Meaning?

"Does the 2012 Election Mean Anything to African America?" (Glen Ford, Black Agenda Report):

Once black America gets beyond bragging rights, what difference have presidential and congressional politics made lately? What, if anything is likely to change when Democrats or Republicans win or lose Congress and/or the White House in 2012? Can we really say that who wins or loses this election will really change how and how well we live? The honest answer is probably not.

Neither Democrats nor Republicans will do anything to stop the nationwide wave of foreclosures that have cut the average net worth of black families in half the last four years? Neither Democrats nor Republicans want to prosecute the Wall Street criminals who crashed the housing market and walked away with a fifth or more of all the nation's $401K savings in the last few years. Democrats and Republicans agree that US citizens, and citizens of anyplace else can pretty much be kidnapped, tortured, imprisoned for life or killed without being convicted, or even charged with anything in particular. Neither of the two parties will wind down the oil and resource wars the US is waging from Afghanistan and Yemen to Somalia and the Congo, bring the troops home from 140 foreign countries and spend that money on schools, libraries, transit, job creation and neighborhoods near you. Both parties agree on the runaway privatizations of roads, schools, the post office, public utilities and broadcast frequencies. Neither cares about urban gentrification, the loss of black-owned farmland, or mass incarceration. Both agree on laying off public school teachers an d letting corporate criminals who poison our rivers, our air, our people and environment, and neither intends to protect and expand social security.

I don't think it does, I don't the it has any meaning for Black America.

I think it could.

Like in "The Bad Seed" where the mother's willing to take the blame with Rhoda, where she's willing to say, "This happened because of my own foolishness so I will take the punishment." 

So we could take the attitude, as a commmunity, that he's done nothing but hurt us so we will be the ones responsible for ensuring he gets less and less votes by, community-wide, refusing to support him.

That would be such a powerful message.  But we don't have the guts to do it.

"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):

