What if it were you or your children?

I was walking in Karada in July 2006, when [men in] two BMWs stopped me,
beat me up, and put me in the trunk. There were a whole lot of men in the
cars, all armed and squashed in. It was around dusk. They took me to a
husseineya [prayer hall] in Sadr City. Everybody knows that when the Mahdi
Army arrest someone, they take them to Sadr City and kill them.
They took me out in front of the mosque and beat me, and then they took me
in, to the sheikh of the mosque. They told him I was a sexual pervert and
asked, should they kill me or just punish me? I thought the Mahdi Army do
not execute people under 18. I was just 18, but I told them I was 17 when they
asked.
The Sheikh told them to burn me with coals from a narghile [water pipe].
They shaved my head and burned me with coals. And then they flogged me
90 times.

That is from a new, PDF format warning, Human Rights Watch report on how the LGBT community in Iraq is being targeted. Gay men and suspected gay men are being threatened, beaten and murdered.

In today's snapshot, C.I. points out that, in the US, the brutal murder of Matthew Shepard woke us up. And I would agree with that and point to the tireless work by his parents Judy and Dennis Shepard to not only ensure justice for their son but to change the climate and tone for all. But somehow there has been a disconnect. Somehow it appears we only concern ourselves with American LGBTs. Somehow we have other things to ponder than what's taking place in Iraq. Anything and everything else can come ahead of this targeting.

That's not right and I don't believe that's the lesson that Matthew Shepard taught us all.

"Militias target some Iraqis for being gay" (Paul Wiseman and Nadeem Majeed, USA Today):
Unable to trust the authorities — and in some cases shunned by their own families — many Iraqi gays have gone into hiding. Hassan and some gay friends say they had found refuge in a house in Karrada. But as the threat against them increased, they became afraid the police would find them. So they scattered.
Hassan says he sometimes stays at home with his brothers — their parents are dead — but he's afraid even of them, afraid they will kill him because he has brought shame to the family.
He says he wanted to move in with his sister, who lives in Abu Dhabi. She turned him away, saying she didn't want her children to know they have a gay uncle.
Unwilling to trust the police, Iraqi LGBT has set up its own safe houses for gays in Iraq. The group has struggled to raise money and had to close three safe houses in the past couple of months, leaving just one open.
Hili says five safe houses are needed, each of them housing 10 to 12 gay refugees. Rent for a 2,150-square-foot safe house is usually $600 a month. Yet other expenses pile up: security guards, food, fuel, medical bills, pots and pans, bedding.
"We desperately need to add more because we have so many urgent cases," Hili says. "We receive requests for shelter every day, but are not able to help."
Things were better for gays, Hassan says, under the dictatorial rule of Saddam Hussein.
"In the Saddam era, it wasn't like this," he says. Saddam's security forces, offended by Hassan's openly gay lifestyle, once arrested him and hauled him to court. The judge let him go, ruling that he had done nothing wrong.
"Now, you don't know who to be afraid of," he says. "Forget about freedom or democracy. We just want our safety."

The right of anyone to be safe is a basic right. Everyone should have it. And Iraq's LGBT community would benefit so much from those of us in the US who can using our voices. I don't believe that Iraqi society would openly tolerate this targeting and if the US firmly and collectively called it out, I'm sure the silent Iraqi groups and governmental figures would suddenly find a few who would speak out.

We have nothing to lose in America by speaking out on this issue. We are protected and we are safe. And our speaking out could mean so much to a persecuted group of people. And I don't understand why we refuse to do that. If it were you being targeted, you'd want someone to speak out for you. If it were your child, you'd want someone standing up.

Here's a link to Bob Somerby's latest. I enjoyed reading it today but I'm just not in the mood to go through it right now for an excerpt.

"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Tuesday, August 18, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, Human Rights Watch's report on the targeting of Iraq's LGBT community gets some press coverage, the SOFA's back in the news, the right-wing notices how little Iraq now matters to the so-called 'antiwar movement', and more.

This is Iraqi Mustafa sharing his story:

There is a hmam [bath] in Basra that gays frequent. I entered, but I was very careful how I looked and acted. I took a shower, and then this man approached me. He started talking about the situation in Iraq: how people should be more open, accept changes and change with them. He was very clever in his questions!
He asked if I watched satellite TV. I said yes. He asked if I watched the European channels. I denied that I did. He said, "The Internet is a good thing; it is good that it came to our country." He asked what websites I visited. I just said, various ones. He asked if I went to porn sites. I denied it. Then he asked if I used Manjam [a personals site popular among gay men]. He was very smart: that website is only known among the gays, I thought. When he said that, I trusted him; I admitted it.
He smiled for a couple of minutes, a very neutral, slick smile, just looking at me. Then he grabbed me by the hair and started beating me, shouting, "You are gays." That was how he said it: gays. He dragged me out of the shower; I begged him to let me put my clothes on, and he let me dress, but then he dragged me onto the street, shouting "You sodomite!" [Enta luti].
People gathered around us while he was hitting me, and tried to interfere. They said, "How do you know he is a sodomite? Did you see him practicing liwat?" The man said, "I have my own ways of find out!" I was begging them to help, and while they were trying to reason with him, I took advantage of the confusion and ran away. We were on a narrow, winding street; I must have run 300 meters before I reached a shop where they sell rope. I shouted dakhilak [a cry for asylum]. The owner let me hide in his shop.
He put me in the cellar, but even there I could hear the man shouting, "Where is he?" and other voices joining him. Two hours later, the owner told me he had to close the shop. He said the man was from the Mahdi Army and the militia was searching for me up and down the street. I pleaded with him to let me stay overnight, and so he shuttered the shop up and let me hide there. In the morning, after dawn prayer, he came and said it was safe and I ran away.

Mustafa is among the Iraqis sharing his story in a Human Rights Watch report entitled "'They Want Us Exterminated': Murder, Torture, Sexual Orientation and Gender in Iraq." For the 67-page report [PDF format warning] click here. We noted the report yesterday and we're noting it again today. It is news. Iraq's LGBT community is being targeted. And, with that it, all people who don't fit some theocratic thug's stereotype of what a man or a woman is. They're being terrorized and this is taking place while US troops are on the ground which really underscores that US troops need to leave Iraq. When they can't even provide protection to the at risk population, there's no reason for them to remain in the country. Human Rights Watch's report notes that the Kurdistan Regional Government does everything they can to publicly black out discussions of same-sex issues. In terms of the KRG, that's it from the report. The gangs are Shi'ites, militias. Allowed to operate and terrorize by Nouri's security forces who look the other way even as the bodies pile up. In April 2008, Mashal was kidnapped in Baghdad. He tells HRW, "There was a police patrol right next to my store when they kidnapped me; they saw everything that was happening, but they didn't intervene. Everyone believes the police [in the area] are under the control of the Mahdi Army." Nouri's security forces and Interior Ministry are accused of blackmailing gays on top of everything ("And gay men are especially easy for them to blackmail," says an Iraqi military officer). The report notes, "One young man told us a story in which official corruption and brutality intertwine. In early 2009, as the broader militia campaign was getting underway. Ministry of Interior officers kidnapped and tortured him in a murderous shakedown, to extort money because they knew he worked with an LGBT organization abroad. He paid and escaped. He says he saw the bodies of five men killed because they could not pay." Nuri was stopped by the police, a bag pulled over his head, beaten and pulled into a car which desposited him at the Interior Ministry:

Once we got there, I heard them talking on a walkie-talkie: they were telling people from the intelligence service what had happened.
They put me in a room, a regular room, took the bag off my head, and there I was with five other gay men. I didn't know them previously, but I found out we had mutual friends. They gave their female names but not their real names. Gay men in Iraq are very cautious that way.
Then two hours later, they separated us and put each in a room. After they separated us, I didn't know anything about the fate of the other five men. And then a police officer dame and said, "Do you know where you are? You are in the interrogation wing of the Ministry of Interior." He told me, 'If you have ten thousand US dollars, we will let you go."
I said I didn't have that kind of money.
The next day at 10 a.m., they cuffed by hands behind my back. Then they tied a rope around my legs, and they hung me upside down from a hook in the ceiling, from morning till sunset. I passed out. I was stripped down to my underwear while I was hung upside down. They cut me down that night, but they gave me no water or food.

In the United States, we were outraged, appalled and disgusted by the events of October 12, 1998. That was when Matthew Shepard was brutally murdered. He was beaten, tortured and left to die tied to a fence. It was outrageous and inhumane. And Matthew Shepard's brutal death galvanized the country into action and out of apathy on the issue. In Iraq today, there are multiple Matthew Shepards, targeted because they are gay or thought to be gay, targeted, threatened, beaten, murdered. And the White House has not condemned it and the United Nations has not condemned it and just attempting to get press coverage of the issue is like moving a mountain.

Steve Inskeep (NPR) observes, "The report is painful to read. It begins with the words of an Iraqi man describing the abduction, murder, and mutiliation of his partner -- and it's not clear from the description if the three-events happened in that order. Like many HRW reports it appears to be based on the specific detailed accounts of survivors and eyewitnesses. Homosexuality in Iraq is so thoroughly submerged that according to the report there is not even a commonly accepted term for it, no Iraqi equivalent of 'gay.' Nevertheless it has become a major focus for Iraqi militiamen, who have waged a 'killing campaign' to eliminate what some consider a social disease brought by the American army." Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) adds, "Among the tortures described to Human Rights Watch researchers by gays and doctors is the practice of injecting glue into men's anuses. Human Rights Watch says that according to the gays its researchers interviewed, the Mahdi Army, the militia loyal to Shiite Muslim cleric Muqtada Sadr, 'bears primary responsibility and launched the killing in early 2009'." CBC speaks with HRW's Tom Porteous who states, "One theory is in order to maintain relevance and to gain publicity, they are now taking it upon themselves to run a campaign to -- in the words of some preachers and some media commentators -- cleanse the country of depravity, which again is bieng interpreted as being brought in by the foreign invasion and occupation." Neal Broveman (The Advocate) covers the report and how "Iraqi officials allegedly knew about the murders but have done little to stop future killings." Dalila Mahdwai (Lebanon's Daily Star) explains, "Although the violence is mainly concentrated in the Iraqi capital, abuse has also been recorded in other the cities of Basra, Kirkuk and Najaf, Moumneh said. 'Murders are committed with impunity, admonitory in intent, with corpses dumped in garbage or hung as warnings on the street,' the report said." Free Speech Radio News points out, "Homosexuality is not illegal in Iraq, and according to HRW, the militia action spurred by the Mahdi Army violates the tenets of legality, proof, and privacy enshrined in Sharia law as well." Mark Memmott (NPR) includes HRW's call for Nouri al-Maliki's government to condenm the assaults while Alsumaria notes, "Iraq authorities have done nothing to stop the killing, Human Rights Watch said calling on Iraq's government to act urgently to rein in militia abuses, punish the perpetrators, and stop a new resurgence of violence that threatens all Iraqis' safety."

