kodak Theater. Another 4,000 demonstrated in San Francisco, where police carried out violent attacks on demonstrators and arrested numerous people. "This is the launch of the anti-war movement in the post-Bush era. Bush is gone, but the occupation of Iraq continues, the war in Afghanistan is escalating, and the people of Palestine are living under a state of siege," stated Brian Becker, National Coordinator of the ANSWER Coalition. And we'll ignore the fluff radio report from reporters who don't understand that you report what happens. Not what you believe will happen. Not what you hope will happen. You report what happened. If you are 'reporting' on something from next month, next year or later, you are not reporting. You are predicting unless you use verbs such as "claims". A lot of self-righteous beggars in Panhandle Media, so quick to castigate Big Media, never learned the basics. We'll be kind and let it go at that. "Visits abroad by heads of state are different to those by heads of government," editorializes Arab News. "They are a symbolic endorsement of good relations between countries; prime ministerial visits are about the nitty-gritty of politics -- trade, military agreement, and foreign policy decisions. This as true for Turkey as any other country. The visit to Iraq by its president, Abdullah Gul, is therefore something of a landmark. No Turkish head of state has visited Baghdad in over 30 years, although Prime Minister Recept Tayyip Erdogan was there for talks with his Iraqi counterpart Nuri Al-Maliki last July." And Iraqi President Jalal Talabani visited Ankara last year. The last visit to Iraq for a Turkish president was in 1976 by Fahri Koruturk. The Turkish Press notes that the visit "was postponed for a year-nad-a-half." Anthony Shadid and K.I. Ibrahim (Washington Post) note that "Gul was welcomed at Baghdad International Airport by Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari and other officials in a visit that included talks with Talabani and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki." Gul met with al-Maliki and Iraq's President Jalal Talabani on Monday. He went on to meet with KRG Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani today. Gulf Daily News zooms in on a statement by Jalal Talabani, President of Iraq, yesterday, "The PKK has two choices: lay down its guns or leave Iraq." That statement may seem to carry a level of weight due to Talabani's position but not only is he weakened in the Kurdistan Regional Government itself (his party's struggling) but he's also announced he will not seek re-election when his term expires (at the end of the year -- assuming elections are held in December). Hurriyet observes, "Turkey expects important results to emerge from the visit, Gul had said ahead of his arrival in Baghad for meetings likely to focus on the terrorist PKK organization." AP reports PKK spokesperson Ahmad Deniz has declared Talabani "doesn't have the authority or the will to utter such words and we don't take orders from him" and went on to warn of "grave consequences" for Talabani. The visit was not without controversy. One example noted by Hurriyet for the controversy erupting over Gul referring to the "Kurdistan regional administration" which makes him "the first Turkish official to define the northern Iraqi administration as 'Kurdistan'." It is of issue because Kurds in Turkey want an autonomous region and the PKK -- which Talabani was condemning -- is a Kurdish group of fighters whose goal is to carve out an indepenent region for Turkish Kurds. Gul's remarks are controversial for that reason since some in Turkey have long feared that just the existence of the KRG fuels a push for an autonomous Kurdish region in Turkey. Hurriyet quotes Gul responding to the controversy by asking, "What should I say? We do not refuse to say Macedonia because Greece rejects to do so. This is written in the (Iraqi) constitution. This is a fact that those in northern Iraq should calculate the possible outcome of losing Turkey." That wasn't the end of the waves. Hurriyet notes Nechirvan Barzani stated Turkey should offer amnesty to PKK members, that "it would be very helpful in solving the problem. We support this." But Gul replied amnesty "is an issue for Turkey alone. We do not debate it with others." Paul De Bendern (Reuters) quotes Gul stating he told Barzani "explicity that the PKK terrorist organisation and their camps . . . in your region (and) you need to take a clear position against them. Once the PKK is eliminated there are no bounds to what is possible: you are our nieghbours and kinsman." Jamal Hashim (Xinhua) hails the visit for its 'great significance as a sign of warming relations based on mutual needs" and notes "Gul was accompanied by his state minister responsible for exports on the Iraqi tour, a sign that reflects the importance of boosting bilateral trade." KUNA notes Kursad Tuzman, Turkish Minister of State for Foreign Trade, declared Sunday "that exports to Iraq" from Turkey "have leaped by 70 percent in the last two months, supported by the improving relations between the countries." Hurriyet notes Gul declared today that Iraqi energy sources will be tranferred to others via Turkey. While some diplomatic movement may be going on, the Parliament remains at a standstill. Alsumaria reports: "Accordance Front spokesman Salim Abdullah told Alsumaria that the federal court delayed the decision about the legitimacy of Accordance Front candidate Iyad Al Samirrai for Parliament Speaker, till April 8." Dropping back to the Jan. 12th snapshot: Willam Brockman Bankhead was the Speaker of the US House of Representatives for over four years. He died unexpectably of a heart attack on September 15, 1940. (For those unfamiliar with Bankhead, he was the father of Tallulah Bankhead.) The following day, Sam Rayburn became Speaker of the House. The following day. December 23rd, Mahmoud al-Mashhadani was forced out of the Speakership of the Iraqi Parliament. The week prior he had stated he was resigning. He attempted to take that back but a large number wanted him gone as Speaker and had wanted him gone for some time with repeated public efforts to oust him. al-Mashhadani was forced out of his position. No one forced Parliament to give him the shove. They made the decision and that was three months ago. Today the announcement was made that they'd delay any decision until April. The Parliament has no speaker. When the US House of Representative was without a Speaker due to an unexpected death in 1940, there was a new speaker in less than 24 hours. There is no political movement in Iraq. A point US Vice President Joe Biden made leading Nouri al-Maliki to attack Biden verbally. As Biden noted last year, "The purpose of the surge was to bring violence