Wednesday, January 4, 2012.  Chaos and violence continue, Barack pretends he cares about oversight and accountability and the uniformed American press doesn't know what's going on (as usual) or which four oversight positions are, as of today, empty, Nouri's breaking the Iraqi Constitution again but no one's supposed to notice, and more.   Nouri al-Maliki has an affinity for breaking the Constitution.  Repeatedly.  Recently, he's broken Article 19's Fifth Clause.   The accused is innocent until proven guilty in a fair legal trial.  The accused may not be tried on the same crime for a second time after acquittal unless new evidence is produced.   Nouri's statements and those of other members of State of Law regarding Iraqi Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi have not presumed innocence.  No trial has taken place but Nouri and his associates have repeatedly and publicly pronounced al-Hashemi guilty.   Today Nouri manages to break the Constitution again.  Khalid Al Ansary and Nayla Razzouk (Bloomberg News) report that he placed "all eight government ministers from the Sunni Muslim-backed al-Iraqiya alliance on leave" according to his spokesperon Ali al-Musawi.  Where in the country's constitution does that power exist?   Oh, right, it doesn't.  Those eight ministers were confirmed in their posts by Parliament (in other words they're not 'acting' anything, they are the ministers, per the Constitution). His only power after a minister is confirmed by Parliament?  Outlined in Article 75:   The Prime Minister is the direct executive authority responsible for the general policy of the State and the commander in chief of the armed forces.  He directs the Council of Ministers, and presides over its meetings and has the right to dismiss the Ministers on the consent of the Council of Representatives.   He is not allowed to strip a minister of their post without the consent of Parliament.  Iraqiya has been boycotting the Cabinet and Parliament -- this started last month over the failure of Nouri to live up to the Erbil Agreement that ended the eight month political stalemate following the March 2010 elections.  If Nouri now wants the ministers dismissed -- for any reason -- he needs to go to Parliament.   He has no right to put them on "leave."  There is nothing in the Constitution that gives him this right.  Per the Constitution, a Minister can only be stripped of their post (which would include their duties) if the Parliament agrees to it.  The Parliament still hasn't set a date on hearing Nouri's demand from last month (December 17th) that Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq be stripped of his post.  They certainly haven't agreed to strip eight ministers of their post.  Reider Visser (Gulf Analysis) on al-Mutlaq:     In another sign of Maliki's inability to proceed with a bolder course in parliament, no vote of no confidence in vice premier Salih al-Mutlak, also of the Iraqiyya party, was held. The true test, however, will come later in the month with an expected national conference to deal with the latest political unrest. It is noteworthy that Maliki has used the past few weeks to speak out vocally against several power-sharing clauses of the shadowy Arbil framework that led to the creation of his second government in December 2010. This continued a trend seen throughout 2011, when Maliki increasingly sought to evade any discussion of the exact contents of that agreement.     It would be nice if reporters covering Iraq would learn the Constitution.  Then, for example, they might be able to note when something was being done illegally.  And, yes, if something's done that's not permitted the Constitution, a journalist can note that in their report.  It's not opinion, it's the law.   So Bloomberg's report is worthless as is Prashant Rao's report for AFP which opens, "Iraq's premier backed off threats to fire ministers boycotting cabinet, instead naming temporary replacements Wednesday, as the UN voiced concern over a row that has stoked sectarian tensions."    Sidebar, while we're on the Constitution.  If someone asks you when Iraq holds elections next, the answer is not, 'The last ones were in March 2010 so four years from that.'  The approprirate answer is that with each election -- provincial or parliament (and excepting KRG's provincial elections which are run smoothly) -- Iraq has taken longer and longer to hold elections.  That's (A).  (B) March has nothing to do with the next elections.  The thing to determine is when was the first Parliament session?  In the late spring of 2010 or in November?  Arguments can be made for either.  But, per the Constitution, you go by the first session of Parliament.  Article 54: "First: The electoral term of Council of Representatives shall be limited to four calendar years, starting with its first session and ending with the conclusion of the fourth year."   Again, it will be interesting to see -- if early elections do not take place -- which session of Parliament will be considered the "first" session.  From there, you count back 45 days.  Article 54: "Second: The new Council of Representatives shall be elected 45 days before the conclusion of the previous electoral term."   What Nouri's doing with the Cabinet isn't covered by the Constitution.   He is not solely responsible for the Cabinet.  He can not pick someone to be a minister and have them be a real minister without Parliament confirming them.  He can not strip anyone of their title without Parliament approving.    What Nouri has done is illegal and unconstitutional.  Reporters who can't make that point, really have nothing to say.     With no eye to the comic possibilities, President Jalal Talabani issued a statement today, Aswat al-Iraq reports, noting that the government is committed to the supremacy of law. Aswat al-Iraq notes State of Law MP Ali al-Shalah, criticizing Paul Bremer (and possibly Bremer's call for Iraq to become a federation), states that "when Bremer left Iraq, the security situation was on the brink of disaster and the country not unified, but today the situation is different."  The country is unified?  It's like reading The Onion.   Let's move over to the US quickly.  Today, Time magazine notes, US President Barack Obama had a lot to say about his recess apointment of Richard Cordray (of course it was a man, wasn't it?)  as the director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.  And Barack's remarks included:   The only reason Republicans in the Senate have blocked Richard is because they don't agree with the law setting up the consumer watchdog. They want to weaken it. Well that makes no sense at all. Does anyone think the reason we got in such a financial mess was because of too much oversight? Of course not. We shouldn't be weakening oversight and accountability.   So we need oversight and accountability?  That's important to Barack, is it?   Why is it December 7th sticks in my head right now?  Oh, right.  The US House Oversight and Government Reform's National Security Subcommittee held a hearing that day.  Who gave testimony?  Oh, that's right, appearing before Congress were the Defense Department's Inspector General Gordon S. Heddell, the State Department's Deputy Inspector General Harold Geisel, US AID's Acting Inspector General Michael Carroll, the acting Inspector General for the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction and the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction Stuart Bowen. And if, January 17th, the House wanted to hear from these witnesses about what was going on right now, who could give knowledgable testimony?    Only Bowen.  He's the only one who would still be in the position listed by his name above.  From that Decemember hearing, let's note the Chair.   Subcommittee Chair Jason Chaffetz: Before recognizing Ranking Member [John] Tierney, I'd like to note that the Defense Dept, State Dept, USAID and SIGAR will not have IGs in January. In May of this year, I wrote the President asking him to move without delay to appoint replacements. That letter was signed by Senators [Joe] Lieberman, [Susan] Collins, [Claire] McCaskill and [Rob] Portman, as well as [House Oversight Committee] Chairman [Darrell] Issa and Ranking Member [Elijah] Cummings and Ranking Member Tierney. I'd like to place a copy of this record into the record. Without objection, so ordered. To my knowledge, the President has yet to nominate any of these replacements, nor has he responded to this letter. I find that totally unacceptable. This is a massive, massive effort. It's going to take some leadership from the White House. These jobs cannot and will not be done if the president fails to make these appointments. Upon taking office, President Obama promised that his administration would be "the most open and transparent in history." You cannot achieve transparency without inspectors general. Again, I urge President Obama and the Senate to nominate and confirm inspectors general to fill these vacancies and without delay   So today, Barack insists oversight and accountability are important -- laughable when the State Department has repeatedly avoided breaking down their basic budgets with Stuart Bowen.  But let's pretend Barack's serious.  Why is he not filling those position?  Billions of dollars have been lost in war spending and he's pretending he cares about accountability and oversight while letting those positions go vacant?  In that December hearing, US House Rep Raul Labrador observed, "Yet this panel is representing the IG offices principally responsible for overseeing tax payer money in Iraq and Afghanistan and, as of January 4th of next year, four of the five offices will not have an IG."   Do you know what today is?    January 4th.   Will the lazy ass American press ever do their job?   Magic 8 Ball says: "Reply hazy, try again."   [For more on that hearing, see "Iraq snapshot," "Assault on transparency (Ava)" and "Obama refuses to name nominees."]     Meanwhile, still in the US, Media Matters self-presents as a watchdog.  But instead of watching out, it offers snark.  Snark that doesn't even make sense.  Snark that wastes time and actually helps War Hawks.   So Media Matters has sent something to the public e-mail account.  'What does it say?' I asked.  I had to find a laptop because it's nothing but a video -- and a clip at that -- not a video of them speaking themselves, just something they captured.    The first question is obvious:  Is that how Barack looked in the Iowa address?  If so, there is something wrong with his make up.  [Click here for AP video, it is how he looked.  Note the eye lids for his actual skin color and then check out the ridiculous foundation they've painted on him.  He looks like a clown, an orange clown]    The title of their post is "The Premature Evacuation Of Iraq Is So Rapid, We Basically Have Left That Country In Total Chaos."  And, at the very end of the dumb clip, someone on Fox News says that.      Judging by the comments readers are leaving, we're supposed to chuckle at how stupid Fox News is.  The stupidity is on the part of those leaving comments like this one "If Brian thinks nearly 10 years of occupation is premature evacuation his girlfriend must get bored."  That doesn't even make sense.  Not even on the joke level.  "His girlfriend must be sore!"  