It matters. So does the Iraq War -- although to some it's past tense "so did." Conservative Byron York (Washington Examiner) observes:

Remember the anti-war movement? Not too long ago, the Democratic party's most loyal voters passionately opposed the war in Iraq. Democratic presidential candidates argued over who would withdraw American troops the quickest. Netroots activists regularly denounced President George W. Bush, and sometimes the U.S. military ("General Betray Us"). Cindy Sheehan, the woman whose soldier son was killed in Iraq, became a heroine when she led protests at Bush's Texas ranch.
That was then. Now, even though the United States still has roughly 130,000 troops in Iraq, and is quickly escalating the war in Afghanistan -- 68,000 troops there by the end of this year, and possibly more in 2010 -- anti-war voices on the Left have fallen silent.

He explains that at Netroots Nation (Daily Toilet Scrubbers Unite!), Stan Greenberg polled and the dead last issue for the Cult of St. Barack was "working to end U.S. involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan." Byron York's not pointing out anything that we haven't pointed out community wide; however, it's worth noting that the right-wing is now laughing at the hypocrisy of the so-called left. As they should. (York also notes Cindy Sheehan will be at Martha's Vineyard next week to protest during Barack's vacation there.) Byron York offers more honesty than 'from the left' Brian Katulis who writes at American Progress that the SOFA creates "an unconditional withdrawal of U.S. forces on a three-year timeline" -- it does no such thing. What a load of crap and what a way to flaunt ignorance. No link to trash (or government propaganda -- US Institute of Peace). I'm real damn sorry that little Katulis felt the need to talk about something he knows nothing about but for those who actually have signed contracts -- and for those of us who have been able to legally break those contracts -- we're damn well aware of what a contract does and doesn't do. The SOFA replaced the UN mandate for the occupation. The US didn't want to renew it because the US government already wasn't living up to legal obligations under it. Nouri didn't want to renew it because under the UN mandate he had less ability to manuever. The SOFA was a way to continue the Iraq War. It was not about ending it. It is a three year treaty and, at the end of it, it can be extended. That's why Nouri floated that idea on his DC visit last month. If you've never signed a contract and/or you have no background in contract law, maybe it's time you just found something else to talk about it because you only embarrass yourself as you attempt to misinform others.

On the SOFA, Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) reports that Nouri al-Maliki is now backing a referendum on the US remaining in Iraq. For those who have forgotten, even with the US and Nouri strong-arming the Iraqi Parliament last November, even with many fleeing to avoid voting on the treaty masquerading as a Status Of Forces Agreement, in order to barely squeak by with the votes needed, it was promised that, in July, a referendum would be held on the SOFA. July came and went without a vote. Nouri's proposing the referendum being part of the January vote (national elections are scheduled for January -- postponed from December). Parliament doesn't come back until September. Nouri's announcement appears to be another in his many efforts to woo voters. If January 2010 the voters decided to reject the SOFA, that would mean after Iraq's government notified the US that they were rejecting it, the SOFA would end one year from that date. Londono says January 2011. That's optimistic. Adam Ashton (McClatchy Newspapers) says a vote would mean that US troops would leave "by the end of 2010 instead of 2011." What?From the SOFA:

Article 30The Period for which the Agreement is Effective1. This Agreement shall be effective for a period of three years, unless terminated sooner by either Party pursuant to paragraph 3 of this Article.2. This Agreement shall be amended only with the official agreement of the Parties in writing and in accordance with the constitutional procedures in effect in both countries.3. This Agreement shall terminate one year after a Party provides written notification to the other Party to that effect.4. This Agreement shall enter into force on January 1, 2009, following an exchange of diplomatic notes confirming that the actions by the Parties necessary to bring the Agreement into force in accordance with each Party's respective constitutional procedures have been completed.

The one that applies is "3. This Agreement shall terminate one year after a Party provides written notification to the other Party to that effect." If the SOFA is followed, a January vote -- even if the count was instant and it was certified on the day of the vote and swearing in and all other official acts all took place on the same voting day -- would not mean a December 2010 departure. Is counting really that hard?Back to our main point, it takes a minimum of approximately nine days for Iraq to get an official count of a vote. It could be February before a vote was official. And from that point, the Iraqi government (not the voters) have to formally notify the US government that they are ending the SOFA. According to the SOFA's outlines, it would expire one year after the official notification was made to the US government. A minimum of nine days and national elections, Londono notes, are supposed to take place January 16th. That would be January 26th at the earliest. And it would likely be February. If Parliament approves and it goes through. Londono notes that the basic framework needed for the January national elections have still not taken place.

In addition to the referendum on the SOFA in July, Daniel Atzmon (Foreign Policy In Focus) points out that another thing was offered to push the SOFA through the Iraqi Parliament, "The Reform Document addressed concerns about Maliki's growing clout and authoritarian tendencies by calling for more equitable power sharing in the government and security forces." Atzmon explains that the Reform Document has been largely forgotten and sketches out reality for Iraq today:


In the chaos that came with the insurgency in Iraq, it has become all too easy to label and detain innocent individuals as insurgents for political reasons. Maliki and his inner circle have garnered disturbing control over Iraqi security forces, using them to crack down on political threats. In his capacity as commander-in-chief, Maliki has assumed direct command of two army units and the elite Baghdad Brigade. He is also using U.S.-trained Iraqi Special Forces and the counterterrorism taskforce, both of which report directly to him, to advance his personal agenda.
Furthermore, Maliki is able to directly appoint military leaders without parliamentary approval. Some are concerned that the military's loyalty will be to Maliki, not Iraq. In addition to his command of military resources, Maliki controls his own intelligence service through the ministry of national security, run by a close ally.
Maliki is wielding his power to ensure support from local leaders, based on a system of fear and rewards. Some tribal leaders toe Maliki's Dawa party line in fear of arrest and indefinite detention, while others have their support paid for through control of reconstruction funds and government appointments. Lured by positions of power and control of the purse strings, Maliki is effectively bribing his way to reelection.
Through his authoritarian policies, Maliki is creating a centralized state based on a patchwork of arrangements with local leaders. This is a very precarious policy with huge risks, as maintenance of these relationships depends on how local leaders see their future in Iraq. Things could change dramatically if a shift in power relations causes one or more groups to feel threatened or marginalized. If Maliki's web of alliances were to break, Iraq could again be plunged into violent upheaval.

Yesterday Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) was reporting on a new plan to send more US troops into nothern Iraq. That's due to the fact that the Kurdish Regional Government and the central government out of Baghdad have 'tensions' and these tensions have been identified by many in the US military and government as the next big conflict wave to potentially hit Iraq -- on those fears, see Larry Kaplow's Newsweek article here. Today Chip Cummings (Wall St. Journal) reports, "The proposal to deploy fresh forces in the north undrescores a growing worry among U.S. commanders over violence there after the June 30 withdrawal of U.S. troops from all Iraqi cities." Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) quotes Gen Ray Odierno stating of the proposed flooding of US forces into Nineveh Province this September, "It won't be full-on if we do it. It will just be to build confidence, then we will slowly pull ourselves out. As we deliberately withdraw our forces, you will see that there will be less forces withdrawn from the north than any other place. It's a recognition of where we think the bigger problem areas are." She also speaks with US Institute of Peace's Sam Parker who gets at the potential problems which is the US is in the middle and, if the central government in Baghdad and the KRG are still in conflict (a good bet is they will be), their presence will be taking sides. (Taking Nouri's side.) And, as Aljazeera explains, the plan, US "forces would start in Ninevah province, which includes Mosul, and then extend to Kirkuk and to Diyala province north of the capital." NPR's Deborah Amos (All Things Considered -- link has text and audio) reports on the development and Odierno tells her, "Unfortunately, they are killing a lot of innocent civilians, and so that is not acceptable to the Iraqi government, and it's not acceptable to us. So we are trying to come up with solutions to solve this problem." And the problem with the targeting of Iraq's LGBT community? Those killings? Oh, apparently only some lives have meaning.

Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing which claimed 2 lives and left fifteen people injured, a Mosul roadside bombing which wounded an Iraqi Col's guard, a Mosul bombing which wounded four people (including two police officers) and a Tikrit bombing which injured three police officers. Reuters notes a Mosul roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 Iraqi truck driver, a Mosul car bombing left an Iraqi soldier wounded and -- dropping back to Monday night -- a Mosul car bombing claimed the life of 1 civilian.

Shootings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 police officer shot dead in Mosul.

"They gave me a gun" he said
"They gave me a mission
For the power and the glory --
Propaganda -- piss on 'em
There's a war zone inside me --
I can feel things exploding --
I can't even hear the f**king music playing
For the beat of -- the beat of black wings."
[. . .]
"They want you -- they need you --
They train you to kill --
To be a pin on some map --
Some vicarious thrill --
The old hate the young
That's the whole heartless thing
The old pick the wars
We die in 'em
To the beat of -- the beat of black wings"
-- "The Beat of Black Wings," words and music by Joni Mitchell, first appears on her Chalk Mark In A Rainstorm.

