The New Adventures of Old Christine was so funny last night. That really is the funniest show on TV. Rules of Engagement aired before it and I did watch because Ava and C.I. hailed it as the most improved show on TV. It really is the most improved. I couldn't stand it before but it's actually enjoyable, not just watchable. The actresses carry the show but the guys have all gotten better and if the show comes back, just let Oliver Hudson play a himbo. He's so much funnier in that role. In episodes I saw before they tried to give him meaning or went with darkness. Just let him be a the male equivalent of the dumb blond. He plays that so well and he's honestly rather sexy in that role.
But Christine. I laugh so hard. It was the party before New Christine's big wedding to Richard. And it was all hilarious. The entire cast. New Christine got very little to do but the actress added this non-stop laughter and made it very funny by laughing even when she didn't have a line. Richard was wonderful, especially in scenes with Old Christine.
Wanda Sykes? I assume she had funny lines. Assume because whenever she's on camera, my daughter gets so excited and starts reminding me, "Mommy, she's funny. She's funny. Listen to her."
I'm glad Wanda's on the show for a number of reasons (including that she is very funny when I can hear what she's saying) but, on a purely personal level, my daughter loves Wanda. And she's very aware that Christine is one of the few shows where someone like her is on. She's even begun to point that out when we watch other shows. Used to she would just ask where the Black characters were. Now she points it out. "Mommy, don't any Black people live there?"
So Wanda's Barb means a lot to my daughter and that means a lot to me.
Wanda Sykes came out last year and good for her. And she's now a new parent. She and her spouse just had twins. Congratulations to her. I hope she appreciates what she means for kids already, all children. But if not, she'll soon learn because those kids will notice what they're shown and what they're not.
Okay, Stan passed this over to me. "ACLU Challenges Patents on Breast Cancer Genes:"
On May 12, 2009, the ACLU and the Public Patent Foundation, a not-for-profit organization affiliated with Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law (PUBPAT), filed a lawsuit charging that patents on two human genes associated with breast and ovarian cancer are unconstitutional and invalid. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of four scientific organizations representing more than 150,000 geneticists, pathologists, and laboratory professionals, as well as individual researchers, breast cancer and women's health groups, genetic counselors and individual women. Individuals with certain mutations along these two genes, known as BRCA1 and BRCA2, are at a significantly higher risk for developing hereditary breast and ovarian cancers.
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) has granted thousands of patents on human genes – in fact, about 20 percent of our genes are patented. A gene patent holder has the right to prevent anyone from studying, testing or even looking at a gene. As a result, scientific research and genetic testing has been delayed, limited or even shut down due to concerns about gene patents.
As a result of the PTO granting patents on the BRCA genes to Myriad Genetics, Myriad's lab is the only place in the country where diagnostic testing can be performed. Because only Myriad can test for the BRCA gene mutations, others are prevented from testing these genes or developing alternative tests. Myriad's monopoly on the BRCA genes makes it impossible for women to access other tests or get a second opinion about their results, and allows Myriad to charge a high rate for their tests – over $3,000, which is too expensive for some women to afford.
The lawsuit, Association for Molecular Pathology, et al. v. United States Patent and Trademark Office, et al., was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in Manhattan against the PTO, Myriad Genetics and the University of Utah Research Foundation, which hold the patents on the BRCA genes.
That's pretty important.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Thursday, May 14, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, Steven D. Green's War Crimes sentencing continues, new details emerge in John Russell's shooting of five fellow service members in Iraq, the US Armed Services Committee forgets Iraq today and Dems let Republicans set the game for next week, Dennis Kucinich calls out the War Hawks, and more.