That's a stupid remark that does finish out the idiot theme the comment was trying to maintain.  (Though "premature evacuation," pay attention, would more likely be the basis for a spastic colon joke.)    In fairness to the readers, why should they show logic when Media Matters apparently didn't.   I don't watch Fox News, I have no idea the name of the man speaking, nor do I need to know who it was.  But what I do know is that the White House spent 2011 trying to extend the Status Of Forces Agreement and willing to go with a new agreement if need be.  And then in October, they were told Nouri would give immunity but that the Parliament wouldn't.  (In December, the Parliament offered "limited immunity" -- the talks continue.)  In October, with no immunity, the White House announced they were removing US troops.  That is most likely the point being made in the Fox News clip.  (Most likely?  Despite starting with Barack and boring us all with his orange face, the clip ends with that one line from the Fox News guy.  If he said more, it's not in the clip.)   If Media Matters can't follow the argument being made, then they really are stupid.  What's worse though is that they're probably not stupid, they're probably trying to play people for fools by mis-presenting the argument.   The November 15th Senate Armed Services Committee hearing was only one hearing where this was addressed and, hate to break it to the Media Matters geniuses, elected Democrats publicly voiced concerns about the administration's move as well.  This was especially true in the House.   And those concerns should be addressed, not snarked about.  Christmas Eve, Kenneth M. Pollack (Brookings Institution) observed,  "Make no mistake about it: the current crisis, manufactured by Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki for reasons that only he knows for sure, is of seminal importance for Iraq. Right now, it seems far more likely to end badly rather than well. And if it ends badly, it could easily usher in renewed civil war, a highly unstable dictatorship, or even a Somali-like failed state. Not only would this be a humiliation for the Obama administration -- which justified the withdrawal of American troops by insisting that Iraq was well on the way to democratizing and did not need an ongoing U.S. peacekeeping presence -- it would be a major threat to American vital interests in the Persian Gulf region." These are serious issues and, apparently, far beyond anything Media Matters can handle because they just want to snark.    So maybe they should do everyone a favor and just not tackle Iraq?  If they can't present a coherent, factual argument regarding Iraq, maybe they should find other topics?    Repeating: When you distort the facts, you don't anyone any favors.  Ten years from now, War Hawks will be able to point to the Media Matters item as proof of how their side, their position was distorted.  This garbage from Media Matters breeds backlashes.  It's a real shame that what was supposed to be a site of integrity that provided fact checking from the left has instead descended into cheap distortions.  But then Media Matters isn't about peace or antiwar, it's just another cheap whore for Barack.    Reality via James Cogan (WSWS): "The Obama administration and the US military agreed to remove all combat troops, as stipulated in the Status of Forces agreement reached in 2008, only after they failed to bully the Iraqi regime into allowing thousands of troops to remain under a blanket exemption from prosecution under Iraqi law."   Back to Iraq where Talabani met with the UN Special Envoy to Iraq Martin Kobler and Kobler's office later issued the following statement:   Baghdad, 4 January 2012- The Special Representative of the United Nations Secretary-General for Iraq (SRSG), Martin Kobler, met today in Sulymaniya the President of the Republic of Iraq, H.E. Jalal Talabani. He also met in Erbil yesterday with the President of the Kurdistan Region, H.E. Masoud Barzani; the Speaker of the Iraqi Kurdistan Region's Parliament, Mr. Kamal Kirkouki; and the Minister of Interior, Mr. Karim Sinjari. The SRSG discussed in all his meetings the latest political developments in Iraq including the recent political tensions. He expressed concern about the current political stalemate in the country. He urged Iraqi political parties and leaders to work together in the spirit of partnership towards finding a common ground to resolve their differences on the basis of the Constitution through meaningful dialogue and compromise as stated by the UN Secretary-General in a statement issued yesterday, 3 January 2012.  He assured all his interlocutors of the readiness of the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) to support Iraqi leaders' efforts to promote confidence and trust among the parties at this important juncture in the history of Iraq.   In addition to Kobler meeting with Kurdistan Regional Government President Massoud Barzanai, US Senator Joe Lieberman met with Barzani on Tuesday where the two "discussed the ongoing political crisis on the one hand and the differences between State of Law [Nouri's political slate] and Iraqiya [Ayad Allawi's slate] on the other hand."  Monday, Robert Grenier analyzed Iraq's political crisis at Al Jazeera: Yes, Iraq's Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has always shown autocratic tendencies, unsurprisingly given the traditional political role models with which Iraqis are working. And yes, he has long over-centralised security power in his own hands, maintaining personal control over the Interior, Defence and National Security Ministries and making the Baghdad Operations Command directly answerable to his personal office. But this, too, is not entirely unexpected, given the tenuousness of Iraqi internal security. And finally, yes, Abu Isra has been transparently uncomfortable in sharing any authority with the Iraqiyya bloc, the largest vote-getter in the last elections, and has essentially reneged on many of the elaborate power-sharing arrangements reached in the so-called Irbil accords, which facilitated formation of his government. But again, here too, Maliki has not been entirely outside his rights. He did, after all, form the most viable parliamentary coalition, giving him the right to form a government, and the vague provisions for an extraordinary National Security Council to be chaired by his chief political rival, and to which key domestic and national security policies were to be referred, were simply never realistic. Now, however, only days after the final withdrawal of American troops, it is clear that al-Maliki has finally gone too far. His recent actions have served to strip the veneer of legitimacy from his past policies, and have revealed those past actions as the precursors to a naked power-grab. Beginning with the sudden and summary arrest of some 615 alleged Baathists, including many of Maliki's political enemies and conducted while the final push to evacuate the last of the US troops was conveniently underway, the Iraqi prime minister has gone on to press politically-motivated terrorism charges against Vice-President Tariq al-Hashemi, a Sunni Islamist and a prominent member of Iraqiyya. At the same time, the Shia Maliki has moved to orchestrate a parliamentary no-confidence vote to oust Sunni deputy Prime Minister Saleh Mutlaq, another prominent member of Iraqiyya, ostensibly over a personal slight. Other political opponents have awakened to find tanks around their homes.   While the political crisis continues,  the editorial board of the Toledo Blade notes, "Iraq will get fighter jets, tanks, and a wide range of other weapons. With the final withdrawal of U.S. forces last month, Iraq is on the verge of armed conflict between its majority Shiites and minority Sunnis. Its armed forces are little more than pickup squads of Shiite militias, ready to go after Sunnis and possibly each other." And the UN News Center notes: Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon today expressed concern about continuing political tensions in Iraq, urging all parties in the Middle East country "to work to resolve their differences peacefully through meaningful dialogue and compromise." In a statement issued by his spokesperson, the Secretary-General said the ongoing issues could contribute to insecurity in the country, which has been hit by a series of recent bomb attacks. "It is essential that pending political issues are resolved in a way that respects the constitution and its provisions for the separation of powers, the rule of law and an independent judiciary," the statement noted. As Sheikh (Dar Addustour) reports that the national conference President Jalal Talabani has been advocating for seems unlikely according to the latest indicators. However, State of Law MP Abbas al-Bayati tells Aswat al-Iraq that the conference should take place near the middle of January.  Meanwhile yesterday there were reports about Iraqiya continuing their boycott of Parliament; however, Dar Addustour reports that the Kurdish Alliance walked out yesterday in portest of State of Law's Hussein al-Assadi's assertion that Talabani (president of Iraq and a Kurd) is a "terrorist." Kurdish MP Mohsen Saadoun called for a formal apology as Parliament convened and what followed was a loud disagreement with the Kurdish Alliance then walking out. Parliament stopped the session until the Kurds returned at which point they resumed the reading of nine bills. In addition, Aswat al-Iraq notes: A meeting between leaders of Iraq' main political parties ended on Wednesday, without any result, following al-Iraqiya Bloc's demand to discuss the case of Iraq's Vice-President, Tareq al-Hashimy, wanted for charges related to terrorism, according to a source close to the meeting. "The meeting that began at 10:00 AM local time has ended without any result, due to al-Iraqiya Bloc's demand to discuss the case of Vice-President, Tareq al-Hashimy, within the schedule of the meeting," the source told Aswat al-Iraq news agency. In Iraq today, AGI reports a 6-year-old girl is dead from a series of Baquba bombings which left eight more people dead. AFP notes there were five bombs which went off "at short intervals." While AGI and AFP report the girl was a 6-year-old, Jomana Karadsheh (CNN) reports the girl was nine. Reuters ups the wounded count to twelve (also states the girl was 6-years-old) and notes a Samarra grenade attack has killed 1 police officer (three more injured), a Baquba bombing claimed the life of 1 young boy (two more injured),  and, dropping back to last night, notes 1 police officer shot dead in Baghdad and 2 Iraqi soldiers shot dead in Mosul. AP reports two children were killed in the Baquba bombings. In addition, AP notes that an Abu Ghraib home invasion resulted in 2 deaths (husband and wife).     Quickly, January 17 was picked for the House example above because that's when the House goes back into session (the Senate does on the 23rd).  A number are asking in e-mails if hearings start this week.  No.  Although the US Congress did start back up this time last year, they've pushed it back to the middle of January for the 112th Congress.       iraq wsws james cogan agi afp cnn jomana karadsheh reuters the associated press the toledo bladethe seattle times jonathan webb dar addustour as sheikh aswat al-iraq al jazeera robert grenier