Danny Fitzsimons is facing a trial in Iraq and could be sentenced to death. He served in the British military for eight years and was stationed in Afghanistan and Kosovo. He is accused of being the shooter in a Green Zone incident this month in which 1 British contractor, Paul McGuigan, and 1 Australian contractor, Darren Hoare, died and one Iraqi, Arkhan Madhi, was injured. Eric and Liz Fitzsimons spoke to the BBC (link has video) and noted that they are not asking for Danny to 'walk.' They stated that he has to take responsibility. But they want a fair trial and do not believe that is possible in Iraq. His legal defense team doesn't believe he can get a fair trial either stating today that the British military's presence in Iraq during the war means that Fitzsimons will be used as scapegoat. First, a few e-mails came in on the SOFA today. Glad you read it. The SOFA does give Iraq control over contractors. That has nothing to do with Danny Fitzsimons and whether or not he can be tried in England as his attorneys and family desire. The Status Of Forces Agreement is a treaty the US and Iraq entered into. It has nothing to do with England. If that's not clear to you, England had to move there remaining forces into Kuwait last month. Why? Because the Iraqi Parliament had not approved the agreement between England and Iraq. With no agreement, England can't operate there. The SOFA does not cover England. Danny Fitzsimons is not covered by the SOFA. The SOFA applies only to the US and Iraq -- no other countries. Hussein Al-alak (Palestine Chronicle) covers Danny Fitzsimons as well as a protest suicide which has received very little media attention:

Both his father and step-mother admitted to the British media that they weren't even aware he had gone back to Iraq, that coupled with his addiction to alcohol and substances, the failure of the security company to carry out proper medical checks and with many independent witness reports stating that Daniel had been incredibly disturbed back home, it appears that the intelligence of the two Manchester based teachers may outweigh that of the Ministry of Defence, when they stated, "He patently should not have been allowed to go to Iraq. He is extremely poorly."
So why on earth was he sent back? The fact that bad publicity surrounding this case has only now forced many uncomfortable questions to be raised in the parliament of unelected Prime Minister and Tony Blair's financier Gordon Brown, when less than one month before the case of Daniel Fitzsimmons hit the front pages across Great Britain, 25 year old Andrew Watson threw himself off the top of a tower block in London, having saluted in front of the television, the returning bodies of eight soldiers who were brought back from Afghanistan.
When serving in Basra, Watson witnessed the deaths of two of his friends from a landmine and on a separate occasion had to carry out the bodies of dead babies from a bombed out building. According to his mother Glynis Watson, psychologically Andrew Watson "was dead when he came back from Iraq and we were desperately trying to get him the help he needed."
The family also believe that his suicide, which took place at 5 AM in July 2009 coincided with his Army roll-call time and whilst his mother recalled her son "crying in my arms and saying, "I know I'm really, really ill", hit out at the Ministry of Defence for failing to provide him with the emotional support he needed.

It's painful to write about Lynndie England because it's very obvious that she's never been all there in the head. But that doesn't excuse her and she refuses to go away. She refuses to find the rock under which to hide. We're going to drop back to June 30th for the set up on the Charles In Charge look-alike's latest stunts, that's when AP's P.J. Dickersched and Vicki Smith interviewed the War Criminal who was minimizing her actions with statements like "People don't realize I was just in a photo for a split second in time." Lynddie's the criminal who didn't just torture, she thought you went to Iraq to sleep around. And that's how she got pregnant in Iraq. And how she ended up with "It's never my fault! It's all the fault of the man I loved!" She disgraced herself and created an image that female service members have to live down. Lynndie should be hanging her head in shame instead of rushing around on a book tour. Yes, orders for the torutre came from higher up and yes, Charles Graner was selected because of his past history. The guilt doesn't end with Lynndie and Charles. It goes all the way up. But that doesn't absolve them of guilt either. But Lynndie wasn't having any of that. She was harmed, she wanted the world to know. She can't escape her infamy. Boo-hoo. She tells you she tried dying her hair (she did) and that she tried gaining weight (false, she gained it because she ate too much and she was no longer living a physically active life). It's so awful, she insists, because she's recognized.

But she didn't try to change her name. She claims her face is so famous that it wouldn't make any difference. Lynndie's confusing scandal with fame. And if she really wanted to start over, she'd have changed her name and then gone on to reply, "I get that a lot," if anyone did say, "You look like that criminal." Lynndie didn't change her name because she wants the shame she mistakes for fame. That's why she's doing the interview now and prepping for, yes, her book tour. The AP article told you that Lynnide "said she's paid her dues and repeatedly apologized." Did you hear that apology? Not only is it not in the article but anyone who's followed her press (including while she was in prison) is damn well aware that she never apologized and always pushed responsibility for her own actions off on others. She continues to minimize as she attempts to pimp her War Crimes to rake in a buck. Last Thursday, Mark Memmott (NPR) reported she told the BBC that the Abu Ghraib War Crimes were "nothing . . . compared to what they would do to us" and went on to compare it to college initiation ceremonies. By the way, that's why ALL the photos need to be released so that it makes it that much harder for LYING WAR CRIMINALS like Lynndie England to minimize what they did. Her ass should still be in prison and I loved to see the psych consult (which should have been done) that allowed the pregant in prison torturer to raise a child without state supervision. Last week a 'speaking engagement' (shouldn't that be grunting?) of Lynndie's was cancelled. AP reported the Library of Congress engagement was cancelled because the promoter was getting death threats. Lynndie should never have been invited to speak at the Library of Congress to begin with. As for the alleged death threats? Grow the hell up. If they did exist, grow up. You can't do anything without a few death threats. Most of us learned long ago to ignore them. If you don't ignore them, if you freak out and cave in to them, don't whine in public for sympathy. (To be clear, Lynndie is not the one whining and I seriously doubt that any death threat would ever stop her from speaking anywhere.) Frank James (NPR) quotes an employee at the Library of Congress objecting to Lynndie's using the landmark to promote herself:

She is a convicted criminal who was dishonorably discharged, but she's out of prison and on stage at the Library of Congress. You may recall many of the memorable pictures of the glowing Private England during her tour in Iraq, including the one of her standing next to an Iraqi prisoner, a cigarette dangling from her lip, as she points at the Iraqi prisoner's genitals as he stands there naked with a sack over his head as he's forced to masturbate in the presence of GI England and several other nude men. It sure looked like she was enjoying some good times in the picture, so maybe she'll give more behind the scenes details during her lecture on Friday as she expounds on how she's a victim who is deprived of veteran's benefits because of her dishonorable discharge. As she said in an interview published in the West Virginia Metro News on Monday: "Yeah, I was in some pictures, but that's all it was ... I just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time." That has to be comforting to those who died because of the wave of anger her snapshots ignited in the Middle East, like the family of Nick Berg who was slaughtered in front of a video camera in retaliation for Abu Ghraib, according to his murderers. America as a whole still pays the price for Private England's "wrong place -- wrong time" misadventure, but that won't stop the Library of Congress from opening its doors and handing her the mike.

Meanwhile Shelby Baker (Sweetwater, Tennessee channel 6) reports that Joy Oakes is thrilled her brother Raymond Girouard is getting out of prison. Girouard was found guilty of negligent homicides and of obstruction of justice and cospiracy in the deaths of three Iraqis. In March of 2007, when he was sentenced, Channel Six was reporting that he admitted to "lying about the killings" and they also said Girouard would "be up for parole in three to four years." Three to four? It's barely two years. For any wondering, the Iraqis he had imprisoned and was found guilty in the homicides of? They're still dead. Again, only some lives have meaning, apparently.


iraqhomophobia
the los angeles timesliz slyalsumariacbcnprmark memmottthe advocateneil brovermanfree speech radio newsdalila mahdawi
the wall street journalchip cummingsthe washington posternesto londonothe los angeles timesliz slymcclatchy newspapers
adam ashtoncindy sheehan
newsweeklarry kaplow
joni mitchell

Mondays

I'm not going to give him or his trashy family any publicity by saying their names but I will note that if you die on June 25th and your family is burying you August 29th, that's just disgusting. Now I'm Black, and we do tend to move a little slower in terms of a funeral. If you're White and your mother dies Tuesday, you'll have the funeral by the end of the week. In the Black community, we'd be more likely to have it the following week. In part due to travel issues -- family members needing to attend. (And the income bracket meaning that many would not be able to take a plane.) So June 25th death and even a July 10th funeral I could understand. But August 29th? That's just trashy.

Feminist Wire notes the following:

A poll released Saturday by CBS and the New York Times indicates that just 53 percent of American adults support military women serving in combat roles. The poll also found 83 percent support women serving in support roles for ground troops, according to CBS. The United States currently restricts women from direct combat roles in infantry positions or in the Special Forces.
The poll also found a number of ideological and demographic factors to be influential. In general, Democrats, liberals, moderates, and independents favor women serving in combat roles while Republican and conservatives oppose it. Age is also a factor: 62 percent of women respondents younger than 45 support lifting the combat restriction, while only 44 percent of women respondents older than 45 support removing the ban. Overall, only 37 percent of respondents older than 65 support lifting the restriction.

I firmly support a woman's right to hold any job a man does. I think a woman can do any job a man can and a man can do any job a woman can. (Pregnancy is not a job. Child rearing is one -- and it's a very valuable one.)

But even so, I feel a pang of sadness about the above. Great for women who want it and I hope it lets their work they are doing (women are in combat, wake up, America) but I just honestly wish we were smarter. I wish we were smarter and finding new and alternative ways of addressing conflict. Instead, it appears we will measure success solely by how women achieve on men's terms.

I'm giving Bob Somerby (Daily Howler) a link and a recommendation that you read him today; however, I can't figure out what to excerpt. Everything's pretty much inter-related and I don't see a section I can pull that might not confuse since you really need to read in full as he progresses paragraph by paragraph.

"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Monday, September 17, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, Human Rights Watch issues a report on the targeting of Iraq's LGBT community, Barack Obama tosses out pretty words to the VFW that aren't so pretty if anyone pays attention, too bad for Barry's vacation because Peace Mom Cindy Sheehan is paying attention, the benchmarks are forgotten, a census is called off and more.

Today Celebrity in Cheif Barry O! spoke to the VFW and made comments such as this: "When communism cast its shadow across so much of the globe, you stood vigilant in a long Cold War -- from an airlift in Berlin to mountains of Korea to the jungles of Vietnam." If your mouth just dropped open at the stunning historical ignorance of that single sentence, grasp that Barry O is whomever he thinks audiences want. He never means one damn word. That's the most frightening thing about him. George W. Bush's Iraq 'plan' was 'we'll stand down as they stand up' and Barry revealed the same 'strategy'. He also noted, "But as we move forward, the Iraqi people must know that the United States will keep its commitments. And the American people must know that we will move forward with our strategy. We will begin removing our combat brigades from Iraq later this year. We will remove all our combat brigades by the end of next August. And we will remove all our troops from Iraq by the end of 2011. And for America, the Iraq War will end." Yeah, we'll see. Barry O didn't argue "Trust me!" with comments about how he's working to ensure that troops in Iraq get more: "and for all those serving in Afghanistan and Iraq, including our National Guard and Reserve, more of the protective gear and armored vehicles that save lives." Uh, excuse me, he's been president for seven months. If US troops in Iraq (or Afghanistan, but this is the Iraq snapshot) need "more of the protective gear and armored vehicles that save lives," as commander in chief, he should have ensured that they received it. Don't tell us what you're going to do. You've been president for seven months, it's time you have accomplishments to point to and if you're saying US troops are at risk because they lack "protective gear and armored vehicles," and you haven't already taken care of this? He brags about how its in his (proposed) budget and how he's not hiding the costs of the wars. On the latter, he means that he's not doing supplementals. As Bette Davis tells Joan Crawford in Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?, "But you are, Blanche, you are." The night of June 16th, the US House voted on his War Supplemental (and passed it): 226 members (221 Democrats, 5 Republicans) voted for it, 202 members (32 Democrats, 170 Republicans) voted against it. June 18th the US Senate voted for it (91 voted for it, five -- Russ Feingold, Bernie Sanders, Jim DeMint, Mike Enzi and Tom Coburn -- voted against it.) Barack should remember that because June 24th he signed the $106 billion War Supplemental. So he's telling the American people in August that the US troops in Iraq do not have the equipment they need and in June he was signing a multi-billion dollar supplemental and not taking care of the troops in that?