down so that Iraq's leaders could come together politically. Violence has come down, but the Iraqis have not come together. Our military played an important role in the violence. So did three other developments. First, the Sunni Awakening, which preceded the surge. Second, the Sadr cease-fire. Third, sectarian cleansing that left much of Baghdad segregated, with fewer targets to shoot or bomb. These tactical gains are relative. Violence is now where it was in 2005 and spiking up again. Iraq is still incredibly dangerous and, despite what the President says, very far from normal. And these gains are fragile. Awakening members frustrated at the government's refusal to integrate them into the national security forces could turn their guns back on us. Sadr could end his cease-fire at a moment's notice. Sectarian chaos could resume with the next bomb. Most important, the strategic purpose of the surge has not been realized: genuine political power sharing that gives Iraq's factions to pursue their interests peacefully." True last April, true today. al-Maliki can hiss and stomp his feet all he wants. There is no political motion. There's not a great deal of forward motion at all. For example, the "Awakenings." Since October of last year, we're all supposed to gather around the potty and cheer on Nouri al-Maliki every few weeks. "You can do it, Nouri! You're a big boy!" Despite the nonstop praise for his taking over the "Awakening" Councils -- nearly 100,000 males (Daughters of Iraq are not included in the count) which cost the US tax payer $300 a month -- he's still not done so. When all were on the US payroll, that was $18 to 27 million a month. The US may be paying as much as $12 million a month currently. Rod Nordland and Alissa J. Rubin (New York Times) pulled toilet training duty and tried to be encouraging to Nouri by declaring it "another milestone" because only 10,000 of the "Awakenings" have not yet been turned over. Hey, wasn't the treaty masquerading as a Status Of Forces Agreement supposed to make Iraq 'independent' and 'sovereign'? Funny how everything that indicates otherwise is swept aside or minimized. But while Nouri sits on the big boy potty and basks in the applause, turns out everyone's not so happy -- or as Nordland and Rubin put it, "the militiamen themselves were not celebrating." Party poopers! So what has them upset? That Nouri's doing what he always said he would. He's not bringing them in. This isn't news. US Senator Barbara Boxer was referring to Nouri's attitude and position re: Awakenings in an opening Senate hearing last April. Was anyone paying attention? Nordland and Rubin report: These are among the signs that the fighters' patience is fraying badly at a difficult moment. After months of promises, only 5,000 Awakening members -- just over 5 percent -- have been given permanent jobs in the Iraqi security forces. Those promises were made last year when Iraq was flush with oil money. To no one's surprise, the issue of Iraq's shortfall -- which isn't that large compared to the problems countries around the world are having with their budgets -- is given as a reason. Nonsense. Nouri didn't want them. Boxer was quoting from the European press back in April, from interviews Nouri was giving, where he was making it very clear that about, yes, 5% would be allowed to work for the government and no more. For those who are late to the party, the "Awakening" Council are Sunni thugs. The US put them on the payroll and armed and trained them. As US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker and Gen David Petraeus told Congress repeatedly in April, the thugs were put on the payroll because, if the US paid them, then they wouldn't attack the US or kill US service members. Yes, that would be known as extortion in the rational world but we don't live in a rational world and, over and over, for several days, Crocker and Petraeus bragged about this we-forked-over-our-lunch-money-on-the-playground 'strategy' and were never questioned on it. Example, April 4, 2008, Petraeus told the Senate Armed Services Committee that "there are now over 91,000 Sons of Iraq -- Shia as well as Sunni -- under contract to help Coalition and Iraqi Forces protect their neighborhoods and secure infrastructure and roads. These volunteers have contributed significantly in various areas, and the savings in vehicles not lost because of reduced violence -- not to mention the priceless lives saved -- have far outweighed the cost of their monthly contracts." And, yes, this is what some are pushing for the US to do in Afghanistan. Once upon a time, the US declared wars and fought another side. Now, like spoiled playboys?, they instead declare a war and then try to bribe the other side. For those wondering, Nouri's objections were not ethically-based. He had no problem with thugs -- he's staffed his ministries (especially the Ministry of the Interior) with nothing but thugs. But Nouri likes his thugs to be Shi'ites and not Sunnis. April 2, 2008, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Boxer and Stephen Biddle: Barbara Boxer: Did you just say that Maliki uses the Iraqi security forces as his militia? Did you say that? Biddle: Yes. Barbara Boxer: If that's true and Maliki uses his military as a force to bring about peace -- that's scandalous and that we would have paid $20 million to train [it] and someone that we consider an expert says it's a militia, that's shocking. This is what then-Senator Joe Biden was getting it when he explained last year that the US had armed and paid both sides of a civil conflict and you couldn't pretend that there was a functioning government in Iraq. There's still no functioning government. The April 10, 2008 Senate Foreign Relations Committee discussed agreements the then-administration was attempting to make with al-Maliki. The then-proposed agreements would require the US "to take sides in Iraq's civil war," Biden noted, and "there is no Iraqi government that we know of that will be in place a year from now -- half the government has walked out. . . . Just understand my frustration. We want to normalize a government that really doesn't exist." At the same hearing, Senator Russ Feingold explained how al-Maliki's government didn't represent a "true coalition." With all that from a year ago, the events of today are not at all surprising. The "Awakenings" clearly aren't being absorbed into his al-Maliki's government -- as al-Maliki always said they wouldn't be. At the end of their article Nordland and Rubin talk about some "Awakenings" ("in Diyala and Baghdad") that are supposed to be paid by Nouri not getting paid. They fail to make clear who is paying them or others and it is an issue. Let's drop back to the April 4, 2008 Senate Foreign Relations Committee