Brian Carter, NPR's latest racist

If you missed "All Things Considered" today, you missed this report featuring the latest racist NPR's chosen to uphold as an expert, University of Michigan's Brian Carter.

And there's no excuse for NPR featuring that racist.

Aretha's launching a search for classical music singers.  The winners she picks will be signed to her recording album and she will handle their albums.

White Brian Carter says during the 'report' that this would be like him picking the next R&B singer.

Yeah, Massuh, Brian, us Black folk, wez nots knowz nuthing bout no classical music.

How racist.

Because Aretha is Black, she doesn't know classical music?

She not only a world class singer -- who sings R&B, jazz, pop and, yes, classical, she's also a world class pianist.

And, get it Massuh Brian, it's her damn music label.  I don't think Brian would soak his drawers at the thought of Clive Davis signing classical singers. But if it's a Black -- and especially a Black woman -- it's time to insist that she's not qualifed.

She's not qualified to run her own label?

Fat ass racist.  Brian Cater is a racist.  He owes Aretha an apology, he owes all of us an apology.

"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):

Tuesday, January 3, 2011.  Chaos and violence continue, the political crisis continues, Jalal Talabani is called a "terrorist" by State of Law, Moqtada al-Sadr reportedly will not attend a national conference, the Iranian government expresses displeasure over the MEK, and more.   "Recently the media has been filled with announcements that the war in Iraq has finally ended.  But in a war fought not only by enlisted foot soldiers, but also largely by corporations, mercenaries, and drones, what constitutes an end?" asks Iraq War Veterans Against the War's Joyce Wagner: Although it is an important and significant milestone, the withdrawal of troops from Iraq does not necessarily signify an end to occupation.  The US footprint is still heavy in the form of corporate contractors who employ indentured servants (under the euphemism "third country nationals") and mercenaries without oversight, accountability, or transparency. The Iraqi resistance movement is preparing for what it calls, "the second face of the occupation."  According to a statement released by Uday al-Zaidi, this includes structures imposed by the US such as the sectarian government and its divisive constitution.  Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have been killed, families have been destroyed, displaced, and forced into refugee status all over the world.  We support self-determination for the people of Iraq, and continue to work toward our goal of making reparation with the people who have been so deeply affected by this war and its aftermath. [. . .] Meanwhile, over 4,000 American service members have been killed, and many more are living with physical disabilities and invisible wounds, such as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Military Sexual Trauma, and Major Depressive Disorder.  Troops are living with undiagnosed traumatic brain injuries, many of which go undetected for months or even years.  Instead of being treated when they return, many service members receive orders to deploy to Afghanistan, even though a part of them remains at war in Iraq.  If this nation wants to honor its veterans, we need them to honor our right to heal.   And, of course, some who might be thought to be returning will remain to guard the embassy and train on weapons and, in addition, many have instead been repostured (Pentagon's term) into surrounding countries with the plan that they can dart back into Iraq should the White House determine that this is needed.  Ted Koppel established that fact with a report last month on Rock Center with Brian Williams (NBC):   Ted Koppel: This is the man who might actually have to deal with that nightmare, Lt Gen Robert Caslan. General, how are you going to get 1320 people out of there? I mean if you've 24 hours notice that something like this was going to happen, you're telling me the Iraqi government would evacuate immediately? Would get them all out of there? Lt Gen Robert Caslan: I would argue that we do have, in theater, whether it's in Kuwait or elsewhere in theater, that we fall under the central command, Centcom, and I feel confident that Centcom has the necessary assets to take whatever measures they need to to counter that attack. In Iraq currently, Rebecca Santana (AP) reports that some Sunnis are exiting mixed neighborhoods out of fear.  Why?  The political crisis has frightened them.  It started with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki ordering questionable arrests of Sunnis -- over 500 of them.  He insisted they were "terrorists" and "Ba'athists."  More recently, after a trip to DC and photo ops with Barack Obama, Nouri began going after Iraqi politicians. Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi went to the KRG on business and, the day after he arrived, Nouri al-Maliki has an arrest warrant sworn out on him. Nouri accuses him of being a terrorist.  He currently remains in the KRG, a house guest of President Jalal Talabani. Along with targeting the vice president, Nouri is demanding that Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq be stripped of his duties. Nouri heads the political slate State of Law which came in second in the 2010 elections. Iraqiya, headed by Ayad Allawi, came in first. al-Hashemi and al-Mutlaq are both members of Iraqiya.  The editorial board of the Louisville Courier Journal (via the Leaf Chronicle) covers the political crisis: For starters, the timing supports fears that Mr. al-Maliki is moving to purge the government of meaningful Sunni participation. In addition to seeking Mr. al-Hashemi's arrest, Mr. al-Maliki asked the parliament for a no-confidence vote against another prominent Sunni leader, Saleh al-Mutlaq, a deputy prime minister. Mr. al-Maliki also threatened to exclude Iraqiya, the main Sunni party, from participation in the unity government. Meanwhile, hundreds of former members of the Baath Party, through which Saddam Hussein ruled Iraq as leader of the Sunni minority, have been arrested in recent weeks, and Sunni officials' compounds in Baghdad have been surrounded by Mr. al-Maliki's security forces. All in all, the situation reeks of Shiite vengeance against Sunnis and strongly suggests that Mr. al-Maliki intends to become a new Iraqi dictator. And that possibility, Nouri as the new dictator, may be why the Speaker of Parliment spoke out this week.  Al Mada reports Osama al-Nujaifi has called for the Iraqi military to promote national unity and not suppress the people, noting that human rights abuses by the military are threatening the country. He also called on the military to stay out of political disputes. Dar Addustour adds that he declared public freedoms to be among the most important accomplishments in the transformation of Iraq to a democracy. He decried the use of violence against Iraqis and the arbitrary arrests. AFP quotes al-Nujaifi stating, "We find that human rights in Iraq have suffered massive violations. Human rights have not been achieved amid the deteriorating of the political process in Iraq. It is clear the development of the nation is based on how much human rights are respected. Losing these rights is destroying democracy." Adam Schrek (AP) observes, "The televised comments by Osama al-Nujaifi, one of the country's top Sunni officials, are yet another salvo in a growing political crisis sparked when Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's government issued an arrest warrant for the country's top Sunni politician last month."  Asli Aydintasbas (Newsweek) interviews Iraqi Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi and quotes him stating: The U.S. left my country with challenges beyond our capacity to solve. Maliki cannot be part of a solution. We [Sunnis] cannot reach a reconciliation with Maliki anymore. Anyone else could replace him within the Shiite national alliance. But it has to be someone who believes in rule of law, the future of [Iraqi] institutions   Another member of Iraqiay that Nouri has been targeting is Finance Minister Rafe al-Essawi whom Jack Healy and Michael R. Gordon (New York Times) profiled Saturday and noted that Nouri had tried to get the Cabinet to toss him out but the Cabinet had refused. al-Esawi told the New York Times, "Maliki now wants just to get rid of his partners, to build a dictatorship. He wants to consolidate power more and more. Someone else should be prime minister." The day after the comments ran, there was an attempt on al-Essawi's life.  Press TV reported he was the target of a roadside bombing Sunday which left "three of Essawi's bodyguards, two officers and one soldier" wounded. Dan Morse (Washington Post) reports Essawi is calling for an investigation and Morse writes, "Essawi is widely regarded in Iraq as a moderate official.  But it's no longer just Iraqiya that Nouri's State of Law is going after.  Aswat al-Iraq reports: Al-Iraqiya spokeswoman Maysoon al-Damalouji expressed her astonishment and denunciation of the "irresponsible" statement made by the State of Law MP Hussein al-Asadi against President Jalal Talabani. In a statement issued by her office, received by Aswat al-Iraq, she added that "Al-Iraqiya Bloc considers these statements a new unilateral rule and attacking the partnership in decision making". She added that "the attack against al-Iraqiya Bloc will cover all other political blocs, which warns in severe deterioration in the political situation and demolishing the Iraqi state". Damalouji pointed out that Asadi accused President Talabani with "terrorism" for hosting his deputy Tariq al-Hashimi till a just trial is made. Asked about Talabani being called a terrorist by State of Law, US State Dept spokesperson Victoria Nuland declared in today's press briefing, "Well, we don't think name calling is the right solution here."  Way to stake out a brave position there.   It needs to be noted that Nouri al-Maliki has sued and threatened to sue others for less and yet he has not condemned the statement by a member of his bloc, he's let it linger out there, the charge that Jalal Talabani is a terrorist.  Next time Nouri kicks his feet and screams in public, remember that.  Or remember that it was Saturday when he was claiming people needed to be civil. Iraqi President Jalal Talabani has been calling for a national conference among the political blocs. (And presumably speaking for the two dominant Kurdish parties when he did so.) Iraqiya states that they would attend if Moqtada al-Sadr and Ammar al-Hakim did. Over the weekend, MP Jawad Jubouri (a member of the Sadr bloc) stated that Moqtada would not attend the conference. Yesterday Hossam Acommok (Al Mada) reported that the National Alliance has two conditions for attending: (1) the conference must take place in Baghdad and (2) the issue of charges and criminal investigations will not be on the agenda. Aswat al-Iraq added that Iraqiya says it will end its boycott of Parliament and the cabinet (according to Kurdish MP Ashwaq al-Jaf) if Tareq al-Hashemi's case is transferred to Kirkuk.  Alsumaria TV reports on the issue of transferring al-Hashemi's case to Kirkuk, "Higher Judicial Council of Iraq denied, on Tuesday, having approved to transfer Iraqi Vice-President Tarek Al Hashemi's case to Kirkuk. Hashemi's case will remain in Baghdad, Higher Judicial Council announced noting that it will be examined by a judicial body of nine judges."  As the crisis continues, Victoria Nuland declared today, " Well, Ambassador [James] Jeffrey has been in and out of Iraq throughout this period. As you know, he's been talking to all of the major Iraqi leaders. The Vice President [Joe Biden] as well made some key phone calls in the days before and after Christmas, trying to encourage Iraqis to come together and have a conversation about the issues that divide them, and we remain closely monitoring that situation. But there do seem to be a great number more important voices inside Iraq making the same points, that they need to find a forum, sit down together, and work it through."   Today Parliament was supposed to convene.  Reuters reports Iraqiya maintained their boycott (al-Nujaifi was present as has been the tradition when Iraqiya boycotts or walks out -- that was the established pattern in November 2010).  In additition, Reuters notes all eight Iraqiya cabinet ministers boycotted yesterday's Cabinet meeting.  An Iraqi correspondent for McClatchy Newspapers reports (at Inside Iraq) on a visit to an MP's office and concludes, "Even after eight years of what so called FREEDOM and even after three elections, Iraqis are still loyal to sect and race more than being loyal to Iraq and it seems that we will need more time to change the sick mentality of race and sect and move to the mentality of the country."     