Steven D. Green was convicted last Thursday in the gang-rape of 14-year-old Iraqi Abeer Qassim Hamza al-Janabi, her murder, the murder of her five-year-old sister and the murders of both of her parents. His sentence hearing is ongoing and today was day four. Evan Bright reports that the defense called Green's friend Tammi Dehay, Green's Cousin Suzi Woolsey and a social worker, Jan Vogelsang. Bright states the latter offered "an extreme walk through of Steven Green's family". Brett Barrouquere (AP) notes today's "witnesses were called by defense attorneys trying to persuade jurors that Green, 24, of Midland, Texas, should be sentened to life in prison rather than face a death sentence." Of yesterday's hearing, Bright reported:
The defense brought Jim Isclaw to the stand. At entry, Isclaw winked at Green when their eyes met. Isclaw, a native of Alvarado, TX, is an assistant football coach, golf coach, and teacher at Alvarado High School, and has been there for 23 years. To be quite frank, he's a good ol' country boy, and he's got the persona of one as well. In his face, you can see the hours/days/years spent in the hot(understatement) Texan sun, calling plays and yelling at players. The attorney got straight to the point by beginning with "Do you remember Steven Green?" Isclaw immediately fired back with "I'll never ferget 'im...there's some kids you just don't forget." He spoke of meeting Steven in the summer of his freshman year for the football team's two-a-day workouts during the summer. He spoke of Green living with his uncle, David. He highlighted on his memory of green: his far and few between class/school absences, "he had very good attendance...in fact I did some research and he only had four absences that entire year," and about his personality as he remembered it, "he was a very likable guy, very enjoyable, he was easy to spot and when you did see him you could count on him to put a smile on your face." He told of Green being a typical "knucklehead" and getting into small trouble. Defendant Green couldn't help but to laugh. He spoke of Green's unfaltering attendance at the varsity games, "he never missed a game." He told of Green's undying sense of humor, "he was a funny guy, he'd do this one leg chicken dance at all the pep rallies." This humor/dance would become a recurring theme throughout the rest of the days' testimony. He gave the courtroom a laugh when he spoke of Green's "lack of" athletic ability in playing wide receiver. The jury and audience was shown a picture from the yearbook of Green on the football field, "looking for an opening" against Arlington Heights, to which Isclaw commented, "If he had the ball against Arlington Heights... We were either way ahead or way behind," bringing a few chuckles. Wolff began a difficult line of questioning in the witnesses by asking Isclaw "If Green were to be executed, what impact would that have on you?" Isclaw visibly thought about his answer, and you could almost see his stomach churning as he responded, "It'd….it would break my heart...(pausing)...he's one of my own. 185 days of school to get to know him, I know that don't seem like much but he was always one that I liked and remembered…I'd be saddened...(pause)...I believe it'd crush me." No cross from the prosecution. The next witness was Chase Bentley, a 24 year old from Lovett, Texas. He just completed his Masters Degree in Civil Engineering last week, and is already engaged with a wedding on December 14th, he told the court. He spoke of meeting Green during his junior year of high school, when Green was only a freshman(Green only attended Alvarado for his freshman year). As a requirement, football players must run track in the spring, which was where Green and Bentley met. When asked what his impression of Green was, he quickly spoke of having "only great memories. He was just one of the fellas" He spoke of Green being "the class clown….this guy was funny." When asked about his track running ability, Bentley grinned profusely for a few seconds before eluding to his opinion that "well…he was fun to watch, let's just put it that way." Once again, his testimony ended with what his thoughts would be if Green were to be executed, "I couldn't imagine…(long, thoughtful pause)…he lost his father and….I can't imagine that with a set predetermined date and…" His testimony ended there, again with no cross examination.
"Even as our focus shifts to Afghanistan and Pakistan, the stability situation in Iraq remains a source of concern and significant effort," declared Senator Carl Levin today . . . after spending five minutes in his opening statement discussing Afghanistan and Pakistan. Levin was making opening remarks as the chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee which heard testimony this morning from US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair Adm Mike Mullen. It was all a bunch of posing and preening from the witnesses and from Congressional members. Senator Jim Webb may have scored most embarrassing as he rushed to sing the praises of Iran-Contra War Criminal Caspar Weinberger ("Cap Weinberger," he called him). [Weinberger was indicted by the grand jury, George H.W. Bush pardoned him. It's a sad day in Congress when Iran-Contra War Criminals earn praise . . . from Democrats.] Democrats rushed to grovel and preen before Gates and Mullen and to play I-love-the-military-more. The Republicans laid down markers that they intend to develop in a future hearing (possibly next week) which will bring an officer to Congress to testify about his opposition to Gates' budget recommendations. Iraq rarely came up in the hearing. Republicans focused on the budget -- chiefly what wasn't in it -- while Democrats obsessed over Pakistan to the point that they appeared eager to go to officially go to war with the country. We'll drop back to opening remarks since it was one of the few times Iraq came up.