Cindy Sheehan (Cindy's Soapbox) observed last week:

There has been no significant removal of troops from Iraq and there has been a very significant increase of troops to Af-Pak, with the unfortunate commensurate increase in casualties on all sides, yet there is very little movement in the "movement." McCain would be doing the exact same thing that Obama is doing in Iraq-Af-Pak: the EXACT same thing. There is no difference between what Obama is doing and what McCain would be doing, except Obama has a (D) behind his name. The profound difference to us here in the grassroots would be that if McCain were president, faux-gressives would still be up in arms about the wars and, even though our protests wouldn't change McCain's mind, at least we could retain our moral high-ground, that has been sold out to the Democrats for absolutely nothing in return.

Cindy's not sitting still. Barack vacations on Martha's Vineyard from Sunday through the 30th and Cindy will be there:

From her home in California, Ms. Sheehan released this statement:
"There are several things that we wish to accomplish with this protest on Martha's Vineyard. First of all, no good social or economic change will come about with the continuation or escalation of the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. We simply can't afford to continue this tragically expensive foreign policy.
Secondly, we as a movement need to continue calling for an immediate end to the occupations even when there is a Democrat in the Oval Office. There is still no Noble Cause no matter how we examine the policies.
Thirdly, the body bags aren't taking a vacation and as the US led violence surges in Afghanistan and Pakistan, so are the needless deaths on every side.
And, finally, if the right-wing can force the government to drop any kind of public option or government supported health care, then we need to exert the same kind of pressure to force a speedy end to the occupations."
Cindy Sheehan will arrive on the Vineyard on Tuesday, August 25th.

Late last night Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) reported Human Rights Watch would be releasing a report today on the targeting of Iraq's LGBT community: "Although the scope of the problem remains unclear, hundreds of gay men may have been killed this year in predominantly Shiite Muslim areas, the report's authors said, basing their conclusion on interviews with gay Iraqi men, hospital officials and an unnamed United Nations official in Baghdad." The Austin-American Statesman (compiling various wire reports) noted, "The campaign has been largely blamed on Shiite extremists who target behavior deemed un-Islamic, beating and even killing women for not wearing veils and bombing liquor stores." B-b-but, the New York Times told us the Shi'ite militias are standing down! And that they're lovely! Why, they're not just lovely, they're de-lovely! Imagine the New York Times ever being wrong about Iraq -- it's one for Ripley's. This morning the BBC added, "The report says members of the Mehdi Army militia group is spearheading the campaign, but police are also accused even though homosexuality is legal. Witnesses say vigilante groups break into homes and pick people up in the street, interrogating them to extract the names of other potential victims, before murdering them." CNN notes, "Interviews with doctors indicate hundreds of men had been killed, but the exact number was unclear because of the stigma associated with homosexuality in Iraq, the New York-based watchdog group said in its report." BBC correspondent Natalia Antelava interviewed gay men in Baghdad who report that no attempts are made by security forces to stop the assaults against them.The Human Rights Watch report is entitled "'They Want Us Exterminated': Murder, Torture, Sexual Orientation and Gender in Iraq." For the 67-page report [PDF format warning] click here. The report opens with Hamid relating how his partner was murdered: It was late one night in early April, and they came to take my partner at his parents' home. Four armed men barged into the house, masked and wearing black. They asked for him by name; they insulted him and took him in front of his parents. All that, I heard about later from his family. He was found in the neighborhood the day after. They had thrown his corpse in the garbage. His genitals were cut off and a piece of his throat was ripped out.Since then, I've been unable to speak properly. I feel as if my life is pointless now. I don't have friends other than those you see; for years it has just been my boyfriend and myself in that little bubble, by ourselves. I have no family now -- I cannot go back to them. I have a death warrant on me. I feel the best thing to do is just to kill myself. In Iraq, murderers and thieves are respected more than gay people. Their measuring rod to judge people is who they have sex with. It is not by their conscience, it is not by their conduct or their values, it is who they have sex with. The cheapest thing in Iraq is a human being, a human life. It is cheaper than an animal, than a pair of used-up batteries you buy on the street. Especially people like us. His partner of ten years is murdered and he has to live in fear, hide his own grief and hide who he is. And this is the country the US 'liberated'. Human Rights Watch's report notes that most of the Iraqis interviewed self-label as "gay" but the murderers would "describe the victims and excuse the killings with a potpourri of words and justifications, identifying those they abominate in shifting ways -- suggesting how concerns about an Iraq where men are no longer masculine drive the death squads, as much as fears of sexual 'sin.' 'Puppies,' a vilifying slang term of apparently recent vintage, implies that the men are immature as well as inhuman. Both the media and sermons in mosques warn of a wave of effeminacy among Iraqi men, and execrate the 'third sex'.'' The report also notes that while "gay" may be a new term in Iraq, homosexuals and lesbians are not new to Iraq ("always existed in Iraqi society, as in all societies"). HRW also notes that the hatred towards "'feminized' men reveals only hatred of women." Tariq shares with HRW: At the end of March, I started to hear from friends that the Mahdi Army was killing gays. The newspapers also reported there was an increase in the "third sex" in Iraq, also known as "puppies" [jarawi]. Then on April 4, I found out that two of my gay friends, Mohammed and Mazen, had been killed. I think those were their names; within a gay group, gays rarely give out their real names. We were friends, we met in cafes or chatted on the Internet, andone day they just disappeared. A few days later, I met the brother of one of them and he told me they were killed. They were kidnapped on the street and then their bodies were found near a mosque, with signs of torture. One was 18, one was 19. A couple of days after that, on April 6 or 7, I was in my parents' house, and someone threw a letter at the door. I didn't see who. Inside the envelope was a bullet. It had brown blood on it, and the letter said, "What are you still here for? Are you ready to die?" I think those two were tortured into giving my name, because two days after I learned they were killed I got this threat. ... I spoke by phone to a friend of mine yesterday night: he is also gay but he's very masculine and no one knows about him. He said, "Get out if you can and save yourself. They are killing gays left and right." I said, "Who is doing it?" He said, "Everyone knows. Who do you think? The Mahdi Army." The report traces how militias originated from the security vacuum created by the US invasion. The Madhi 'Army' billed itself as the protector of society and "an agent of social cleansing." An unnamed journalist floats the idea that the Mahdi militia is now targeting LGBTs because "[g]etting rid of the Sunnis and the Americans is less important". Mashal was kidnapped by the Mahdi militia and he's quoted explaining:It was about 4 p.m. and four men came inside the shop. They lingered and when I tried to get them to leave, they pulled out guns. They had three cars -- one a black Daewoo -- and they put me in one and covered my eyes. It was the Mahdi Army -- they are the ones who operate in the area. The place they took me to wasn't far away: it was very close to a mosque or actually in the courtyard, because I could hear the call to prayer very clearly. When they hauled me out of the car they beat me until I fell unconscious. Late the next day, they came to me and said, "We know you are gay, we know you're farakhji" [a derogatory term used in Iraq for men who have sex with men]. They pulled out a list of names and started reading them: you know these perverts, you know X and Y and Z. They gave the first name and the neighborhood where he lived. I knew four who were still alive. One they had already killed. They had killed my friend Waleed in February, before I was kidnapped. He was walking down a big street between Hayy Ur and al Shaab [in northeast Baghdad near Sadr City] at dusk. I asked Waleed's brother about it later, and he told me, "Waleed was slaughtered in the street. Don't ask more." I am sure he was killed because he was gay. He was walking with a bunch of straight friends, and he was killed, not them: he was the one they targeted. He was the first name on the list they read me. There were many more names I didn't know. I admitted knowing those four, but I said it was only because they were customers in my shop. They interrogated me for three hours that night. They kept me blindfolded and gagged, and when they wanted me to speak, they took out the gag. They demanded I give them names of other gays. At night they got a broomstick, and they used it to rape me. After that, they negotiated a ransom. They asked my family for $50,000 USD.My brothers sold my shop, my car, everything I had to put together half that. When they let me go they said, "We have our sources, and we know exactly what you do. If you step outside your house, you are dead." I never left the house for more than a month, until I fled Baghdad. One of the people whose names they read to me ran away from Baghdad, with his parents. Two others I know are just hiding in their houses. A few don't answer their phones and I don't know what has happened to them. This is targeting of a population and it goes on while US service members are on the ground in Iraq but the US White House, State Dept and Embassy in Baghdad do nothing -- despite requests from US House Reps Jared Polis, Tammy Baldwin and Barney Frank, among others. And the problem includes Iraqi forces (and, I say, Nouri). The report explains: Iraqi police and security forces have done little to investigate or halt the killings. Authorities have announced no arrests or prosecutions; it is unlikely that any have occurred. While the government has made well-publicized attempts since 2006 to purge key ministries of officials with militia ties, including the Ministry of Interior, many Iraqis doubt both its sincerity and its success. Most disturbingly, Human Rights Watch heard accounts of police complicity in abuse -- ranging from harassing "effeminate" men at checkpoints, to possible abduction and extrajudicial killing. As the targeting has taken place, the Iraqi government has refused to call it out. The report points out, "Iraq's leaders must be defenders of all its people. The Iraqi state must desist from silence, and fully and immediately investigate the murder and torture of people targeted because they do not correspond to norms of 'masculinity,' or are suspected of homosexual conduct." Following the murders, the police look the other way. The murders are not punished, the killings are not investigated: "The brutality of the killings, the proliferation of mutilated corpses discarded in the trash, not only conveys the power of the killers and dispensability of the victims, but makes the dead a savage example. Bodies castrated, broken, tortured -- becomes billboards, on which punishment is less imposed than inscribed." The report makes recommendations for many bodies but here are the recommendations for the Iraqi government: • Investigate all reports of militia or other violence against people targeted because they do not correspond to norms of "masculinity," or are suspected of homosexual conduct, and appropriately punish those found responsible; • Publicly and expressly condemn all such violence; • Investigate whether ties continue between the Ministry of Interior and militias that have operated in the past as quasi-independent security forces under the Ministry's protection, including the Mahdi Army; • Investigate all claims of abuse by police or security forces, including abuses against people because they do not correspond to norms of "masculinity," or are suspected of homosexual conduct, and appropriately punish those found responsible; • Investigate and prosecute all Ministry of Interior officials involved in death squad killings or other unlawful acts, including torture, assault, and extortion; • Properly vet and train all police, security forces, and criminal justice officials, ensuring that this entails training in human rights inclusive of issues of sexual orientation and gender expression and identity, and establish effective monitoring and accountability mechanisms;• Take all appropriate measures to end torture, disappearances, summary killings, and other abuses, including abuses based on sexual orientation and gender expression and identity; • Repeal article 128 of the Criminal Code, which identifies "The commission of an offence with honorable motives" as a "mitigating excuse"; • Examine vague articles of the Criminal Code, including paragraphs 401, 402, 501, 502, and 200(2), that could justify arbitrary arrest or harassment of people due to their sexual orientation or gender expression and identity, or could be used to prevent civil society from addressing unpopular or stigmatized issues; repeal or modify them if necessary, or otherwise ensure that they are not applied in an arbitrary or discriminatory manner contrary to international human rights law; • Create and support an independent National Human Rights Commission; • Support the development of domestic independent human rights non-governmentalorganizations with the capacity to monitor the full range of human rights violations, and ensure that they can operate without state harassment or interference; • Train all criminal-justice authorities in effective responses to gender-based violence against women and men; • Promote gender equality by embodying in legislation explicit guarantees for women's equal rights to marriage, within marriage, at the dissolution of marriage, and in inheritance.A large number of the LGBT community is fleeing or has fled Iraq and HRW calls on foreign governments to assist with this segment of the Iraqi refugee population. They note Jordan, Turkey and Syria -- three countries that house the majority of Iraq's external refugees -- are not countries where LGBTs are likely to feel welcomed.