Jim Loney (Reuters) takes a look at various factors that may be political risks for Iraq, "The political crisis and the Exxon pact could push disputes between Baghdad and the Kurds to new heights, increasing anxiety in Iraq's disputed territories, already a potential faultline for conflict without U.S. troops to act as a buffer." Today Suadad al-Salhy (Reuters) runs down possible outcomes of the crisis including: Maliki could also face opposition within his own bloc, where some factions appeared to be using the crisis to push for a new prime minister or to negotiate for posts or other benefits. Maliki's move against Hashemi and his demand that parliament dump Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq, another Sunni leader, sparked Iraq's worst political crisis in a year. The Shia leader has presented Iraqiya with a challenge to sideline Hashemi, one of its senior leaders, or lose its sway in government. Iraqiya may ultimately have to decide whether it stays together or splinters, and cracks have already appeared. Reuters notes a Baghdad roadside bombing left three people injured, a second roadside bombing injured three police officers and one bystander, the Muqdadiya home of a Sahwa was attacked "killing him and wounding his wife," a Mosul roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 police officer and left another injured, a Kirkuk sticky bombing injured one peshmerga, an attack on Mosul checkpoint left two police officers and one bystander injured and another Mosul roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 Iraqi soldier.     Meanwhile AFP reports the Iraq Body Count says approximately 162,000 Iraqis were killed in the war. You can read IBC's report in full here. A Lancet study found over a million dead several years ago and Iraq Body Count has come under criticism for undercounting the dead. It is also true that, unlike Reuters, AP, et al, they actually keep track of reported deaths and don't just blindly repeat the 'official' figures from the Iraqi government (figures that have been wrong month after month -- the government undercounts the dead). Worst reaction to the results thus far? Eric Engleman (Bloomberg News) uses it to insist that "more than 114,000 civilians have died" -- they just can't handle big numbers, they will always undercount the dead. Iran's Fars News Agency reports today, "The Iranian foreign ministry called for the rapid expulsion of the terrorist Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) from neighboring Iraq, and called on the European countries which support the terrorist group to shelter its members. [. . .] Since the beginning of 2011, the Baghdad government has repeatedly assured Iranian officials and people that it is determd to expel the MKO from Iraq by the end of 2011."  While Iran continues to insist the Camp Ashraf residents must be evicted, Manisha Mistry (UK's St Albans & Harpenden Review) reports, "The Bishop of St Albans has added his name to an appeal to the United Nations and other world bodies to protect 3,400 Iranian dissidents in Iraq."   So what are we talking about?  Camp Ashraf houses a group of Iranian dissidents (approximately 3,500 people). Iranian dissidents were welcomed to Iraq by Saddam Hussein in 1986 and he gave them Camp Ashraf and six other parcels that they could utilize. In 2003, the US invaded Iraq.The US government had the US military lead negotiations with the residents of Camp Ashraf. The US government wanted the residents to disarm and the US promised protections to the point that US actions turned the residents of Camp Ashraf into protected person under the Geneva Conventions. As 2008 drew to a close, the Bush administration was given assurances from the Iraqi government that they would protect the residents. Yet Nouri al-Maliki ordered the camp attacked twice. July 28, 2009 Nouri launched an attack (while then-US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was on the ground in Iraq). In a report released this summer entitled "Iraqi government must respect and protect rights of Camp Ashraf residents," Amnesty International described this assault, "Barely a month later, on 28-29 July 2009, Iraqi security forces stormed into the camp; at least nine residents were killed and many more were injured. Thirty-six residents who were detained were allegedly tortured and beaten. They were eventually released on 7 October 2009; by then they were in poor health after going on hunger strike." April 8th of this year Nouri again ordered an assault on Camp Ashraf (then-US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was again on the ground in Iraq when the assault took place). Amnesty International described the assault this way, "Earlier this year, on 8 April, Iraqi troops took up positions within the camp using excessive, including lethal, force against residents who tried to resist them. Troops used live ammunition and by the end of the operation some 36 residents, including eight women, were dead and more than 300 others had been wounded. Following international and other protests, the Iraqi government announced that it had appointed a committee to investigate the attack and the killings; however, as on other occasions when the government has announced investigations into allegations of serious human rights violations by its forces, the authorities have yet to disclose the outcome, prompting questions whether any investigation was, in fact, carried out." Nouri al-Maliki is seen as close to the government in Tehran. They have made it clear that they want the dissidents out of Iraq and returned to Iran -- where they would face trial at best, torture most likely. Nouri had announced he will be closing Camp Ashraf at the end of this year.  With the date looming, December 25th the United Nations reached an agreement with Iraq on Camp Ashraf.  US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton noted:   Today, the United Nations and the Government of Iraq signed an important agreement on the temporary relocation and eventual resettlement of the more than 3,000 residents of Camp Ashraf in Iraq. We commend the Government of Iraq for its work with United Nations Special Representative Ambassador Martin Kobler, and welcome this important step toward a humane resolution to the ongoing situation at Ashraf. The UN effort has our full support. The signing of this Memorandum of Understanding represents significant progress on this issue and outlines steps necessary to achieve a peaceful and viable solution for the residents of Ashraf, including their temporary relocation to Camp Liberty, a former U.S. military base near the Baghdad International Airport. At this new location, the UN High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) will be able to conduct refugee status determinations for the residents of Ashraf -- a necessary first step toward resettlement to third countries. We are encouraged by the Iraqi government's willingness to commit to this plan, and expect it to fulfill all its responsibilities, especially the elements of the MOU that provide for the safety and security of Ashraf's residents. We welcome the agreement by the Government of Iraq to allow the United Nations to station monitors at this new location around the clock and to observe the move from Ashraf to this new location. In addition, officials from U.S. Embassy Baghdad will visit regularly and frequently. We also welcome the Iraqi government's willingness to delay the final closure of Camp Ashraf to give this plan time for implementation. To be successful, this resettlement must also have the full support of the Camp's residents, and we urge them to work with the UN to implement this relocation. All those who want to see the people at Camp Ashraf safe and secure should work together to see that the agreed upon plan is carried out. December 26th Catherine Ashton, the High Represenative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of th European Union issued the following statement:   "I was pleased to hear that the Government of Iraq and the United Nations have signed yesterday night a Memorandum of Understanding setting out the rules applying to the transfer of the residents of Camp Ashraf to a transit location, in order for UNHCR to proceed to the verification of their status and to facilitate their repatriation or resettlement. The EU fully supports this agreement and wishes to commend the good will and constructive spirit shown by all parties involved. I would like to praise more particularly the Special representative of the UN Secretary General Martin Kobler for his persistent efforts to arrive at this promising result. I thank also the Government of Iraq for having showed the necessary flexibility, including with the timing. We count on it to ensure that this process takes place in an orderly way, avoiding violence or coercion. The safety of the Camp residents is under its responsibility and we count on it to discourage any provocation against them as from now. I hope that the residents of Camp Ashraf will be prepared to respect the terms of this Memorandum and I encourage them and their leadership to cooperate fully in its implementation. They should be reassured by the terms of the MOU and the commitment of UNAMI and the United States to ensure a robust monitoring. Thanks to this, the entire International Community will be able to follow closely the whole process and the EU intends to bring its support to this whole arrangement. UNHCR will soon be able to proceed to the interviews of Camp Ashraf residents and the verification of their status. This will greatly facilitate their repatriation to the home countries of those wishing to do so voluntarily and the resettlement of others in third countries. The EU is prepared to help UNHCR in the fulfilment of this task and will continue to follow very closely the implementation of this agreement."   Of that agreement, British MP David Amess (Huffington Post UK) states, "Reaching this point took lots of flexibility by the Iranian opposition leader and great efforts by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, EU High Representative Baroness Ashton, and UN High Commissioner for Refugees Antonio Guterres. These leaders have put their own credibility on the line, so it can be hoped that they will follow through."  Supposedly last week saw 200 to 500 residents relocated to the former US Camp Liberty base.  What did happen last week was repeat rocket attacks on Camp Ashraf.  KUNA reported Friday, "The United States on Friday said it had begun monitoring and refugee processing of 3,200 Iranian dissidents residing in Iraq's Camp Ashraf after a rocket attack struck the camp."   We'll close with this from Terry O'Neill's Huffington Post piece:   As the president of NOW, I hear from a lot of women (and men). Many of them are outraged right now, and they're asking the same question: Can this be real -- is the White House actually caving in to the radical right on birth control? At this moment, the answer appears to be Yes. Earlier this month, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius pulled rank on the FDA, overruling the agency's carefully considered decision to eliminate the discriminatory age restriction on a safe and effective form of emergency contraception. Despite the unprecedented nature of this move, President Obama backed up the secretary, adding: "As the father of two daughters, I think it is important for us to make sure that we apply some common sense to various rules when it comes to over-the-counter medicine." Women are all too familiar with the paternalistic call for "common sense" when it comes to female bodies. We're sick and tired of the implication that women aren't capable of exercising common sense over our reproductive lives. And let's be honest: Is a government agency really best suited to define common sense for, say, a 12-year-old who's just been raped by a family member? The thought of a tween girl having unprotected sex and then purchasing and consuming a medication to prevent pregnancy makes many people uncomfortable. No matter how well-meaning their concern might be, it is absolutely beside the point. If that young woman doesn't want to become pregnant, that's her business. Personal opinions about birth control and societal preconceptions about young women's sexuality have no part in this private medical decision.   iraq the associated press rebecca santana press tv the washington post dan morse newsweek asli aydintasbas the new york times jack healy michael r. gordon al mada rock center with brian williams nbc news ted koppel al mada hossam acommok aswat al-iraq alsumaria tv reuters jim loney afp bloomberg news eric engleman