Senator Carl Levin: This June, pursuant to the US-Iraq SOFA, Status Of Forces Agreement, US combat forces are supposed to be withdrawn from Iraqi urban areas, turning over the security of cities and major towns to Iraqi security forces. The agreement also sets a December 2011 deadline for the withdrawal of all US forces from Iraq. President Obama has called for an end to US combat missions in Iraq by August of 2010. I hope that the draw down of forces in Iraq can be maintained while preserving our hard fought gains and while continuing to build Iraqi capacity to provide for their own security. The failure of Iraqi leaders to complete the political steps that they promised to take long ago puts at risk the reaching of those goals.
And with that approximately one minute and ten second bit, Levin was done with Iraq. Aaaaaawwwwww. Did the illegal war drag on longer than Congress cared to pay attention? How very lucky for our members of Congress that they serve in DC and not Iraq. Can you imagine how bored they be and how much their non-stop yawns would be as they patrolled Iraq? Poor, poor Congressional members.
Senator John McCain is the Ranking Member on the Committee. He used his opening statements to focus on "runaway costs." In the general, you understand. The abstract. He mentioned Afghanistan and Pakistan repeatedly and Iraq only once. You might have thought otherwise especially since McCain has an annoying habit of whistling his "s"es and Iraq has none. Considering his remarks in the presidential debates about Iraq it was amazing to watch him reduce the Iraq War to a subordinate clause of single sentence. The hearing itself lasted over three hours and that was due in part to Levin breaking from the topic to address civilian nominees since the committee had a quorum. After those were approved, it was time for the prepared opening statements from Gates [PDF format warning, here] and Mullen [PDF format warning, here].
Gates noted he was in Afghanistan last week. And that he had damn little to say, "As I told a group of soldiers on Thursday, they have done their job. Now it is time for us in Washington to do ours." Does Gates ever not repeat that statement? He's been repeating it since 2006. It was also popular with then-Senator Hillary Clinton when she was running for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination in 2008, with then-Senator Barack Obama when he was running for the presidency in the summer and fall of 2008, and for then-and-still Senator John Kerry throughout his 2004 campaign for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination and his run in the 2004 general election. By no means is that a full listing of all those who have repeated that over and over for the last five years. But at some point, when the next person tells US service members that, one hopes at least one shoots back, "When is Washington ever going to get around to doing their job?" Because, as these never ending statements indicate, DC seems to be the hold up, the bottle neck, at least according to the constant repetition of that stale statement. It's also kind of stupid to repeat that statment and then, in an exchange with Senator Susan Collins, get all catty about a marine at Camp Leatherneck who asked when his equipment was going to arrive and then snort that the commander told Gates that the equipment was there they just hadn't given it to the soldier.
Like Gates, Mullen read from a prepared statement. It was not, however, the prepared statement he turned in. It's always amusing to watch someone read word-for-word, in a bored manner, such phrases as "Let me tell you why". Mullen invented a phrase or hangs out in very strange circles. "We are what we buy," he declared ("It has been said that we are what we buy"). If so, he must do a great deal of his shopping in horse stalls because the committee stank of it as he called the budget a people's budget and asserted it put people first and these people were service members. Really? The increase of $700 million in funding for missile 'defense' systems? $17.6 billion for equipment replacment in Iraq and Afghanistan? $15.2 billion for "force protection" for equpiment such as MRAP All Terrain Vehicles?$7.5 billion to Afghans composing their country's National Security Forces? $700 million to Pakistan (for counter-insurgency)? An additional $200 million for Aegis ships? $550 million for "global partnership efforts"? We could go on and on but let's stop pretending that this is about putting US service members first. And if Mullen has a problem with any of the figures listed, he can take it up with Robert Gates who used those and more in his testimony today. For the record, while Mullin called it "the people's budget," Gates called it a "reform budget." Gates would also note that "a third of this budget is the people cost." A third. Not exactly "a people's budget."