The LGBT community is among the many communities targeted in 'liberated' Iraq today. The press is another target. Friday they demonstrated and that day's snapshot included a link to BBC video footage of the demonstration which somehow became "nearly 100 Iraqi journalists, news media workers and their supporters" when Sam Dagher showed up with a 'report' in Saturday's New York Times. Yesterday Adam Ashton (McClatchy's Kansas City Star) did a better job -- he notes around 200, as opposed to the Times' less than 100 who protested Friday -- but where's the draft law in his article? Not in his article. He does note: "Journalists' fears have been inflamed this summer by a decision from the Iraqi Ministry of Culture and Ministry of Interior requiring publishers to get their permission before printing books and by an Aug. 7 speech at a prominent Shiite mosque where an imam and lawmaker denounced a journalist's work, triggering fears for the writer's safety." (Here's a link to Ashton's story at McClatchy.) NPR's Deborah Amos (All Things Considered) manages to address the topic (and put the boys to shame):Deborah Amos: The demonstrators chose a place in central Baghdad that sends an unmistakable message: Al-Mutanabi Street -- a literary center for generations is lined with book shops as well as an outdoor market that does a lively trade in racy romance novels and political magazines. Here book sellers joined journalists and authors for a rousing protest. Over the past few months, the government has been quietly proceeding on laws to register websites and ban certain books. But opponents say it's a first step to limit freedom of expression. Emad al-Khafaji: I am afraid of the return of the censorship. Deborah Amos: Iraqi journalist, Emad al-Khafaji. Emad al-Khafaji: It's not enough to say, "For national security, I cannot accept this book or that book." No, this thing will remind us of Saddam era. Deborah Amos: When Saddam's era was swept away after the US-led invasion, new media outlets came rushing in. Even the poorest neighborhoods sprouted rooftop satellite dishes. For the first time, Iraqis could feast on Lebanese music videos and Turkish soap operas. They soon discovered website porn and online gambling but in this media revolution more dangerous ideas appeared promoting hatred and sectarian violence. The prime minister's proposed law would prohibit websites that deal with terrorism but also drugs, gambling, negative comments about Islam and pornography. Hanna Edward, a human rights actvist, says these vague categories are aimed at stifling Iraq's diversity. Hanna Edward: This really hinders our democracy, diversity of expression, diversity of opinions. Without it, I fear that we are going again to some dictatorship. Deborah Amos: Iraq's National Library and Archives has already been a target for government censors. Saad Eskander, the executive director, tells the story in his office filled with books. He's rescued old texts, hidden in basements and personal libraries, written in Hebrew from the day when Iraq had the largest Jewish community in the region. He's also rescued books written by Saddam Hussein. The new censors wanted those books gone. Saad Eskander: They say we have no right even they are written in a way that not acceptable to us but they are an Iraqi [no idea on the word]. Deborah Amos: A part of Iraq's heritage's Eskander says, he won that fight for now. Saad Eskander: It reflect old mentality its part of our historical memory and should be read and studied and analyzed in order to prevent the emergence of such dictatorship and brutality in our society. Deborah Amos: Which is why he says he will stand against the prime minister's proposed censorship law.
At the end of last week, Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reported on the lack of electricity in Baghdad, how graffiti can be found proclaiming "Electricity is dead. Pray for its soul" and noting, "Electricity long has been a benchmark for reconstruction success in Iraq. Even as American troops have withdrawn from Iraqi cities and there's talk of a faster U.S. pullout from the country, however, electricity remains elusive for millions of Baghdad residents." Hammoudi notes the benchmarks. No one seems to remember them. The White House proposed them. They were supposed to be the way 'success' could be measured. Congress was all for them. Nouri al-Maliki signed off on them. That was 2007. By 2008, movement on any benchmark would be hailed as 'success!' That's all you needed, movement. Wasn't movement 'achievement'? Weren't they the same thing. As the 'results' demonstrate in 2009, no. They weren't the same thing. And by 2009, they're all but forgotten even though, generally, when two parties sign off on something, what you have is a binding contract.

Staying with benchmarks, in 2005, Iraq created a Constitution and ratified it. The Constitution held that a census would be held in Kirkuk and a referendum held there to determine the will of the residents -- did they want to be part of the central government out of Baghdad or part of the Kurdistan Regional Government? The area was historically targeted by Saddam Hussein who moved Arabs in and forced Kurds out. It is a disputed territory. As 2006 came to a close, the Bush White House began talking "benchmarks" by which "success" in Iraq could be measured. They proposed a set of benchmarks to Congress and to Nouri al-Maliki which both signed off on. The benchmarks included resolving the Kirkuk issue. The referendum has never taken place. Repeatedly, Nouri manipulates bodies such as the United Nations which then whine that the Kurds need to wait -- as if this wasn't agreed to both in the Consitution and in the benchmarks. Provincial elections took place in 14 of Iraq's 18 provinces back in January and in three of the KRG's provinces in July. The missing one? Kirkuk. Nouri announced that a census would finally take place and that the entire country would vote in January elections in 2010 (kicked back from December 2009). Now BBC reports that Iraq's "has postponed indefinitely plans to hold its first nationswide census in 22 years". AFP adds that politicians (Arab and Turkmen) have declared that they will block the census and that they will work to overturn Article 140 of the Constitution. They quote Kurdish politician Sherzad Adil stating, "Article 140 is constitutional and the Iraqi government is obliged to implement it. The delay in implementing it is the fault fo the governments that followed the former regime and we hope the problems will be solved before the next (general) election." Aseel Kami and Michael Christie (Reuters) remind, "The census would have shed light on the actual ethnic composition of those areas. Many Arab and Turkmen leaders in Kirkuk opposed the survey there, and have also opposed holding a referendum on the city's fate."

And on the topic of northern Iraq, this morning Ernesto London (Washington Post) reported online that the top US commander in Iraq, Gen Ray Odierno, states US forces may be position "along disputed areas" and that Nouri's thrilled with the idea and quotes Odierno saying, "I think they all just feel more comfortable if we're there."

As Third noted yesterday, there were 122 reported deaths in Iraq last week and 414 reported wounded ("Last Sunday found the press reporting 6 deaths and 12 people injured. Monday saw 61 deaths reported and 252 injuries. Tuesday saw 11 dead and 57 wounded. Wednesday's numbers were 11 dead and 21 injured. Thursday 25 lives were claimed and 51 people were wounded. Friday there were 2 reported deaths and 6 reported injured. Saturday saw 6 dead and 15 injured.") Yesterday saw 13 reported dead and 41 reported injured. Violence continued today.

Bombings?

AFP reports a car bombing outside Taji which claimed 5 lives and left thirty-eight people injured according to "local police Lieutenant Sarmed Sami." Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad car bombing which claimed 2 lives and left eleven people (nine are police) injured. Dropping back to yesterday, Reuters notes a Kirkuk roadside bombing which injured six police officers.

Shootings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Mosul checkpoint was attacked and 2 police officers were killed with a civilian wounded and 1 "off-duty" police officer was shot dead in Mosul and, dropping back to Sunday, 1 civilian was shot dead in Mosul. Reuters notes a Sunday night attack on a checkpoint in Mussayab in which 1 Sahwa was killed and three more were injured, a drive-by shooting in Mussayab Sunday night in which a Sahwa leader was shot dead and a Mosul shop break-in Sunday night in which the owner was shot dead. Note that Reuters' Sunday violence included under "Bombings" and "Shootings" today was not reported yesterday and not included as part of Sunday's count. It will be counted at this site as part of Monday's count. (And, yes, we will keep a running count because the press seems unable/unwilling to do so.)

Corpses?

Reuters notes the Iraqi government announced today they'd found 10 corpses in the last two weeks in Baghdad. Hope those weren't Sunni corpses -- it would destroy the New York Times' p.r. efforts. (As noted August 12th, "Mass graves turn up in a month is he going to retract? Hell no, they never do.")

Shane Bauer, Sarah Shourd and Josh Fattal are three American citizens who visited northern Iraq and allegedly went hiking and allegedly crossed over into Iranian territory. Saturday, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton released a statement which noted, "Regarding the three American hikers, Joshua Fattal, Shane Bauer, and Sarah Shourd, who were detained by Iranian authorities on July 31, we once again call on the Iranian government to live up to its obligations under the Vienna Convention by granting consular access and releasing these three young Americans without further delay." They are being held by the Iranian government and, last week, they were moved to Tehran. Damien McElroy and Ahmad Vahdat (Telegraph of London) report that Iraqi tribal leader Farhad Lohoni is stating that eye witnesses (his family members) saw the Americans seized by Iranians who were in Iraqi territory and the Iranians were allegedly part of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Meanwhile Rahmat al-Salaam (Asharq Alawsat) reports that the governments of Iraq and Iran met "to discuss border problems and implementation of the Algiers Agreement." Kareem Abedzair (Azzaman) reports on the meeting as well and notes promises on both sides to create more "border controls."