What's Taylor Marsh really up to?

Taylor Marsh.

She whored for Barack in 2008.  Now that he's toxic, she's done a post claiming her vote is up for grabs.  Please, that whore claimed that we would take it to the floor of the convention . . . until she decided the convention didn't matter and what was more important was sucking off  --er, standing with Barack.

So what is the porn worker really up to?

You'll note she takes no aplogies, owns no blame for her past support of Barack.

So what's really going on?

The whore knows Barry needs votes in 2012.

The whore knows she's a known whore.

The whore knows she can trick a few people.  Enough to help swing the vote?

Not by herself but if all the Cult of St. Barack members do their lies, if they all say "my vote is up for grabs" and they get people to read them again, and trust them again, and then as the spring turns to summer, start explaining how scary Republican zombies are and how, I know, I know, Barack isn't perfect, but if we just hold our noses this time . . .

Taylor Marsh wants to manipulate.  That's where her little stunt's all about.

If it were sincere, she'd have not only offered a lengthy apology, she would have explained how she got taken in by him in the first place (after spending months calling him out at her site in 2008).

Alessandro (Daily Puma) offers a refesher on what a fake Taylor is so be sure to check that out.  Also be sure to check out the community year-in-review stuff:

The Common Ills year-end coverage included C.I.'s "2011: The Year of the Slow Reveal," Ruth's "Ruth's Radio Report 2011," Martha and Shirley's "2011 in books (Martha & Shirley)" and Kat's "Kat's Korner: 2011 in music." In addition, community coverage of 2011 also included Ann's "2011 best in film (Ann and Stan)" & Stan's "2011 in films (Ann and Stan)", Cedric's "Barack finally gets something right!" & Wally's "BARACK BEST 2011 MOVE!," Rebecca's "best of fall tv 2011" and Trina's "New Year's Parties."

Charmed dreams

First, Kat's "Kat's Korner: 2011 in music" and I love it.  You will too.  She picks the ten best albums of the year and weighs in on some trends.

Now for the bad news.

I had a dream that I thought was real.  And I went through the whole day thinking it was true.  After 6:30 this evening, I called Kat so we could share in the good news.  Kat asked me, "Betty, where did you hear that?"

"It's been on the news since late last night," I said.  She asked me when.  I realized then it was when I was asleep.

My dream?  The CW was doing a two-hour "Charmed" movie and saying that if the ratings were high enough they would be bringing the show back.

The CW gave the show the axe.  It debuted on the WB and when the WB was no more (it merged with UPN to become CW), the CW killed the show.


Despite the fact that it was a solid hit.  That it could be -- and was switched -- from night to night, time zone to time zone and retain an audience.  They can't do that with their own shows.  They should have kept "Charmed."

I wish my dream had been real.  I thought all day it was.  I told two people at work about it (about the 'news' -- at that point, I still thought it was for real -- I texted them after I got off the phone with Kat).  I felt so happy.  :(



"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):