Senator Joe Lieberman doesn't believe that the Fiscal Year 2010 Budget request is adequate and feels that some baseline issues (especially personnel) were being underestimated/underaccounted. He gave Gates the opportunity to clarify that. Gates took a pass. Remember that if a supplemental request comes along after the passage of the FY2010 request. Lieberman wasn't being hostile (Lieberman loves to fork over money to the defense industries). He was concerned that the money wasn't enough and that the request needed to be upped. Senator Jeff Session noted he "was concerned" about the budget which he thought was too small and especially with two ongoing wars. Gates rejected that notion (and went into a long drawn out response about research including airborne lasers and how, to use it on Iran, it would have to be circling within Iran's borders which he didn't see happening so research needs to continue and blah, blah, blah). So twice Gates was given the opportunity to ask for an increase, twice he declined. Senator Jim Inhofe did get out of Gates that he will receive a list of "unfundeds" from staff tomorrow and will forward that to the Congress on Monday. Senator Saxby Chambliss brought up the issue as well. He noted that in private conversations, General Norton Scwartz (Air Force Chief of Staff) has disagreed with the budget and that the general has told him he will testify to that which Senator Chambliss expects to happen shortly (next week). (Schwartz was interviewed by Lara Logan in a report that aired Sunday on CBS 60 Minutes, link has text and video.) For those who caught Cindy Sheehan's most recent Soapbox, this is the concern some Republicans -- including one she spoke to in Arkansas -- have regarding the defense budget and that it is not meeting security needs. Cindy Sheehan took last Sunday off because her son was hospitalized and in a grave condition. He has recovered and she will have Russell Baker on her show this Sunday to discuss his new book Family of Secrets: The Bush Dynasty, The Powerful Forces that Put It in the White House and What Their Influence Means for America. Bonnie Faulkner (KPFA's Guns and Butter) interviewed Baker Wednesday and you can click here for the audio at Information Clearing House. Senator John Thune pursued this issue as well and his website has posted audio, video and a transcript of the exchange. We'll note this exchange and encourage those interested in the full exchange to use the link:
Senator Thune: We've had a lot of combatant commanders in front of this committee who've testified to the need for this capability. And also, to the concern about the aging fleet and the fact that half of our bombers are pre-Cuban Missile Crisis era bombers and being able to persist and penetrate some of the more sophisticated air defense systems that we're expecting to encounter in the future. So it seems like a very relevant, very real-time question. But I guess my final question is this, what I hear you saying is you are still analyzing and looking at this. What OMB's budget said is terminated. So is this delayed, is this terminated, what is this? Secretary Gates: The program that was on the books is terminated. The idea of a Next Generation Bomber, as far as I'm concerned, is a very open question. And the recommendation will come out of the Quadrennial Defense Review and the Nuclear Posture Review. And I certainly don't want to leave the impression that the Russians are going to help us decide whether or not we have a Next Generation Bomber. What I was trying to say is if it looks like we're headed for a lower number of deployed nuclear weapons then we will have to make a recommendation to the president and to you as to how we allocate those weapons among missiles, submarines and aircraft.
While the Republicans laid down the marker and Gates grew testy (his "fine" to Thune was sharper than one expects from the flat affect Gates), Dems seemed unaware what was taking place with one exception: Evan Bayh. Bayh attempted to take on the Republican argument that the Defense Dept proposed budget was puny or weak. Attempted. He was throwing Gates life preservers but Gates appeared determined to drown.
Senator Evan Bayh: Is it still true, Mr. Secretary, that the amount that we're spending next year [on defense] will in the aggregate will be more than all our likely adversaries combined? It used to be that way. The reason I ask the question is, if it's true, what we're really facing is not a question of the amount of resources but how we most effectively allocate them to meet the challenges that we face. Is it still true that we appropriate more for national security and defense than all our likely adversaries combined?
Secretary: Robert Gates: Yes, but I -- Let me just add two things to that. First of all, more than -- more than any other country we have global interests and we have allies around the world who -- who depend on us for their -- for their security. So I mean, that's one of the reasons why we spend as much as we do.
Senator Evan Bayh: To be sure. I was just trying to put it in perspective. I don't think we've been -- We're allocating what we need to to protect the country and take care of some of these other interests. And it was by way again of saying we need to allocate the resources effectively to meet the threats and deal with some of the legacy and reform issues. I think you've done that.