Saturday, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton released a statement on Ken Bacon, "The United States and the world lost a great humanitarian leader with the passing today of Ken Bacon, President of Refugees International. Most Americans remember Ken as the unflappable civilian voice of the Department of Defense, where he served with distinction as spokesperson for many years. But for millions of the world's most vulnerable people -- refugees and other victims of conflict -- Ken was an invaluable source of hope, inspiration and support. From Centeral Africa to South Asia to the Americas, Ken shone the spotlight on the causes of humanitarian suffering, and served as an impassioned yet reasoned advocate for the principles of humanitarian protection and assistance. We will miss Ken, but we will be inspired by the contributions he has made and the example he has set." Refugees International notes he was 64-years-old and "died . . . [Saturday] morning from an agressive melanoma that spread into his brain." They also note:

In 2006, Mr. Bacon pushed Refugees International to investigate the plight of Iraqi refugees at a time when no one was willing to acknowledge or speak out about this matter. Drawing on the findings of Refugees International's field research teams, Mr. Bacon was a leader in pushing the U.S. government and the UN to recognize the world's fastest growing refugee crisis at that time. His advocacy with senior administration officials and key members of Congress, such as Senator Edward Kennedy, was instrumental in achieving extensive press coverage and policy discussions on Iraqi displacement, the creation of a State Department task force on the problem, a sharp increase in international assistance for displaced Iraqis, and greater numbers of Iraqis are being resettled in this country.

For approximately 25 years, worked for the Wall St. Journal, first as a correspondent and then as an editor. Stephen Miller (Wall St. Journal) explains, "Mr. Bacon lived simply in Washington, riding a bicycle to work as a reporter, and walking to work as a Pentagon spokesman. He was legendarily frugal with the air conditioning in his family's townhouse in D.C.'s scorching summers. In 1994, he responded to incoming Secretary of Defense [William J.] Perry's summons to the Pentagon, where issues like U.S. involvement in Bosnia and Haiti dominated the agenda. As a former reporter, he mixed well with the Washington press corps and was retained by the subsequent defense secretary, William S. Cohen." Matt Schudel (Washington Post) adds, "Survivors include his wife of 43 years, Darcy Wheeler Bacon of Washington and Block Island; two daughters, Katharine Bacon of Brookline, Mass., and Sarah Bacon of Brooklyn, N.Y.; his father, Theodore S. Bacon of Peterborough, N.H.; a brother; and two grandchildren." The family is asking that those who wish to note the passing make a donation to Refugees International instead of sending flowers.

And finally, we'll note this from Sherwood Ross' "America's Warfare State" (Information Clearing House):

"On my last day in Iraq," veteran McClatchy News correspondent Leila Fadel wrote August 9th, "as on my first day in Iraq, I couldn't see what the United States and its allies had accomplished. ... I couldn't understand what thousands of American soldiers had died for and why hundreds of thousands of Iraqis had been killed." Quite a few oil company CEO's and "defense" industry executives, however, do have a pretty good idea of why the war Fadel deplored is being fought. As Michael Cherkasky, president of Kroll Inc., said a year after the Iraq invasion boosted his security firm's profits 231 percent: "It's the Gold Rush." What follows is a brief look at some of the outfits that cashed in, and at the multitudes that got took. "Defense Earnings Continue to Soar," Renae Merle wrote in The Washington Post on July 30, 2007. "Several of Washington's largest defense contractors said last week that they continue to benefit from a boom in spending on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan..." Merle added, "Profit reports from Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics and Lockheed Martin showed particularly strong results in operations in the region." More recently, Boeing's second-quarter earnings this year rose 17 percent, Associated Press reported, in part because of what AP called "robust defense sales." But war, it turns out, is not only unhealthy for human beings, it is not uniformly good for the economy. Many sectors suffer, including non-defense employment, as a war can destroy more jobs than it creates. While the makers of warplanes may be flying high, these are "Tough Times For Commercial Aerospace," Business Week reported July 13th. "The sector is contending with the deepening global recession, declining air traffic, capacity cuts by airlines, and reduced availability of financing for aircraft purchases."

iraq
cindy sheehan
reuters
the washington posternesto londonocnnbbc newsnatalia antelavanprall things considereddeborah amoshuman rights watch
laith hammoudimcclatchy newspapers
adam ashtonaseel kamimichael christiebbc newsthe telegraph of londondamien mcelroyahmad vahdatrahmat al-salaam
sahar issathe new york timesrod nordland
sam dagher
sherwood ross

LGBT and geography

"LGBT Filtering Victory!" (Catherine Crump, Blog of Rights):
Yesterday we won a great settlement of a lawsuit against two Tennessee school districts. Before, public schools in Nashville and Knoxville had blocked access to all Web sites that presented positive information about lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. Yet they allowed access to Web sites urging individuals to attempt to change their sexual orientation or gender identity (a practice the American Psychological Association recently denounced). Blocking access to just one side of a debate is called viewpoint discrimination – the government cannot favor one side of the debate over another – and it violates the Constitution. Yesterday a federal court approved a settlement binding the schools to never again block access to the favorable sites and agreeing that, if the schools violate the settlement, the court will take up the lawsuit again.
Students and faculty were understandably upset by Nashville and Knoxville’s discriminatory practice, which they protested to school officials for many months before finally resorting to contacting the ACLU of Tennessee. When the ACLU and the Tennessee affiliate investigated, it quickly became apparent that about 80 percent of Tennessee school districts were using the same Internet filtering software as Nashville and Knoxville, strongly suggesting that all of these schools were blocking access to the LGBT-supportive websites.

That's good news. We do follow LGBT issues at my site and I am the mother of three kids so school issues get covered as well. And it's Tennessee which my home state (Georgia) is below and we're neighbors that border one another. Georgia, in fact, borders many states. We also border North Carolina and South Carolina, Florida and Alabama. Yes, that is five. No, we don't have five sides. Look at the map if you're confused.

As I tell my kids and as my mother used to tell me.

And that's how I learned my geography.

My sister didn't look it up ever. She was never concerned and she'll tell you she colored every map for class beautifully with the blues and the greens and all of it.

But she'd color while she had her book opened and would have no retention of what she'd done.

So with her kids, she's tried to rectify that and I've taken it as all the more reason to follow my mother's example and to also follow up on that with my kids. My daughter can find Florida, Georgia and California on the map. And she's not even old enough to lear addition and subtraction.

Now it helps that we've done trips. And the boys can show you every where. We've gone to DC with everyone to protest, for example. And the boys can show you where that is on the map. We went to Mexico for Rebecca's wedding and the boys can show you that as well.


"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Friday, August 14, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the US military releases some suicide data, journalist protest in Iraq, Iraqi women get some press attention, and more.

Starting with US military suicides which are increasing by the DoD's own figures. The June figures for the army were released July 9th and they were "no confirmed suicides and nine potential suicides." Yesterday, the Defense Department released the July figures and noted that "four of the nine potential suicides [for June] have been confirmed and five remain under investigation." For July they are investigating eight possible suicides. They also state, "There have been 96 reported active-duty Army suicides during the period Jan. 1, 2009 - July 31, 2009. Of these, 62 have been confirmed, and 34 are pending determination of manner of death. For the same period in 2008, there were 79 suicides among active-duty soldiers. During July 2009, among reserve component soldiers not an active duty, there were four potential suicides. During the period Jan. 1, 2009 -- July 31, 2009, among that same group, there have been 17 confirmed suicides and 28 potential suicides; the potential suicides are currently under investigation to determine the manner of death. For the same period in 2008, there were 32 suicides among reserve soldiers not on active duty."

Independent journalist Dahr Jamail (at CounterCurrents) observes, "Soldiers are returning from the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan destroyed mentally, spiritually, and psychologically, to a general population that is, mostly, willfully ignorant of the occupations and the soldiers participating in them. Troops face a Department of Veterans Affairs that is either unwilling or unable to help them with their physical and psychological wounds and they are left to fend for themselves. It is a perfect storm of denial, neglect, violence, rage, suffering, and death." Dahr's latest book was released last month month and is The Will to Resist: Soldiers Who Refuse to Fight in Iraq and Afghanistan. July 31st on NPR's The Diane Rehm Show, a caller, Pamela, phoned to discuss a family member in the service who took his own life:

Yes. Good morning, how are you? Thank you for taking my call. I am responding to a comment I heard earlier and it really just like shot me in my heart. And the comment was that the suicide rates [in the US military] are skyrocketing and how this has to be addressed. And I literally like I said stopped dead in my tracks. I . . . lost my brother in service due to suicide. He was home on a leave and, uh, about to be, pardon me, to go back and to serve and, uh, was, uh -- the difficulty in getting the mental health services I believe that he needed -- I mean he was married with two children -- was most, most difficult and delayed and a long wait and this and that. And then the unfathomable happened and, uh, when I, uh, at times decided to share how he died rather than just say he died in the war and I would say he died by suicide the remark I would hear unfortunately was, "Oh my goodness, he didn't die a hero then." And-and I continually hear this and I guess I want to make a statement that how someone dies, um, should not be -- that -- that is not a definition of how they lived their lives. And here was a good man who gave and did so much for the community and yet because of how he died -- which you know is a mental illness health related, etc. etc. -- he is now being defined as -- not -- as a zero. And not being defined. And I think you know this-this suicide issue is getting way out of control and for every person that dies by suicide there are at least six to ten people that are horribly effected as well to the point where their mental health also, uh, you know, begins to fall apart and the whole mental health, how to get help, starts all over again. And I should say that the support groups for those that lose a loved one by suicide are now separated from regular grief groups and while attending one and sharing how my loved one died, people were going around the room, people said to me, "Oh my God, why is she here?" I've been asked to leave meetings because -- grief support meetings -- because of how my brother died and I don't think that's fair or correct or right and, um, so the issue goes far beyond the pain of losing a loved one and is extremely complicated. And, um, I wanted to share all that. And if ever anybody hears of someone that dies of a suicide please just say "I'm sorry for your loss" and ask about the person. And don't say anything cruel or unkind because, again, how one lives their entire life for 38 years should not be defined by a, you know, a irrational moment that effects -- that became a permanent solution to a temporary problem.

A caller named Mary also explained some of the stressors she sees (she's married to a service member) on that program (and there's transcripts of both calls in the July 31st snapshot). Moving to today's broadcast of The Diane Rehm Show. The second hour found Diane discussing the international news with Aljazaeera's Abderrahim Foukara, CNN's Elise Labott and McClatchy Newspapers' Warren P. Strobel. We'll come in on the Iran section where Shane Bauer, Sarah Shourd and Josh Fattal -- the three American citizens being held by Iran -- come up.