Friday, December 30, 2011.  Chaos and violence continue, protests take place in Turkey and Iraq over the Turkish military killing 35 Kurds, Nouri's forces attack protesters in Baghdad and seize journalists' equipment, Ayad Allawi reminds everyone of the Erbil Agreement, McClatchy closes its Baghdad Bureau, the political crisis continues, the issue of the families of service members being upset about the media whoring for Barack (the false claim that ALL troops were home for Christmas) finally bubbles up in the media, and more.     AFP's Prashant Rao Tweets:   prashantrao Prashant Rao Hundreds of people in both Arbil and Sulaimaniyah have protested Turkish air strikes that killed 35. #Iraq #Turkey 11 hours ago   The Kurds are considered to be the largest minority in the world without a homeland.  Northern Iraq borders Turkey.  As noted in yesterday's snapshot, using drones for 'tracking' and 'surveillance,' the Turkish military then sent air planes to bomb the border northern Iraq and Turkey share to kill members of the PKK.  As Mike noted last night, the Turkish government seems to think it would have been okay if the 35 dead and 20 injured were PKK but they weren't PKK, they were Turkish citizens.  The PKK is a group of Kurds -- one among many -- who fight (physically fight, use violence) for Kurdish equality and dream of a Kurdish homeland.  Many are in the mountains of northern Iraq.  They form in 1984 as a response to decades of oppression in Turkey.    And the government of Turkey gives little reason for them to stop.  Last week, Kaya Genc (Index On Censorship) reported, "In the latest wave of arrests of those the state claims are linked to the separatist group Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), 41 people were detained across Turkey on Monday including many journalists. Initial reports placed the number of media workers arrested at 25, but this number rose in the aftermath of the crackdown. Mustafa Özer, the Agence France-Presse photographer, was among those detained in the operation, which is reported to have taken place in the wee hours of the day. Dicle News Agency's offices in İstanbul, Ankara, Diyarbakır, Van, İzmir and Adana were raided and ten staff members were detained, including the agency's news director, editor in chief and various reporters. Five journalists from Turkey's main Kurdish newspaper Özgür Gündem were among those detained, as well as reporters from Birgün and Vatan newspapers."  Wladimir van Wilgenburg (Rudaw) reports further on the demonization of all things Kurdish, explaining today that a new video game, which is selling briskly (five million in one week alone) is entitled battlefield and allows the player to be a US soldier fighting 'terrorists' -- the 'terrorists' are Kurds and their base, in the game, is the Kurdistan Regional Government (northern Iraq).   Along with protests in Iraq over the killings, there were protests in Turkey as well.  The Irish Examiner explains that "thousands" turned out for the funerals today. Al Jazeera adds: Coffins were brought in a long convoy of cars and ambulances, sounding their horns as mourners flashed defiant V for victory signs. "It is impossible to kill them mistakenly. The soldiers were 150 metres away and had a bird's eye view," 20-year-old Mehmet from Ortasu village, near the site of the raid, said, referring to troops who observed the attack. Mehmet, who also makes his living by smuggling goods from the border, said: "I could have been one of the [victims]." A young woman whose cousin died in the bombing was in tears. "This was no mistake. They intentionally killed people, who were trying to earn a crust," she said. The EuroNews notes Turkish government claims that there will be an investigation and, they swear, no cover up. A protester in Uludere shouted, "Damn you, Erdogan . . . One day you too will know our pain!" The 35 killed were in Turkey. For some reason the Turkish government continues to insist upon stating that they were in northern Iraq. IC quotes the PKK's Bahoz Erdal stating, "This massacre was no accident ... It was organised and planned. We urge the people of Kurdistan... to react after this massacre and seek a settling of accounts through uprisings." Alexandra Zavis (Los Angeles Times) notes of the 35 dead "most appeared to be members of an extended family and were under the age of 30." CNN reports, "Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Friday that he regrets the deaths of 35 civilians in a military airstrike in a Kurdish area on the border with Iraq."   BBC News notes Erdogan termed the attack "unfortunate and saddening" and President Abdullah Gul noted "pain" over the murder of the 35.  But, as well as noting that 20 people were also injured in the bombing, Bloomberg News quotes Turkey's Deputy Prime Minister Bulent Arinc stating, among other things, "Turkey is combating terrorism and in that fight incidents like this may occur." That statement really doesn't make the alleged regret seem genuine.  Christopher Torchia (AP) adds, "For a second day, stone-throwing demonstrators clashed with police who responded with tear gas and water cannons in several cities in the mostly Kurdish southeat. Protesters lobbed rocks at a national ruling party office in Diyarbakir, the region's biggest city, and Firat said 30 people were arrested there."   A protest took place in Baghdad today as well and the government's actions did not speak well.  It did, however, back up an observation Jack Fairweather (Financial Times of London) made today about how "the mechanics of the Iraqi state remain unchanged from the days of Saddam Hussein."   Jomana Karadsheh (CNN) captured the protests in a series of Tweets:     JomanaCNN jomana karadsheh demo organized by brother of Bush shoe thrower to celebrate #US withdrawal. 12 people turned up & more than 200 security forces. #Iraq 12 hours ago   JomanaCNN jomana karadsheh demo organized by brother of Bush shoe thrower to celebrate #US withdrawal. 12 people turned up & more than 200 security forces. #Iraq 12 hours ago   JomanaCNN jomana karadsheh Police Gen. there said gathering was "unauthorized" &kept asking them 2 leave. Hrs later, protesters set #US flag on fire &were beaten up 12 hours ago     JomanaCNN jomana karadsheh Protesters down to 8 ppl at the end kept asking us not leave, saying our presence stops security forces from detaining them. #Iraq 12 hours ago   JomanaCNN jomana karadsheh Camera of 1 Iraqi channel confiscated, our cameraman prevented from filming& my cell phone almost confiscated after taking one still. #Iraq 11 hours ago   JomanaCNN jomana karadsheh protesters surrounded as we left, 1 telling me now 3 were detained after being beaten up. cant reach them 2 confirm, their phones off. #IRAQ 11 hours ago The continued crackdown on protests in Iraq. Excuse me, the continued crackdown on protests in supposedly 'free' Iraq. Nouri's goons grab cameras (Karadsheh's cell phone) and target reporters attempting to do their jobs, the Iraqis beg the reporters to stay out of fear of what happens when no witnesses are around and then the Iraqis disappear.  That's Nouri al-Maliki's Iraq and the US installed him and kept him in power in 2010 even when the Iraqi people rejected him by voting Iraqiya into first place in the March 2010 elections with Nouri's State of Law trailing in second place.   Remember what followed those elections?  Nouri's tantrums.  And eight months of his digging his heels in -- with US backing -- and refusing to surrender the post of prime minister -- even though his term had expired and even though, per the Iraqi Constitution, Iraqiya would have first shot at building a government.  Nouri refused to obey the Constitution and the US  government applauded that by continuing to back him even when the likes of Moqtada al-Sadr and Ammar al-Hakim were stating publicly that Nouri could not be the next prime minister.   Political Stalemate I ended in November of 2010 with the Erbil Agreement hammered out in Erbil between the major political blocs (and the US) whereby every one was supposed to make concessions. The Kurds would get to keep Jalal Talabani as president. They thought they would get three vice presidents. Iraqiya won the elections in March 2010 and the political bloc was headed by Ayad Allawi. Nouri wasn't stepping down and the White House was backing Nouri. For Nouri to remain prime minister, Allawi was promised he would head a new, independent council over security issues. He was also promised that the Iraqiya candidates demonized as Ba'athists and forced out of the 2010 elections by Nouri's friends would have their names cleared. On November 11th, the new Parliament held their first real session. They voted Osama al-Nujaifi Speaker of Parliament (he was from Iraqiya and that was part of the Erbil Agreement), Jalal was named president and Nouri was named prime minister designate (but we were all informed in the following days that this was 'unofficial' -- once named prime minister-designate, you have 30 days, per the Constitution, to put together a Cabinet and get the Parliament to sign off on each member). But what of the security council? It and other promises were forgotten as Nouri refused to abide by the agreement.   Ayad Allawi, leader of Iraqiya and former prime minister of Iraq, remembers what happened and Tweeted about it this week.   AyadAllawi Ayad Allawi 4the sake of stability,Iraqiya agreed2join the national unity government upon the Erbil power-sharing agreement reached a year ago 1/3 28 Dec   AyadAllawi Ayad Allawi However,4more than a year now Mr. Maliki has refused to implement this agreement, instead concentrating greater power in his own hands. 2/3 28 Dec   Nobember 25th, Jalal 'officially' named Nouri prime minister-designate. Nouri had created Political Stalemate I by refusing to surrender the prime minister post. He'd done that for eight months. In that time, he should have had some ideas about a Cabinet. But Nouri's problem was he over-promised to get support. So when it was time to name a Cabinet, suddenly the Cabinet had more ministers and deputy ministers than it had previously (from 37 in 2006 to 42 in 2010). And he still couldn't keep his promises to everyone.  December 21, 2010, the Constitution was tossed by the wayside and Nouri was allowed to move from prime minister-designate to prime minister because he'd assembled a kind of Cabinet. He named 31 out of 42 ministers and people pretended that was good enough. He had failed to meet the Constitutional mandate of naming a Cabinet but everyone looked the other way. He refused to name the security posts: National Security, Interior and Defense. His defenders (including the White House) swore those posts would be named in a matter of weeks. His detractors saw the refusal as part of a pattern of power grabs on Nouri's part and stated he wouldn't fill the posts. This is the start of Political Stalemate II.  And it's where Iraq remains, still in a stalemate and now in a political crisis.  In the latest embarrassment for Nouri al-Maliki, Alsumaria TV reports that State of Law MP Adnan Mayahi, who serves on Parliament's Security and Defense Commission, has declared that the bulk of Iraq's security services have been infiltrated and that a great many working in prisons practice torture.  After a year of refusing to name heads to the Ministery of the Interior, the Ministry of National Security and the Ministry of Defense, you'd think stories like this would lead for widespread calls for Nouri to stop holding those posts and instead fill them.  And Alsumaria TV has now reported more on this story on their English version site:   No Iraqis would be imprisoned for their opinions and thoughts but for violence and terrorism only, Armed Forces General Commander Prime Minister Nuri Al Maliki assured, on December 10. There are no limits for human freedom if it doesn't oppose public interest, he added, a source told Alsumaria. Iraqiya List headed by Iyad Allawi revealed, on December 14, that random arrests are still occuring in all Iraqi regions which contradicts human rights' basics. Our members are holding constant meetings regarding this issue, Iraqiya indicated. Iraqi Government is not executing most of its international agreements and conventions concerning human, women, children and prisoners' rights, Representative of Secretary General of the United Nations in Iraq Walter Kalin accused in his report on June 3. In its report issued last February, Amnesty International revealed that there are secret prisons in Iraq where detainees are being tortured for confessions used in their convictions.     