Secretary Robert Gates: Senator let me interject just to provide some perspective Last summer as the economy was detoriating I I told Admiral Mullin that no matter who was elected I thought we'd be lucky if we got the FY09 number plus inflation.
Senator Evan Bayh: And we have real growth.
Secretary Robert Gates: And we've got two percent real growth.
Lieberman asked Gates about dwell time not being the ideal yet and Gates responded
"That's absolutely right we hope that toward the end of next year and more likely into next that the dwell time will begin to increase." Collins asked if screening was being done for PTSD and TBI upon returning stateside? Mullen stated PTSD screening is occuring at least 90 to 120 days after they return. TBI he was less precise on. PTSD, dwell time and other issues are especially in the news since Monday's shooting in Iraq when John Russell shot five of his fellow service members at a Baghdad stress control clinic. Kimberly Dozier (CBS News) reports that Russell did not feel "that the doctors at the clinic" believe him about combat stress and that "each day, the counselors 'sent him back to his base'" according to a soldier in Russell's unit. Yesterday's snapshot included the following:
Luis Martinez, Martha Raddatz and Kate Barrett (ABC News) speak with Yates' stepfather, Richard Van Blarga Jr., who states, he thinks Yates mentioned Russell in a call on Sunday: "On the conversation with my wife on Mother's Day, he said that he had met a sergeant, that he was, in his words, he was a very nice guy, he could deal with him, but he had some major issues. He was out there on the branch hoping for somebody to help him." Stephanie Gaskell (New York Daily News) reports Christian Bueno-Galdos, Matthew Houseal and Jacob Barton are the other three who were shot dead on Monday. She also notes the phone call Yates made to his mother on Sunday and quotes Shawna Machlinski (his mother) stating, "I do have some sympathy and I do know that I can forgive him [Russell]."
Click here for the ABC News report. UPI reports the five were flown into Dover Air Force yesterday. In headlines today, Amy Goodman (Democracy Now!) played a clip of Yates' mother Shawna Machlinski stating, "As much as I have a lot of anger towards him, I also have some sympathy, because I know he must have been going through a lot as well. That doesn't excuse the fact that he murdered my son. But I believe that if he would have gotten the help that he was there to get maybe sooner or gotten more help, and other people recognized the signs, because there are signs, and you don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure those signs out." At OneWorld, Aaron Glantz adds that "long-time observers of the U.S. military say the shooting shows all the signs of a soldier pushed to the brink of insanity by repeated and consistent exposure to war. The 44-year-old Russell had spent many years of his life at war when he allegedly opened fire and killed five of his fellow soldiers. Russell was drawing to the end of his third tour in Iraq and had also served deployments in Bosnia and Kosovo."
Today Gates wanted to whine about needing longer dwell time. Then why isn't it being provided? Feb. 28th, the US House Armed Services Committee (discussing FY2009 Defense budget) raised this issue:
US House Rep Patrick Murphy was also concerned about readiness. He wanted to know specifically that, regardless of any upcoming announcements, would the length of tours be reduced. On Tuesday of this week, Casey and Geren appeared before the Senate's Armed Service Committee also offering testimony on the 2009 Fiscal Year. From that hearing, the only thing that the media picked up on was that tours in Iraq and Afghanistan would (maybe) drop from fifteen months to twelve months. (Some outlets picked up on the stop-loss issue, stop-loss will continue but they 'hope' to drop the numbers from 8,000 to 7,000 -- ignored was Senator Jim Webb's questioning of Casey which produced Casey's claim that the UCMJ had been applied to Defense Department contractors serving in Iraq.) Murphy wanted to know specifically with the Afghanistan War still going on, an incomplete serach for Osama bin laden, with "the majority of our military in Iraq," what happens "if we're still bogged down refereeing a civil war in Iraq?" And when Petraeus appears before Congress, Murphy wanted to know, "What happens" in terms of the reduction of tours of duty "if he comes back to us and says we need a 'pause' not a 'drawdown.' Casey maintained that regardless of a "a brief pause, as you say, that will not impact our ability to come off of 15 months . . . the most important thing for us to do is to come off 15 months."