when Senator Barbara Boxer raised issues: She then turned to the issue of monies and the militias, "You are asking us for millions more to pay off the militias and, by the way, I have an article here that says Maliki recently told a London paper that he was concerned about half of them" and wouldn't put them into the forces because he doubts their loyalty. She noted that $182 million a year was being paid, $18 million a month, to these "Awakening" Council members and "why don't you ask the Iraqis to pay the entire cost of that progam" because as Senator Lugar pointed out, "It could be an opportunity" for the Iraqi government "to turn it into something more long term." This is a point, she declared, that she intends to bring up when it's time to vote on the next spending supplamental. Crocker tried to split hairs. Boxer: I asked you why they couldn't pay for it. . . . I don't want to argue a point. . . I'm just asking you why we would object to asking them to pay for that entire program giving all that we are giving them in blood and everything else? Crocker declared that he'd take that point back to Iraq when he returned. Until Barbara Boxer raised the issue last April, Crocker and Petraeus apparently never considered asking al-Maliki's government to pay for the "Awakenings" (that's by Crocker and Peteraus' own words to Congress). After Boxer raised the issue and others in Congress expressed their outrage, the issue was supposed to have been dealt with; however, the US continues to pay them. The US just made payment to many at the start of this month. The hope is that the start of next month (mere days away) will find al-Maliki picking up the slack. But that may not happen. Rubin and Nordland have written a very strong article; however, it sidesteps the issue of payment and that's a glaring omission from the paper whose chief Baghdad correspondent in the early days of the Iraq War bragged publicly that he tailored his coverage for US tax payers. Saturday Tim Cocks (Reuters) reported the US military was promissing the rest of the turnover would take place "in the coming months" and he noted that approximately 40,000 "Awakening"s are still not on al-Maliki's payroll. Who's paying them? (The US.) For how long? Let's move for a second to an area that is showing some movement. As usual it's tied to the only body with any movement, Iraq's Foreign Ministry announces that March 16th will start a a training for Iraqi Judges and officers in Germany. This training is being carried out under a joint-program with the European Union. Meanwhile Paris and Baghdad are talking . . . about defense. Alsumaria reports Abdul Qader Al Ubaidi, Defense Minister, is heading to Paris and will meet tomorrow with Herve Morin, France's Defense Minister. The term being bandied about is "defense cooperation." And that apparently includes the training of security forces which Alsumaria also reports will be carried out "mainly" by France according to Interior Minister and Head Thug Jawad Al Bolani. "Defense" costs money. (Actual defense would presumably require them ridding themselves of the British and American forces still occupying their country -- but it's only a puppet government after all.) Alsumaria reports that the puppet still has some big-money love for their puppet master which is why they have "requested an additional 140 Abrams tanks on top of the 140 it has already ordered under a deal signed last year." 280 new tanks. For a country that Republicans like to constantly say is 'about the size of California'? Well if you were al-Maliki -- already sitting on billions of Iraq's dollars -- and you knew you were just a puppet, you'd stockpile too. Amazingly when such orders are placed, no one ever stops to ask, "Why does al-Maliki have money for this but not . . ." Whatever. Such as paying the "Awakening" Councils. Why is that? Turning to some of today's reported violence . . . Bombings? Sahar Issa and Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) report 1 Baghdad roadside bombing which left three wounded, another which left two wounded, and, dropping back to last night, a Mosul roadside bombing which resulted in two people being injured, Shootings? Sahar Issa and Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) report 1 man shot dead in Haditha -- he had been "released from Bucca prison in Basra two days ago". Dropping back to yesterday's bombing in northern Iraq, Time magazine's Rania Abouzeid also sees the bombing as a statement on Kurdish and Shi'ite tensions In recent months, longstanding hostility between the two communities has escalated, whipped up by resurgent Arab secular nationalism. At the federal level, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has repeatedly said he wants to strengthen Baghdad's hand at the expense of Iraq's 18 provinces, including Kurdistan -- the semi-autonomous three-province Kurdish region in the north -- much to the chagrin of the federalist-minded Kurds. At the provincial level, newly empowered hard-line Sunni groups like Al-Hadba in Mosul, Nineveh's capital, are readying to expand their political clout. (See a photographer's diary of the Iraq conflict.) Al-Hadba won 19 of the provincial council's 37 seats during elections in January, running on an anti-Kurdish platform in the volatile, still-violent, mixed but predominantly Sunni province. Its victory was a realignment of power away from the minority Kurds who held disproportionate sway due to a Sunni electoral boycott in 2005. However, it has also set the stage for a showdown between the two groups. (Read an analysis of Iraq's future.) Independent journalist David Bacon's latest book is Illegal People -- How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants (Beacon Press). Bacon covers the a homeless camp that has sprung up in Sacramento and here's an excerpt (click here to read it in full at Immigration Prof Blog): On one side of the American River in downtown Sacramento, foundations and media organizations have comfortable offices with views of the water. On the other side, a homeless camp sits beside the railroad tracks next to the huge Blue Diamond almond processing plant. A biking and jogging trail winds past the camp, and over the bridge crossing the river. Runners and bicyclists in spandex and shorts pass by, hardly noticing the hundreds of people living in tents, under makeshift tarps, or simply sleeping on the ground. This community has mushroomed in the last few months as the economic crisis puts people out of homes and jobs, onto the streets, or in this case, into a field. iraq cindy sheehan a.n.s.w.e.r. the world can't wait the new york times rod nordland alissa j. rubin the washington post anthony shadid k.i. ibrahim rania abouzeid mcclatchy newspapers hurriyet david bacon tim cocks