Meanwhile it's been one denial after another from Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi. Ammar Karim (AFP) reports he is denying co-writing "How to Save Iraq From Civil War" (New York Times) with Rafie al-Issawi and Ayad Allawi but instead insists that his name was added to the byline without his knowledge. Why deny co-writing the column? Because some are saying the column was a letter to the White House asking it to intervene in Iraqi matters. Alsumaria TV reports that National Alliance MP Qasim al-Araji is among those declaring that the column is a plea to the Barack Obama administration to intervene in Iraqi affairs. In addition, Al Mada reports al-Nujaifi is denying having made a deal with President Jalal Talabani to oust Nouri via a vote of no confidence. Al Rafidayn notes that he declared the meet-up with Talabani was to discuss a national conference to be held shortly to address issues (including the political crisis) and the need to resolve the Tareq al-Hashemi issue via the judiciary. On the first issue, Al Mada notes Talabani says the conference will be held within two weeks and, on thesecond issue, Al Mada adds that the political blocs are currently debating the proposal that al-Hashemi's case be transferred to the Kurdish judiciary. Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi, a member of Iraqiya, has been accused by Nouri al-Maliki of being a terrorist. If convicted of that charge, the punishment is life in prison or execution. Tareq al-Hashemi is currently in the KRG and a house guest of President Talabani. al-Hashemi is not the only member of Iraqiya that Nouri has targeted recently. He's also demanding that Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq be stripped of his office. Were al-Mutlaq stripped of his office, he would lose immunity and Nouri could sue him for statements Nouri did not like. (Nouri is highly litigious. Along with suing other Iraqi politicians, he likes to sue news outlets such as the Guardian.) The targeting of the two members of Iraqiya comes as rumors swirl that others will be targeted -- including supposed arrest charges for Financial Minister al-Issawi -- and after the November arrests of over 500 alleged "Ba'athists."   In an introduction to a new profile on the Financial Minister, Jack Healy and Michael R. Gordon (New York Times) observe:   He may also be the next leader to fall as the country's Shiite prime minister takes aim at perceived rivals and enemies, his fate a litmus test for a country in crisis. Unlike other Sunni politicians who have drawn fire from the Shiite-led government, Mr. Essawi is known as a conciliatory figure who has built bridges with Kurds, Shiites and Westerners. If the prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, takes action against him -- he has already tried to relieve Mr. Essawi of his duties --  it could open deep new divisions in Iraq's already tattered sectarian landscape and send a discouraging signal about whether a post-United States Iraq can forge a truly inclusive and representative government.     Calls for the charges against al-Hashemi to be heard by the KRG judiciary stem from the control over the Iraqi judiciary (Baghdad-based) that Nouri has as evidenced by numerous rulings.  This point is made in a report by an Iraqi journalist for McClatchy Newspapers: A politician in Maliki's own National Alliance told McClatchy yesterday that Maliki holds "complete" sway over the Supreme Court. It was the Supreme Court's "interpretation" of the constitution that enabled Maliki to retain his position as PM and form a government after the last elections, although Iraqiya bloc had the highest take. It was also through the Supreme Court that Maliki all but stopped the legislative powers of the parliament by its "interpreting" the constitution to say that legislation can only stem from the executive branch (cabinet and presidency) and that the parliament could only make "suggestions".   The report is called "Iraq At The Crossroads" and hopefully it will run in all McClatchy owned papers because it's an important piece. We're grabbing from it on the courts because that's what I need for this entry but the whole thing is a gripping read. McClatchy's Iraqi journalists have done top-notch work throughout the war. This report (at McClatchy's Inside Iraq) continues that tradition.  And today brings the news, at Inside Iraq, in a heartfelt post, that McClatchy's Baghdad Bureau has now closed.  Sahar Issa, Laith Hammoudi, Jenan Hussein, Mohammed al Dulaimy and others did so much to help the world understand what was taking place on the ground in Iraq. Their spirit and passion for journalism was inpsiring even before you factor in that their reporting took place as Iraq became the war that claimed the most journalist lives and as the Committee to Protect Journalists and Reporters Without Borders repeatedly documented the attacks taking place within Iraq on journalists and the practice of journalism.   While some risked all to convey the truth, others live to obscure.  Professional victim and apparent hobbyist liar Mayada Al Askari surfaces to flaunt her stupidity at Gulf News.  In a poorly written piece, Mayada wants to yet again snarl about Saddam and attack Iraqiya because her hatred has consumed her and she has nothing left to offer but anger and lies.  (You'd think someone who should be seeing their life as "rescued" would be able to tap into some joy but some people only want to embrace the darkness.)  The piece of trash scribbles a defense of Thug Nouri in which she notes:   Al Hashemi, who is a member of the Al Iraqiya bloc, is accused of backing terrorism, and the Supreme Judicial Council in Baghdad issued an arrest warrant after a number of his bodyguards confessed to carrying out terrorist acts. The Al Iraqiya bloc headed by Dr Ayad Allawi mishandled the problem by boycotting the parliament, which may easily lead to additional deterioration in stability and security.     Let's be really clear here, Mayada is nothing but TRASH.  When you've made it your life's purpose over the last years (even before the US invasion) to decry torture and false confessions under Saddam, you damn well don't accept 'confessions' at face value.  That's even before you realize that Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have repeatedly documented that 'confessions' are forced by torture under Nouri al-Maliki.  You're trash because you pretended to give a damn about torture but in fact all you gave a damn about was that torture touched your own tiny circle.  You weren't opposed to torture, you weren't opposed to forced confessions.  If you truly were, you'd be the last person in the world to be insisting that 'confessions' aired on state TV qualified as genuine confessions.  You're just a dirty trash.  And possibly that keeps you far too busy to ever concern yourself with facts, but, as usual, your facts are wrong.   Iraqiya did not walk out on Parliament in response to the arrest warrant for Tareq al-Hashemi. From the Friday, December 16, 2011 snapshot: "In other explosive news, Al Mada reports that Iraqiya has announced it is breaking off talks with the ruling bloc. [. . .] When announcing that talks were over, Al Mada notes Iraqiya stated that they had given up a great deal for the good of Iraq but there was no compromise from another. That's a reference to Nouri's State of Law as well as the coalition he now heads. In giving up the right to prime minister, Iraqiya was promised (and the Erbil Agreement is in writing) that an independent security commission would be created and that Ayad Allawi would head it. That's among the many broken promises Nouri made to keep his claws on the post of prime minister."  That was their announcement on Friday, December 16th.    Saturday, December 17th, they made good on their announcement.  Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) reported, "The Iraqiya political bloc boycotted parliament today over Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's failure to properly share power and the arrests of hundreds of Sunni Iraqiya suppoerters in a crackdown against alleged Ba'ath Party members. [. . .] During a meeting last night the Iraqi block decided to suspend its participation in parliament to protest the prime minister's management of the country."   Sunday, December 18th was the infamous airport moment at Baghdad International where Nouri's goons forced Saleh al-Mutlaq (Deputy Prime Minister), Tareq al-Hashemi and Finance Minister Rafie al-Issawi as well as their bodyguards.  Three of al-Hashemi's bodyguards were taken into custody, the rest and the three officials were let go and allowed to reboard the plane.   As documented in the December 19th snapshot, Monday, December 19th is when the arrest warrant is issued:   CNN reported this afternoon that an arrest warrant had been issued for Iraqi Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi by the Judicial Commitee with the charge of terrorism.  Omar al-Saleh (Al Jazeera) terms it a "poltical crisis" and states, "The government says this has nothing to do with the US withdrawal, that this has nothing to do with the prime minister consolidating his grip on power.  However, members of al-Iraqiya bloc, which Hashimis is a member of, say 'No, [Maliki] is trying to be a dictator."  Sam Dagher (Wall St. Journal) observes, "The arrest warrant puts Mr. Maliki on a possible collision course with the Kurds, who run their own semiautonomous region in the north and participate in the central government but have longstanding disputes with Baghdad over oil and land; and with Sunni Arabs in provinces like Anbar, Diyala, Nineveh and Salahuddin who have pressed in recent weeks for more autonomy from Baghdad with the backing of the Kurds."   No, Iraqiya did not walk out on Parliament after an arrest warrant was issued for Tareq al-Hashemi.  That is a bold face lie. Mayad Al Askari is trash and she's condemned herself to a hell of her own sickness because instead of embracing a new chance offered she wants to baste in the hatred she's carried, stroked and nursed for years and years and years.  She'll die in a hell of her own making.  There is no hope for her.  She will never awaken to the fact that her life could have been different if she'd chosen to embrace the present instead of submerging in a past that is long gone. Back to al-Nujaifi denials, Alsumaria TV reports he is also denying accusations that his actions are being directed by the United States which, the rumor insists, seeks to overthrow Nouri. Turning to the topic of Sahwa. They've been called "Awakenings" and "Sons Of Iraq." They are Iraqis (largely Sunni but some Shi'ites as well according to David Petreaus' April 2008 Congressional testimony -- Petraeus is now CIA Director but he was the top commander in Iraq back then). They were put on the US payroll to get them to stop attacking the US military. Al Mada reports that the Baghdad-based government has recorded 1498 Sahwas deaths since 2006nd that another 830 Sahwas have been left wounded. The government also estimates that over 100,000 people became Sahwas since the program's 2006 inception. Remember all the weeks this month we've repeatedly called out the press lie that ALL US troops have come home from Iraq?  Remember how we've noted that some are being repostured to surrounding areas of Iraq and that some will actually remain in Iraq?  And we've called out the press repeatedly for its painful lie.  We've noted repeatedly that family members of loved ones who are not coming home for Christmas have decried this lie and have mailed this site and Third about how painful it is to hear the lie of "ALL" over and over from one outlet after another (including The NewsHour on PBS which should be able to get the facts right)?  Geoff Ziezulewicz (Stars and Stripes) has an important article today on family members upset that their loved ones are not home for Christmas and he notes, " It has also been painful to see news articles in the past week touting the fact that all U.S. troops are home from Iraq, Thane said."  That's Andrea Thane whose husband is not yet out of the Middle East.  There was never a reason for the media to WHORE for the administration and put lies over the airwaves to give Barack a happy Christmas poll boost.  But they chose to, they chose to whore for Barack at the expense of reality and we noted repeatedly here and at Third that their WHORING was HURTING military families.  They need to do some self-reflection on the way they MISREPORTED all month long.   We first began hearing from the family of service members on this issue at the end of November and wrote "Editorial: Words have meaning" about this subject and the pain it was causing.  The media chose repeatedly to disregard the truth because they wanted to whore for Barack.  I'm sorry but I thought the media role was to inform the public (of reality), not to lie in order to push up the poll numbers of a politician.     iraq afp prashant rao cnn jomana karadsheh the irish examiner al jazeera bloomberg news bbc news the los angeles times alexandra zavis rudaw wladimir van wilgenburg jack fairweather the financial times of london alsumaria tv almada afp ammar karim al rafidayn mcclatchy newspapers inside iraq the new york times jack healy