Diane Rehm: And Elise what is the fate of the Newsweek journalist who strayed apparently into Iran?

Elise Labott: Well you have a couple of detainees. You have a Newsweek journalist, Maziar Bahari, whose been working in Iran, who's been licensed by the Iranian government to work and whose coverage frankly of the regime hasn't been all that critical and he's been caught up in this post-election crisis. He's-he's one of forty -- more than forty journalists that are being tried as part of hundreds of opposition leaders -- some of the most well respected people of the country like Shirin Ebadi, noted Nobel laureate. And there's been a large campaign by Newsweek to-to free him. And then you have three American hikers --

Diane Rehm: Hikers. Right.

Elise Labott: Three American hikers that were hiking in northern Iraq in the Kurdish area in the mountains and it seems as if they strayed into uh, strayed into Iran and were detained by the authorities. And after a kind of week or so of no news whatsoever, the Iranians finally confirmed that they do have them, they are in custody, there's been no consular access, no visits to them at all. What US officials are saying is it's prob -- they don't think that Iran is irrational in these situations and that eventually it will probably shake out like it did in 2007 when Iran picked up these three British -- several British soldiers, held them, milked them for all they were worth and then when the costs -- international outrage and costs of them were too high, they had this ceremony and let them go. So they kind of think that after these hikers, they find out that they've satisfied themselves that they really didn't pose any risks -- the Iraqi government now is getting involved saying, 'They were really just guests of our country and they strayed in, please let them go' -- that eventually, as they did with Roxana Saberi journalist, they will let them go.

Warren P. Strobel: Yeah I think that's probably the case You did have one sort of hardline -- I think it was a member of Parliament, I hope I'm not wrong on that -- say --

Elise Labott: No, it was a member of Parliament, yeah.

Warren P. Strobel: -- that the only reason these three people could have strayed across the border is because they are part of a Western plot to keep things unhinged in Iran. But by and large, I think Elise is probably right that they will be released.

Elise Labott: They just couldn't --

Warren P. Strobel: The costs are too high.

Elise Labott: -- have done it at a worse time. I mean there should be some sort of a warning on your passport not to go into these countries.

Diane Rehm: Yes, you bet. You bet.

Abderrahim Foukara: Yes, I mean regardless of this ball being kicked back and forth between the Iranian government and the United States government as to the nature of what actually happened when those hikers went into Iranian territory, I mean in these situations you inevitably have a new card to play if you're the Iranian government when it comes to negotiations. It just puts one added step on the road to negotiations between the Iranian government and the US government instead of cutting straight to the chase and talking about pressure regarding the nuclear issue, now the US government has this extra hurdle of the three hikers to actually clear before they can talk about any other substance.

Diane Rehm: And speaking of hurdles a new wave of violence in Iraq this week, Warren Strobel?

Warren P. Strobel: Yes, indeed. I think yesterday there was two suicide bombings in the Mosul area targeted against an ethnic minority -- religious minority called the Yazzidis, 21 people killed. That's the latest on a string of these ever since US combat troops left the cities June 30th.

Diane Rehm: So since last Friday, we've had 150 people killed.

Warren P. Strobel: It's, it's a lot. And it's -- though actually, you talk to American commanders they think -- they predicted even worse once -- in other words, it's terrible, I'm not trying to minimize it in any sense of the word but there was a concern that there would be an even larger wave of violence.

Diane Rehm: So how is the Iraqi security handling this?

Warren P. Strobel: You know they -- they're doing better. You had this memo from the American colonel (Timothy Reese) that was published in the New York Times a couple of weeks ago saying the Iraqi security forces were just barely good enough and it's time for us to leave. Iraq is still very unstable and the big concern now is the fault line between the Kurdish areas and the Arab areas and the concern about a full scale ethnic conflict there which we have not seen yet, thank God, but it's a possibility.

Elise Labott: And also there-there, as Warren said, there really trying to fuel an already existing tension between the Arab and the Kurdish government in the north but also up until recently when we've seen these bombings in the north the bombing campaign has really been directed at the Shia and to -- and the bombings have just been horrific, they've been on food lines, you know, school buses, hospitals, funerals, really aimed at the Shia and trying to drag them back into a sectarian war. And the Shia by and large have been very patient. Their spiritual leaders like Grand Ayatollah Sistani have uh told them listen 'No retaliation, renounce violence' and this -- by and large they've been patient but I think people are waiting to see how long that patience will last and whether we'll see the militias come again.

It's really interesting how the media continues to congratulate the Shi'ite dominant population on not publicly going on a violence tear. I don't recall, do you, when the Iraqi Christians have been under attack -- pick any time, it never ends -- any congratulations to them for not responding with violence. What a sad media which repeatedly strokes the Shi'ites as so wonderful for not breaking the law. The same media, it should be noted, which treated the genocide as a civil war. One group controlled the Iraqi government, the Shias. One group had all the power, the Shias. But back then, 2007, it was a civil war -- they covered up for what the dominant group was doing to eradicate a minority. Now they praise that same group for 'restraint.' And what's so amazing is that Elise got close to reality for a moment and then decided to walk it back, "And also there-there, as Warren said, there really trying to fuel an already existing tension between the Arab and the Kurdish government in the north but also up until recently when we've seen these bombings in the north the bombing campaign has really been directed at the Shia". As everyone has yet again rushed to stroke and fawn over the dominant population in Iraq, no one's considered what's going on. Disputed areas erupt in violence? Disputed areas under Kurdish control?

This could very well be a Shi'ite effort to destabalize the area in order to weaken any claim the Kurds may have on the territory. We saw that before. Repeatedly. We saw it with the attacks on Iraqi Christians from the summer of 2008 through November 2008. And we saw, if we paid attention, that the ones blamed originally were the Kurdish peshmerga. The Shi'ites started a whisper campaign that the always-eager-to-please press ran with. But the peshmerga wasn't responsible for the attacks nor would it ever make sense for them to be responsible for the attacks on Iraqi Christians. It was the Shi'ites in that region with indicators that they were being fed/fueled from elsewhere in Iraq.

The Yazidis are not Shi'ite. If they were Shi'ite, they'd be part of the dominant culture and not a minority. More importantly, as per usual, the press can only see the big attacks. There have been attacks for the last two weeks. And those attacks have included attacks, again, on Iraqi Christians in that region. It's interesting how the press only seems to give a damn when the victims are Shia. It's interesting that they then pretend they give a damn because of the violence when the reality appears to be that Shia thugs controlling the government get press appeasement. Out of fear? I have no idea. I only know that Shia thugs have conducted genocide and not been called out by our allegedly free press and now when violence is being conducted in nothern Iraq against Yazidis, Iraqi Christians, Kurds and a host of others, the press can only see Shi'ite victims. It's very strange and very telling. Notice how Mayada Al Askari (Gulf News) covers the hundreds of deaths: "Kurdish villages, with mixed populations of Sunnis and Shiites, were targeted heavily. Nearly 3,000 kilogrammes of explosives went off near a small coffee shop in the forgotten village of Khazna, where poor labourers were killed." And the Shia are not monolythic. Frequently here we refer to the Shi'ite thugs (or the Sunni ones). We're referring to the government and militias. (Which are often the same thing for the Shi'ites.) And within the Shi'ite thug grouping, you have various divisions that can and do go to war with one another. A point that the Western media forgets as it renders the division it's helped to create (Shia v. Sunni) as a hard line that easily divides and which finds only one of two groupings.

Last Friday, Abderrahim Foukara hosted a discussion on the United States exiting Iraq on Aljazeera's Inside Iraq (link is video). The panelists were Thomas E. Ricks, Rend al-Rahim and Scott Carpenter. Rahim is an Iraqi and an American and she was the US ambassador to Iraq immediately after the Iraq War. Rahim was a very loyal supporter of George W. Bush and she got in some attacks on Joe Biden. Not a surprise. Rahim was among the exiles agitating for the illegal war. Long gone are the days when she could sit with Laura Bush at State of the Union addresses. Carpenter is with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

Abderrahim Foukara: Tom, is President Obama in a pickle now having promised that -- during his campaign -- that he would end the war and withdraw US military forces from that country at a time when, on the ground, the situation seems to be somewhat deteriorating?

Thomas E. Ricks: I think it is deteriorating. I think security will worsen throughout this year and probably into next year. The fewer American troops you have, the less influence you have. The American troops have been pulled out of the easier parts first. Later, when the troop numbers start coming down -- they really haven't come down much at all, we're really at the same level the Bush administration had for most of the last six years -- when you start pulling troops out of the difficult areas that are less secure or where Iraqi forces are considered less reliable, I think you're going to see even more violence, more of an unraveling of the security situation.

Ricks went on to note that Barack "threw out a major campaign promise," noting that Barack promised to take a brigade of troops out a month from the time he took office and "if that were the case, he would have taken out 40,000 troops already. He hasn't. So he's thrown away a major promise and he's paid no political cost for that." Of Barack's alleged 'withdrawal' plan (it's not withdrawal and it's George W. Bush's plan), Ricks it wasn't the first one he'd covered, it was "the sixth one."

What will happen in the near future in Iraq? Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) notes one development, "The 1920 Revolution Brigades issued a statement on Thursday in response to a Babylon and Beyond blog item last month about two meetings in Istanbul, Turkey, last spring between U.S. officials and a coalition of Sunni insurgent groups in Istanbul. In the group's statement Thursday, the 1920 Revolution Brigades said that it had not participated in the Political Council for the Iraqi Resistance's talks with the Americans and described the previous blog post as 'mistaken'." They feel their goal is to expell the foreign forces (US) from Iraq.

Today on Aljazeera's Inside Iraq devotes the program to the status of Iraqi women. The program misidentifies Zainab Salbi's organization. She is not with Women to Women (a health organization for women). She is with Women for Women.

Zainab Salbi: I would say when it comes to the marginalized population -- and it is a huge percentage of the population -- this can be generalized. I was in other provinces, for example. Interviewing women in Karbala and Najaf and Hilla, the gist of it is what they're saying. They're saying, "America gave us freedom but took away from us security. And if we have to choose between freedom and security, we would choose security." But then the question became when I asked them about the freedom they're-they're talking about. Can you criticize Moqtada al-Sadr? Can you criticize [Abdul Aziz] al-Hakim? No. Can you criticize militia so-and-so? No. And so eventually that -- even that freedom shrank back into the old patterns of behavior. We're afraid of saying anything. So that's very much actually and not only with the marginalized population. I would say still very much among the whole population. There is still a level of fear. Both from the backgrounnd, the history of the country. Remember this is only seven years ago people were very scared of Saddam Hussein's regime but also because this is a real fact: Militias as well as governments are taking revenge and this is a fact that people are afraid of expressing their political opinions because they don't know what's going to happen to them.