What Ava and C.I. said, amen!

Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Celebrity President"



That is a wonderful cartoon. It is priceless. My daughter 'helped.' (She bumped into Isaiah while he was drawing and ended up messing up an ear in the process. Isaiah fixed it by giving Barack earrings.)

Now thank you to Stan and Ruth. Ava and C.I.'s "TV: Explaining Moyers" was a personal favorite of mine (as Jim points out in his note) and my father only loved it even more. And I wanted to highlight it but I wanted others to as well. I know everyone's tired so I didn't want to bother everyone with my last minute request. Stan and I had already talked about highlighting it this week so I called him and he said don't worry, no problem, he'll do it tonight. I wanted to call someone else but really didn't want to be a bother. That's when Ruth called me to say she'd found my daughter's necklace (toy necklace). She'd put it in a side compartment of Ruth's carry-on. Ava and C.I. will bring it back this weekend (they'll see Ruth Friday and Saturday). So that's great -- for my daughter. But while I had her on the phone, I explained why I loved Ava and C.I.'s piece so much.

Ruth hadn't really heard it because she'd taken the kids off to read them a story (thank you, Ruth -- my three kids and Rebecca's and Ruth's grandson Ely). So I'm explaining why it's so important to me and Ruth stops me and asks if I can hold on a second. No problem and I assume someone's at the door or something. She comes back a few minutes later and apologizes for putting the phone down. She then reads me Langston Hughes' "Northern Liberal." I did not know that poem but it perfectly captures my mood and feeling.

"Northern Liberal" (Langston Hughes):
And so
we lick our chops at Birmingham
and say, 'See!
Southern dogs have vindicated me --
I knew that this would come."
But who are we to be
so proud that savages
have proven a point
taken late in time
to show liberal I am?
Above the struggle
I can quite afford to be:
well-fed, degreed,
not beat -- elite,
up North.
I send checks,
support your cuase,
and lick my chops
at Jim Crow laws
and Birmingham --
where you,
not I
am.

I love that poem and I loved it even more when Ruth told me "not" was italicized. That really does say it all and it's the sort of thing I was talking about and what Ava and C.I. were writing about. This is from their article:

As Moyers simplistic racial discussions indicate year in and year out, it's not about education. It's about rubbing that fixed memory, rubbing out their nostalgia orgasm.
We can never step forward as a society not because of Jeremiah Wrights but because of the likes of Michael Pfleger. Remember him? Mincing about onstage at Barack's now-former church. Mincing about and screaming about racism. Never mentioning sexism, naturally. Attacking Hillary with lies and hate. And it being eaten up by that uneducated crowd. Whitey Pfleger has nothing to offer. He can't talk about love or God's love. Despite being a man of the cloth. So Pfleger goes to the largely Black church of Trinity and serves up attacks on . . . White people. Serves up race based attacks that have no bearing on reality. And it gets eaten up. That crowd caught on camera looks like Romans screaming with joy as Christians are fed to the lions. There's nothing civilized or advanced about that taped moment and never forget that it was a White man stirring it up.
Which is what Mike and Bill do every day of their life. They're not interested in injustice. They're interested in (and caught in) the past. Which is how you get Socialist (Marxist-Environmentalist) Mike Davis waxing on and on about Barack Obama. Why? Because Mike sees the bi-racial Barack as "Black." The programs of Barack? Mike can't stand them. But those programs are never Barack's fault in Mike's eyes. Of course not. As a "Black" man, Barack is the eternal innocent in Mike's patronizing eyes.
It's really ridiculous and pathetic and most of the time we just roll our own eyes. But we were wrong not to confront it earlier. It's what put Barack in the White House and it's what put Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court. In both cases, women had to be savaged in order for the men to be installed. So it's time to get honest about what's going on because the Michael Pflegers and Bill Moyers are ensuring that their garbage is fed to younger generations.
All those decades ago, it was the height of 'sophistication' for Moyers, a racist from the South, to grasp that racism against Black men was wrong. That was the life altering moment for Bill and he can't stop revisiting it. Think of it as the political equivalent of Losing It or Porky's or any other movie where the young male 'comes of age' by losing his virginity. All these years later, as Bill constantly revisits Summer of 42, he doesn't see it as it was, he sees it only in his idealized view, the one he's beat off to repeatedly during the many lonely nights that have ensued since.

Amen. I love what Ava and C.I. wrote and my father's printed it up and has passed it out to everyone he knows. He could have written it. Seriously. If you knew my father, you'd know this is his topic and he could have written that article. I'm so thrilled that Ava and C.I. wrote it. I had no idea what they were going to write about and when we all got back (Ava and C.I. wrote three things), Jim did his usual bit of reading Ava and C.I.'s writing outloud because it always inspires us and we're always curious what they're going to write about. The first two were great and I loved them. But when Jim started reading this one, I was in church. Seriously. I loved it.
It needed saying and thank you to Ava and C.I. for saying it.

And thank you to Langston Hughes for saying it as well and to Ruth for putting me on to that discovery. (And to Stan and Ruth for highlighting Ava and C.I.'s article tonight.)

"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Monday, March 23, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, multiple suicide bombings take place, Turkey makes an official and historic visit to Iraq, over the weekend protests took place around the US against the illegal war, and more.

Saturday protests took place across the country but today Amy Goodman continues her non-stop support of the peace movement . . . What's that? Oh, that's right, Pravda on the Hudson lost interest in the Iraq War years ago. Which is why Goody's 'coverage' today is: "And protests were held in Washington, San Francisco, Los Angeles and other cities on Saturday to mark the sixth anniversary of the US invasion of Iraq." The 'invasion.' Not the ongoing illegal war and nothing else on her show would have informed her dwindling audience that the illegal war drags on. Among the actions which took place Saturday was the March on the Pentagon in DC which was sponsored by organizations such as The National Assembly to End the Wars, the ANSWER coalition, World Can't Wait and Iraq Veterans Against the War. David Judd and Kristin Lubbert (US Socialist Worker) cover the protests and include Tacoma, Washington; Rochester, NY; San Diego; as well as DC, San Francisco and Los Angeles. In San Fransico, they note Andrea who declared, "The Iraq War started when I was 14. It's outrageous that our government has gotten away with this. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan need to end, and that's why I am out here today." Donna St. George (Washington Post) reported on DC's protest, "Thousands of demonstrators marked the sixth anniversary of the war in Iraq with an impassioned protest of the nation's military policies yesterday, demanding that President Obama bring U.S. troops home. The demonstration was the first in Washington of the Obama presidency, replete with many of the same messages of protests during the Bush era. Placards read 'War Is Not the Answer,' 'Troops Out Now' and 'We Need Jobs and Schools, Not War'." Muhammad Qasim (Islam Online) notes the March on the Pentagon in DC and quotes Sarah Sloan (A.N.S.W.E.R.) stating, "We are marching on the Pentagon and several Corporate War Profiteers on Saturday, March 21, because the people must speak out for what is right. More than 1 million Iraqis have died and tens of thousands of US troops have been wounded or killed since 2003." Christina Hoag (AP) reports peace activist and Vietnam veteran Ron Kovic (author of Born on the Fourth of July) spoke at the Los Angeles rally and explained, "I want to remind the American people of the human cost of war, what it means to be wounded." Kendra Ablaz (Daily 49er) reports on the LA protest and quotes Dave Wrathall stating "People don't realize we're still fighting this war. The most common argument is to support our troops. I do in defense, but not offense. There is literally no good reason why we are in Iraq." Ablaz also quotes Barack Obama voter Kathy Pliska stating he got into office "because he was against the war. Now he doesn't seem to be as much." Hint, Pliska, he was never that against it. That was a fairy tale. Heather Knight and Steve Rubenstein (San Francisco Chronicle link has text and video) report, "Umbrellas mixed with protest signs Saturday in San Francisco, where demonstrators marked the sixth anniversary of the war in Iraq with speeches, chanting and a march up Market Street that stretched about three blocks." Susan Shroder (San Diego Union-Tribune) reports on San Diego's rally where Cindy Sheehan and Bree Walker "were keynote speakers" and quotes Cindy stating, "From what I understand, Barack Obama likes to vacation in Hawaii. We'll have a much nicer place to protest now than Crawford, Texas." Matt Otstot (CBS 47 text and video) speaks with Cindy who says, "Unfortunately the new administration is not stopping it, in fact it's escalating in Afghanistan, so I think that now it's more urgent time than ever to be involved and to be active." KFSN (link has video and text) quotes Cindy stating, "It really has changed the mood of the country. The anti war movement was really strong after that, until democrats got elected, and then it kind of fizzled it. So one of my messages too is that it doesn't matter if it's a Democrat or Republican we can't give up our responsibilities." Jim de la Vega and Kyra Jenkins (KMPH Fox 26 -- link has text and video) cover Fresno's protest and student Skylar Devoogd is quoted stating, "I'm a college student so education is really important and we're spending $72 million a day on the Iraq War so I believe we should spend more money on education." Donald Duran III (Daily Lobo) reports on Albuquerque's rally and quotes IVAW's Joe Callan declaring, "So many people are oblivious to the conflicts overseas, and we've been involved in them since 2001. Six years ago yesterday, I was crossing the border from Kuwait into Iraq and going into battle. We did that multiple times. We are still doing that, and there are still young men and women out there fighting and dying." Jackie Loohauis-Bennett (Milawukee Journal Sentinel) reports approximately 200 showed up Saturday to protest the war outside the Milwaukee County Courthouse and quotes IVAW's Jason moon stating, "We want the troops to come home now. This war is not over. Tell the guys coming home in boxes that the war is over." Keith McGilvery (NBC29) covered Virginia's protest outside Augusta County Courthouse and quotes demonstrator Elizabeth La Grua explaining, "I hope they say, 'Oh, wow! There's still people opposed to the war. Maybe I better think a little bit more about it. Maybe that $12 billion a month should be spent here'." KITV notes (link has text and video) that protestors in Sioux City gathered on Friday outside the Federal courthouse.

Back to Saturday's actions, Brandon Hudson (Fox 44) notes the protest in Plattsburgh, Vermont and quotes participant Jack Andrus explaining, "We're concerned that people are losing sight of the fact that the war is still going on." Kimberly Thorpe (Dallas Observer) notes approximately 35 turned out in "black shirts and pants and wore white masks over their faces to represent the dead" as they marched through downtown Dallas. At Thorpe's article, a veteran leaves this comment, "As someone who did bother to show up and march in two protest marches Saturday, the one in Dallas and one earlier that day in Fort Worth organized by Iraq Veterans Against War, what was most striking was how few people were there. The war in Iraq is still going, and Afghanistan is ramping up. The anti-war movement is a pathetic shell of what it was only 4 years ago, figuring Obama will save us all. Obama is not anti-war, and has said as much. As a veteran I marched because someone has to remind our fellow citizens that soldiers and Marines are still dying for lies and corporate profits in foreign lands. But I guess no one cares anymore about supporting the troops." Joe Griffith (The Independent Collegian) reports on students who went to DC for the March on the Pentagon and quotes Derek Ide explaining, "Suicide bombers don't just exist because they're crazy, insane extremists; they exist because there are material conditions that have pushed them in that direction, and they feel that's the way out." Protests took place around the world including in Sydney, Austrlia and Manila, Phillipines. On Firady,, protests took place in six Iraqi cities. The Honolulu Advertiser notes Baghdad was among the six and chants included "no, no for occupation". Media whore Amy Goodman ignored Iraq all last week and had the nerve to join self-loathing lesbian Laura Flanders (who forgot to brush her hair and looked ridiculous with that curl on top of her otherwise straight bangs) to talk about Iraq. Media Whore and professional liar Amy Goodman had five hours of her own to cover Iraq last week and reduced it to a headline but was out in full force with Laura playing Last Journalist Standing yet again. "It's so important to point out," on the sixth anniversary of the illegal war trashy Amy Goodman wanted to say. After doing nothing all week. GritTV, where old whores go to sell it.