Abderrahim Foukara: Well obviously a lot of people were afraid of expressing their opinions even after Saddam Hussein, to what extent do they feel marginalized today post-2003 and how does that compare with this situation prior to 2003?

Zainab Salbi: So let me ask -- answer it this way, Saddam Hussein's regime, or Saddam Hussein's time, gave and took away from Iraqi women, gave them massive campaign of illiteracy [C.I. note, she means a literacy campaign] for example, education access was very much promoted among women, promotion in the public sector as working women very much was promoted particularly in the seventies and the eighties. Took away from them the sense of security in a government controlled way in other words any woman was vulnerable to government torture or rape or whatever but it was what I call a vertical violence by the government against the population. Took away from them many other issues for example multiple marriages were encouraged by Saddam particularly the nineties. Took away from them mobility to travel the country without a companion. So it gave and it took away.

Asked what most surprised her in her visits and interviews with Iraqi women, Zainab Salbi responded, "They are very strong."

Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a bombing outside Falluja which claimed 1 life, a bombing outside Baquba which left three Iraqi soldiers wounded and a Mosul mortar attack which injured three police officers.

Shootings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 merchant shot dead in Mosul (had "received threats by phone few days ago").

From the physical violence to attacks on the Iraqi press. Yesterday, Billie noted a story written up in the Dallas Morning News' "Update: War report" which is an AP item about the $87,000 judgment against Al-Sharqiya by Iraqi 'courts' which, the item says, was "falsely reporting that orders had been issued to arrest ex-detainees released by the United States." I haven't read the verdict -- has anyone? I know AP hasn't. And I know that's not AP's understanding of the verdict or wasn't yesterday. I think, in squashing things into news briefs, something got lost. The case was over an Iraqi official speaking on the record to the TV station for their report. They quoted him. In addition, they spoke with other officials who did not go on the record. One such official's statements were wrongly -- according to the TV station -- credited to the one who went on the record. The lawsuit was over that issue: Who made the statement with the official who went on the record stating he had not done so (the TV station admitted that) and stating his name had been defamed by the broadcast. The court was not being aske to rule on the report itself. Nor was the court in the position to. The verdict is yet another assault on journalistic freedom in Iraq. And the sum is outrageous for a country that repeatedly tries to scrap their meager rations programs for citizens and thinks a few hundred dollars given to the (small number) of returnees should be enough to tide them over for a full year. Today the International Press Institute released the following:

Just days after the Iraqi government published a draft law that appears to pave the way for government interference in the media, a 100 million Iraqi dinar (€60,000) fine levied on Wednesday against Iraqi satellite broadcaster Al-Sharqiya for "misquoting" a top military spokesperson is another ominous signal that press freedom in Iraq is deteriorating, the International Press Institute (IPI) warned on Friday. An Iraqi court ordered the fine against Al-Sharqiya for slander, according to media reports, following a complaint filed in April by Major-General Qassim al-Moussawi, the Iraqi military's main spokesperson in Baghdad. Al-Moussawi claimed that the broadcaster misrepresented him by quoting him as stating that ex-detainees released by the United States would be rearrested by Iraqi authorities. The major-general claims to have said only that ex-detainee files would be reviewed as part of an investigation into complicity in recent bombings. The court decision comes amid growing fears of an increase in state pressure on the media in Iraq. On 31 July, the Iraqi government presented a draft law ostensibly aimed at protecting journalists, but containing as well worrying provisions that could have a negative impact on media freedom. Vague wording in the draft prohibiting journalists from "compromising the security and stability of the country" could be used to stifle criticism, and the right to protect sources is annulled if "the law requires the source to be revealed." The bill also stipulates that freedom of the press can be suspended if a publication threatens citizens or makes "provocative or aggressive statements." Local Iraqi media freedom organisations, such as the Journalistic Freedoms Observatory (JFO), have expressed concern over the draft law, which they see as "the beginning of the imposition of restrictions on journalists, as well as the government's reorganising control over information." "Whatever this law gives in the left hand it seizes back with the right," Ziad al Ajili, JFO manager, told IPI. "Best for us as journalists is to have the right of access to information, and laws guaranteeing freedom of expression, not laws surrounding us with any kind of restriction." IPI Deputy Director Michael Kudlak warned Iraq against taking a step backwards by restricting media freedoms.
"We again urge Iraq's judiciary and legislature to be mindful of the vital role played by media freedom while nurturing democracy," he said. "Legislation that pushes journalists into self-censorship is a step backwards, not forwards. At this stage, it appears as though the Iraq government is taking a step backwards." IPI's latest warning came as Iraqis including journalists, writers and booksellers demonstrated in Baghdad on Friday against what they allege is state censorship.

Today in Baghdad, thousands of demonstrators marched through the streets carrying banners and protesting. BBC has video here. Aljazeera explains they were protesting "against government censorship and intimidation" and notes a threatened law suit, "Jalal Eddin Saghir, a leader of the SIIC, has threatened to sue Ahmed Abdul-Hussein, a journalist with the state-run Al-Sabah newspaper, for suggesting that the party could have staged the robbery to raise money for national elections in January 2010." The SIIC, returning to our earlier conversation, would be "thugs." AFP notes journalist Emad al-Khafaji speaking at the demonstration, "Journalists and media workers have lost 247 of their colleagues over the past six years because of attacks and violations. The participants in this demonstration have confirmed they will not back down in the face of intimidation and threats."


British citizen Danny Fitzsimons is facing a trial in Iraq and could be sentenced to death. He served in the British military for eight years and was stationed in Afghanistan and Kosovo. He is accused of being the shooter in a Sunday Green Zone incident in which 1 British contractor, Paul McGuigan, and 1 Australian contractor, Darren Hoare, died and one Iraqi, Arkhan Madhi, was injured. Eric and Liz Fitzsimons spoke to the BBC (link has video) and noted that they are not asking for Danny to 'walk.' They stated that he has to take responsibility. But they want a fair trial and do not believe that is possible in Iraq. His legal defense team doesn't believe he can get a fair trial either stating today that the British military's presence in Iraq during the war means that Fitzsimons will be used as scapegoat. Haroon Siddique (Guardian) spoke with the family and reports on Danny's PTSD and reports, "His borther Michael said Fitzsimons would cray as he told of finding a child's head in Kosovo, picking up bits of his friend's brain in Iraq, and the faces of enemies he had killed in combat." Terri Judd (Independent of London) quotes Danny's father Eric stating that his son is a victim in the shooting as well, "We do feel very, very sorry for these two men and their families. But Daniel is also a victim." Liz Fitzsimons, Danny's step-mother, has made similar remarks and noted the pain those two families are going through is immense and natural and their own efforts, the Fitzsimons' efforts, are not about preventing accountability for Danny but about getting him to stand trial in a country (England) that has a working legal system as opposed to Iraq which does not.
In the US Zachary Abrahamson and Eamon Javers (Politico) report: "He may be presiding over two wars and facing a terror threat at home and abroad, but you'd hardly know it from listening to President Barack Obama speak.Obama has uttered more than a half-million words in public since taking office Jan. 20 -- and a POLITICO analysis of nearly every word in this vast public record shows that domestic topics dominate, so much so that Obama sounds more like a peacetime president than a commander in chief with more than 100,000 troops in the field." Yes, Barack has avoided Iraq in his speeches, the reporters are correct. Guess what though? The press has avoided it too. Following a March press conference, Steve Padilla (Los Angeles Times) pointed out that 13 reporters asked Barack questions and Iraq "Never came up. Isn't there a war going on?" The the New York Times' live blogged that press conference:

Helene Cooper 9:01 p.m. I'm still slackjawed over the shocking lack of national security issues raised. This is a new world we're living in, after seven years of Al Qaeda, Iraq and Afghanistan. Hard to imagine a Bush press conference focusing so singularly on the economy, but then, these are clearly different times.Jeff Zeleny 9:00 p.m. The second prime-time press conference for Mr. Obama is in the books. Thirteen questions, but not one about Iraq or Afghanistan. That would have been impossible to imagine during his presidential campaign. So what's the headline? "Hang on Americans, We'll Get Through This."The Washington Post live blogged as well (Ben Pershing, Alec MacGillis, Glenn Kessler, Frank Ahrens and Michael Fletcher live blogged for the Post).


TV notes. NOW on PBS rebroadcasts a show from March of this year on what happens to your health care if you lose your job? You can go on COBRA . . . if you can afford it. (A community member writes in today's gina & krista round-robin about paying approximately $250 a month and now, to get COBRA, she'll have to pay over $750 a month -- and you have to decide in the very brief window of time.) The program examines Las Vegas where "the only public hospital" closed the doors on "cancer patients and pregnant women". On Washington Week, Gwen sits around the table with Michael Duffy (Time magazine), Janet Hook (Los Angeles Times), James Kitfield (National Journal) and Janine Zacharia (Bloomberg News). Bonnie Erbe and her guestsEleanor Holmes Norton, Melinda Henneberger, Leslie Sanchez and Sabrina Schaeffer explore population growth on this week's edition of PBS' To The Contrary. Check local listings, all four PBS shows begin airing tonight on many PBS stations. And turning to broadcast TV, Sunday CBS' 60 Minutes offers:
Coming Up On 60 Minutes
Michael Vick The former pro quarterback speaks in his first interview since he admitted to participating in the illegal dogfighting that resulted in a prison sentence and his suspension from the NFL. James Brown is the correspondent. Watch Video
America's New Air Force Increasingly, the U.S. military is relying on un-manned, often armed aircraft to track and destroy the enemy - sometimes controlled from bases thousands of miles away from the battlefront. Lara Logan reports. Watch Video
Coldplay The British rock group that has taken its place among the most popular bands in the world gives 60 Minutes a rare look inside its world that includes a candid interview with frontman Chris Martin. Steve Kroft reports. Watch Video
60 Minutes Sunday, Aug. 16, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.

iraq
dahr jamail
nprthe diane rehm show
the los angeles timesned parker
the guardianharoon siddiqueterri juddthe independent of london
politicozachary abrahamsoneamon javers
steve padillathe los angeles timesthe washington postmichael d. shearscott wilsonben pershingalec macgillisglenn kesslerfrank ahrensmichael fletcherthe new york timeshelene cooperjeff zeleny
60 minutescbs newspbsto the contrarybonnie erbenow on pbs