In Iraq violence never ends. Mohammed Abbas, Tim Cocks and Charles Dick (Reuters) report a Baghdad bombing at a bus terminal has claimed at least 9 lives with at least twenty-three people left injured. BBC puts the bombing just outside Baghdad in Abu Ghraib and notes it's the districts "second bombing . . . this month". DPA quotes sources stating "Awakening" Councils were the bulk of the victims and they report, "Two consecutive blasts rocked a market in the Nasr we al-Salam district of Abu Ghraib, 25km from Baghdad, Shakir Faza, an official with the local police, told German Press Agency dpa." On "Awakening" Councils, Alissa J. Rubin and Rod Nordland (New York Times) have an important article that we'll assume will appear in tomorrow's paper. Regardless, we'll pick up the topic tomorrow. (And watch it be watered down when it runs in the paper.)

This became the 'small' bombing on a day when violence took center stage, even overwhelming what was supposed to be a historic official visit. CNN reports 14 dead from a bombing in Jalawla at a Kurdish funeral -- an apparent suicide bomber -- gender not given so they think it's a male. Anthony Shadid and K.I. Ibrahim (Washington Post) explain, "Witnesses, reached by telephone, said the suicide bomber set off his explosives after the evening prayers, sending a fireball through the canvas of the tent and igniting a fire. By nightfall, nothing was left save the tent's metal scaffolding, and chairs littered the ground. Witnesses said survivors carried out the dead and wounded, who screamed in pain." Charlotte Porter (Bloomberg News) notes that the death toll has risen to 24 on the Jalawla bombing (plus the suicide bomber) and left fifty injured. Deborah Haynes (Times of London) observes, "The carnage brought back memories of the country's darker days of sectarian war and frequent explosions before major security imporvements began to take hold over the past year." Haynes also notes that the who behind the attack is unknown but that it will most likely be said to have been carried out by al Qaeda in Iraq. Eager to prove how right Haynes was, BBC's Hugh Sykes immediately began chanting al Qaeda in Iraq. Caroline Alexander (Bloomberg News) notes the "sucide bomber detonated a belt laden with explosives during a funeral". Laith Hammoudi and Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) report, "The man being mourned in Jalawla, about 60 miles from Baquba, was Kurdish, and officials suspected that the attacker was an Arab. Kurds consider Jalawla, a town of both Arabs and Kurds, a part of greater Kurdistan. The land is contested, and tensions run high between the two ethnicities."

In other reported violence today . . .

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing which injured seven, a Mosul suicide bombing which claimed 4 lives (plus the bomber) and left two people injured, a Tal Afar suicide bombing which claimed the life of 1 police officer (and the bomber) and left five people wounded and a Mosul roadside bombing which claimed 2 lives. Xinhua explains the two killed in the Mosul roadside bombing were a father and a son and that, in Mosul, a grenade was hurled at "a passing U.S. patrol in the Farouk Street damaging a Humvee, the source said, adding it was not clear whether patrol sustained any casualty as the U.S. troops immediately sealed off the area." Reuters adds, "A bomb attached to a car wounded four people, including an official from immigration and Displacement ministry and a Danish national woman who was with him in his vehicle, police said two other policemen were wounded."

The violence increase (following February's increase) comes as people insist it is not happening. Mohammed al-Askari, Nouri al-Maliki's little buddy and an Iraq army figurehead, told Al Jazeera, "The situation is definitely improving, and there are remedies in place. The majority of provinces enjoy general safety." This nonsense is similar to the garbage the Iraqi Ambassador to the US, Hami al-Bayati, offered to Frank Ucciardo for CBS' Up To The Minute:

Frank Ucciardo: Has the mission in Iraq been accomplished? Seriously? Hamid Al Bayati: The general picture for us Iraqis is that Iraq, the region and the war is much safer without Saddam regime. Frank Ucciardo: When you saw Saddam Hussein hanged [December 30, 2006], what went through your mind? What went through your heart when you saw him being hanged? Hamid Al Bayati: Well the Iraqis who suffered -- I suffered -- I'm one of the Iraqis who suffered. I lost eight members of my family during Saddam's regime. I have another brother who was kidnapped and killed in 2005. Frank Ucciardo: You personally when Saddam was hanged, did you have a feeling that you were getting justice? Hamid Al Bayati: I felt at that time that we could have better Iraq after Saddam executed and security would not have been improved dramatically in Iraq without executing Saddam because he was encouraging resistance even in the court he was encouraging people to resist and he was sending letters from his hiding place. So we know that as long as Saddam lived, his followers, his loyalists, they were hoping that he would come back. Frank Ucciardo: Is the US involvement ever going to end in Iraq? Hamid Al Bayati: I think that the Status Of Forces Agreement, the SOFA which was signed, stated clearly that all US forces should be withdrawn by the end of 2011. There will be no extension from that. Frank Ucciardo: But earlier this week, Iraqi *President* Nouri al-Maliki said US troops may remain in some areas that are not completely secure.

Nouri is the Prime Minister, Jalal Talabani is the President. All of Iraq's ambassadors are men and no one's supposed to ever comment on that. Are they all also cowards and weaklings like Hamid? Such a coward that he became a British citizen? He spent the bulk of the last two decades in England and he is a British citizen. Only in 'liberated' Iraq could a citizen of another country be an ambassador. (Yes, he also holds Iraqi citizenship.) He's one of the many cowards who spent years and years agitating for the US to go in and do what he and his cowardly cohorts were too damn scared to do: Overthrow Saddam. In the future, the US government's position should be that no US service members are sent in to fight a battle that cowards of the country won't fight themselves. (No, all these cowards who fled Iraq did not go in fighting when the US invaded. They were and are cowards which is why it will be very interesting on the day the US actually leaves -- probably many, many years from now -- since these cowards have never stood up a day in their lives.) Al Bayati was part of INDICT -- a board member actually (1995-2002). They were so 'brave,' that British group, that they compiled rumors. They didn't take up arms, they didn't do anything but beg and beg other countries to do what the cowards were too chicken to do for themselves. He was also a member of the cowards' other big organization Iraqi National Congress in London (1992-1998). For those new to those cowardly and lying organizations, SourceWatch notes, in their Rendon Group entry: The Rendon Group is a secretive public relations firm that has assisted a number of U.S. military interventions in nations including Argentina, Colombia, Haiti, Iraq, Kosovo, Panama and Zimbabwe. Rendon's activities include organizing the Iraqi National Congress, a PR front group designed to foment the overthrow of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.

A rule should be in place that refugees do not use a host country to plot against their former country. You want to get on with your lives? By all means, the US should welcome you. You want to spend a decade or two plotting how to drag the US into a war with your former country? You need to be kicked out. And if that means you have to return to your former country and if that means you may be tortured or killed, that's really on you because all refugee status should give you is the chance to start your life over, not the chance to plot and scheme a war. Want to fight your own country? Don't be a coward and run off from it. ("Coward" does not apply to actual refugees and those include members of the military who decide that a war is wrong ethically or legally and that they cannot participate in it. A coward is someone who wants war but doesn't want to fight it themselves. Like all the exiles now in control of the Iraqi government.) That rule should apply to all refugees: Iraqis, Cubans, etc. No one should be granted asylum to the US and then use the US as their launching pad for wars.

The claims of 'safety' in Iraq are all the more interesting when they're so short on police officers and when Massoud A. Derhally (Bloomberg News) reports a hiring freeze Jawad al-Bolani, Interior Ministry, has put in place for Iraq's security forces. Derhally reminds, "Violence has been on the rise recently, with at least 70 people killed in three separate attacks in early March. The death toll in February was 35 percent higher than the previous month." Iraqi media is more focused on a column he wrote for today's Chicago Tribune entitled "The meaning of Iraqi freedom" and their focus is on one sentence in his sixth paragraph. Al Arabiya News Channel is among those noting the firings mentioned in passing: "Iraq's Interior Ministry fired 62,000 employees accused of corruption and launched an intensive campaign to dismantle sectarianism among security forces, Interior Minister Jawad al-Bolani wrote in a U.S. newspaper Sunday."

Those needing some reality on Iraq -- as opposed to more waves of Operation Happy Talk -- can refer to an Iraqi correspondent for McClatchy who writes (at Inside Iraq):

When the US military started what they called Operation Iraq Freedom, I really felt so happy for one thing. I thought Iraq would be free again and we would have real government with politicians who really care about Iraq future and its people. I had a real big hope that services will be the best again and we would live happily again. I never thought that we would start killing each other for the sake of some strangers or to kidnap each other for money but I was completely wrong. I was sure that the American administration had planned very well for the stage after the war but I was wrong again. Nothing really changed in Iraq after six years. To be honest, we have one big change. Now we have hundreds of political parties that do nothing to Iraq and all they care about is their interests. After six years, the Americans approved that they came without any plan because most Iraqis are still poor and deprived from the simplest human rights. Iraqi governments and the American administration failed completely in putting Iraq once again on the right path. I have to admit that after six years of the invasion, ALL MY DREAMS HAD GONE WITH THE WIND

The violence was not supposed to resurface -- remember the latest wave of Operation Happy Talk says that violence went gone-gone and bye-bye. Today's big news was supposed to be the visit by a foreign official. BBC News reports that Abdullah Gul, President of Turkey, is in Baghdad ("first by a Turkish head of state for more than 30 years") and is meeting with President Jalal Talabani as well as Nouri al-Maliki. Among the topics to be discussed are the PKK. Hurriyet notes that the visit comes as the trade relationship has strengthened, "Turkey's exports to Iraq have risen 75 percent in the first two months of the year, said State Minister Kusad Tuzmen, adding that the export target for this year is $5 billion." Paul de Bendern, Shamal Aqrawi, Mohammed Abbas and Charles Dick (Reuters) explain:Gul's visit comes less than a year after Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan came to Baghdad, marking a milestone in Iraq's efforts to end its regional isolation after U.S.-led troops toppled Saddam Hussein in 2003.Turkey regularly shells PKK targets in Iraq. It killed at least four PKK guerrillas this month. The rebels are fighting for an independent ethnic homeland in southeastern Turkey.
Turkey was also in the news over the weekend. CNN's Ivan Watson reported on CNN's interview (link has text and a video option) with Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey's Prime Minister, who states, "With regard to the exit of the American soldiers, we are positive on that issue." This announcement was whispered about for some time and the Turkish press began reporting it was coming at the beginning of this month. Prime Minister Erdogan added, "If weapons and ammunition are going to come out, it has to be clear where they are going to be heading. If we are informed about where this military equipment would be going precisely, then we can make a proper evaluation."

Turning to legal news, the US has filed criminal charges in Iraq. For the background before we get to the criminal charges, we'll note this from the Feb. 25th snapshot:Saturday, May 12, 2007 an al-Taqa attack on US soldiers took place resulting in 4 US soldiers and 1 Iraqi translator being killed immediately and three US soldiers missing. The three missing were Jospeh Anzack, Byron Fouty and Alex Jimenez. In May of 2007 (23rd), the family of Joseph Anzack was informed his body had been identifed. Still missing were Byron Fouty and Alex Jimenez. July 11, 2008 the press reported (citing Byron Fouty's step-father for confirmation) that the remains of both soldiers had been identified. That afternoon the US Dept of Defense released a statement: "The Department of Defense today announced the deaths of two soldiers previously listed as "Missing-Captured" while supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom. On July 10, the Armed Forces Medical Examiner positively identified human remains recovered in Iraq July 9 to be those of two soldiers who had been previously listed as 'Missing-Captured.' . . . Jimenez and Fouty were part of a patrol that was ambushed by enemy forces south of Baghdad on May 12, 2007. They were assigned to the 4th Battalion, 31st Infantry Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 10th Mountain Division (Light Infantry), Fort Drum, N.Y. The Department of Defense previously announced the names of soldiers killed in the attack. They were Pfc. Joseph J. Anzack, Jr., 20, of Torrance, Calif.; Sgt. 1st Class James D. Connell, Jr., 40, of Lake City, Tenn.; Pfc. Daniel W. Courneya, 19, of Nashville, Mich.; Cpl. Christopher E. Murphy, 21, of Lynchburg, Va.; and Sgt. Anthony J. Schober, 23, of Reno, Nev." Now for the criminal charges. CNN reported last night:The U.S. Army has filed a criminal complaint in Iraq against 12 people suspected in an ambush south of Baghdad nearly two years ago that left seven U.S. soldiers dead, the military said Sunday.The Army says the Islamic State of Iraq, an umbrella insurgent group led by al Qaeda in Iraq, claimed responsibility for the May 12, 2007, attack. The Army did not release details about charges against the 12 suspects, who are in custody.

Yesterday Ava and I (at Third) covered the TV coverage (and some radio) of the Iraq war or, more to the point, the lack of coverage and we opened with the curious disaster that took place Thursday night:

March 19th was the sixth anniversary of the start of the illegal war. On that day, a day that saw the death of the 4260th US service member in Iraq, the president of the United States, Barack Obama, went on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno to yuck it up.
He had time to babble on like the bitterest of starlets. Everyone is Simon Cowell! (Does that make him William Hung?) He had time to waste on college basketball. He had time to tell a very unflattering story about his daughters which made them sound like ungrateful little brats. (He told the story or we wouldn't comment -- we haven't, for example, riffed on how much the youngest daughter looks like Wanda Sykes.) He laughed a lot, tried to yuck it up (insulting over 40 million Americans -- that's an editorial for this edition). But he never mentioned the Iraq War. The sixth anniversary of the illegal war and he couldn't mention Iraq? He could go on TV, on a trashy entertainment program, and try to yuck it up. And he's the president of the United States. This is presidential behavior? We felt we were the only ones offended by that but a caller to The Diane Rehm Show (who disclosed she voted for Cynthia McKinney and not Barack) Friday raised the issue as well. And as we spoke about Iraq to various groups Friday, we would point this out and they would agree it was in poor taste and offensive. Approximately 146,000 US troops are stationed in Iraq, on the battlefield (the Pentagon's the one who determined that all of Iraq is a battlefield and that's why they issued the firing orders they did) and the sixth anniversary rolls around and the president of the United States can be found acting like a celebrity, sitting down on the couch across from Jay Leno, trying to yuck it up but he can't address the Iraq War? It was disgusting and the only thing more disgusting was watching TV and waiting all last week for coverage.

That's some of what we saw, the president of the US telling jokes (or trying) on the 6th anniversary. What we didn't see? Lieven De Cauter's "A Forgotten Humanitarian Disaster" (Information Clearing House, De Cauter is with the Brussells Tribunal) covers some of that:


The sixth anniversary of the invasion of Iraq is a sad occasion for the balance sheet: during six years of occupation 1.2 million citizens were killed, 2,000 doctors killed, and 5,500 academics and intellectuals assassinated or imprisoned. There are 4.7 million refugees: 2.7 million inside the country and two million have fled to neighbouring countries, among which are 20,000 medical doctors. According to the Red Cross, Iraq is now a country of widows and orphans: two million widows as a consequence of war, embargo, war again and occupation, and five million orphans, many of whom are homeless (estimated at 500,000). Almost a third of Iraq's children suffer from malnutrition. Some 70 per cent of Iraqi girls no longer go to school. Medical services, not so long ago the best in the region, have totally collapsed: 75 per cent of medical staff have left their jobs, half of them have fled the country, and after six years of "reconstruction" health services in Iraq still do not meet minimum standards. Because of the use of depleted uranium in ammunition by the occupation, the number of cancer cases and miscarriages has drastically increased. According to a recent Oxfam report, the situation of women is most worrisome. The study states that in spite of optimistic bulletins in the press, the situation of women keeps deteriorating. The most elementary supplies are still not available. Access to drinkable water is for large parts of the population a problem and electricity is functioning only three to six hours a day, and this in a state that was once a nation of engineers. More than four in 10 Iraqis live under the poverty threshold and unemployment is immense (28.1 per cent of the active population). Besides 26 official prisons, there a some 600 secret prisons. According to the Iraqi Union of Political Prisoners, over 400,000 Iraqis have suffered detention since 2003, among which 6,500 minors and 10,000 women. Torture is practiced on a large scale, and some 87 per cent of detainees remain uncharged. Corruption is immense: according to Transparency International, Iraq, after Somalia and Myanmar, is the most corrupt country in the world. The American Foreign Affairs journal calls Iraq "a failed state". This is symbolised by the fact that Iraq, a state that has the third largest oil reserves in the world, must import refined oil on a massive scale. Authorities are on the verge of giving oil concessions for 25 years to international (also European) oil companies, though they have no mandate or legal authority to do so. Instead of being paid reparations for the enormous destruction wrought on the infrastructure of the country, entailing billions in oil revenues lost, Iraq is again in line to be robbed. There is large scale ethnic cleansing going on against the Turkmen, the Christians, the Assyrians and the Shebak. Kirkuk is being "Kurdicised" by massive immigration and illegal settlements (of Israeli inspiration) and its history falsified.

iraq
iraq veterans against the war
a.n.s.w.e.r.the world can't wait
hurriyetpaul de bendernshamal aqrawimohammed abbas
cbs news up to the minute sourcewatch
frank ucciardo tim cocks
charles dick
cnnivan watson
the chicago tribunemassoud a. derhallybloomberg news
the washington postanthony shadid
the new york timesalissa j. rubin
lieven de cauter
the third estate sunday review