Murphy noted that "we're begging for about 7,000 troops for Afghanistan from our allies" and wondered if Congress needed to "mandate that if you deploy for 15 months, you're home for 15 months, if you deploy for 12 months, you're home for 12 months"? Casey wasn't keen on that idea and claimed it would interfere with the military's ability to do their job. Which makes the 'promise' Casey and Geren made earlier this week seem even more hollow (even more hollow than Casey claimed, in today's hearings, his experiences in the seventies were).
Murphy was right, it needs to be mandated by Congress. Otherwise it won't happen. April 1, 2008, US House Rep Shelley Berkley was pointing out to Walter Reed Amry Institute of Research's Col Charles W. Hoge that he'd just stated 12 months was not enough dwell time (he hemmed and hawed but agreed he'd just said it) and she pointed out that some US service members didn't even get that. Let's stop pretending these are new problems or new issues. These are the same issues the military command has said they were addressing. They have not. It's time for the US Congress to do so.
Meanwhile in Iraq, Alsumaria reports Nouri al-Maliki is again speaking publicly of conspiracies against him. The puppet of the occupation declared "he fears the return of" Ba'athis "conspiracies and dictatorship while he stressed that the Constitution bans reconciliation with Baathists as a party." While he frets over imaginary plots by 'Ba'athists,' Nouri announced he wasn't at all alarmed by the increase in bombings.Alsumaria explains Nouri's not the only one floating conspiracy theories. Ahmad Al Jalabi ("head of Iraqi National Congress Party") has declared Iraq's intelligence community has been "infiltrated by Al Qaeda and defunct Baath Party" and how does he know that breaking news? He just now read it. In George Tenet's book. At the Center of the Storm: My Years at the CIA was published in April. Of 2007. Fresh intel for Iraq? Alsumaria notes the book "points out that Iraqi intelligence chief Mohammed Al Shahwan is an employee of US Intelligence since 1991." That would mean that the intel community was infiltrated by the US. If the names seems familiar, it's Ahmad Chalabi. Ahmad Al Jalabi is another name he's known by. And of course, Chalibi was a CIA asset for many, many years.In other insanity, April 23rd, al-Maliki's government announced they'd captured Abu Omar Baghdadi. Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times' Babylon and Beyond) reports they continue to claim that they've captured al-Baghdadi, "There is already widespread skepticism whether the man in custody is really Baghdadi -- which is itself a nom-de-guerre indicating only that the man is from Baghdad." Sly notes the US still has not been allowed to examine the alleged al-Baghdadi.
As noted throughout the week, kidnappings never went away and now appear to be on the rise in Iraq. Sahar Issa and Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) report the corpse of a six-year-old boy was found in a plastic bag in Baghdad and he "had been kidnapped three days ago". Reuters notes "a Christian male teacher" was kidnapped in Rashad. Today Paul Schemm (AP) reports on the exodus of Christians from Iraq and notes the US State Dept estimated there were 1.2 million Christians in 2003 and that the number has fallen to as low as 550,000 with other estimates even lower. Philippe Leclerc, the United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees acting rep in Damascus states Iraqi Christians who are external refugees are not planning on returning, "They simply do not feel safe enough. They cannot suffiicently count on state security or any other force to protect them." The reasons include the ongoing violence, the past threats and the fact that they are shut out of previous employment opportunities by the Shi'ite controlled government. Bobby Ghosh (TIME magazine) notes "the surge of violence" and how only 1% of Iraqi external refugees have returned while only 18% of Iraq's internal refugees have returned to their homes and yet the UN has recommended that Iraqi refugees no more "get automatic refugee status abroad" -- 'automatic,' the UN was being comical. Ghosh notes:
Although the U.N. agency has warned that its new guidelines don't mean Iraq has turned a corner, aid workers fear that's exactly how they will be taken by officials in Damascus and Amman -- with dire consequences for the refugees. "I'm wary that this will be interpreted by asylum countries that it's O.K. to return Iraqis forcibly," says Bob Carey, vice president for resettlement and migration policy at the International Rescue Committee (IRC).
Joe Sterling (CNN) reports on refugees coming to the US and notes that the US admitted 60,000 refugees in FY 2008 but only 13,823 were from Iraq (Burma resulted in the largest number of refugees). Sterling also interviewed Internaional Rescuee Committee's George Rupp:
Sterling: Any bigotry encountered in job searches?
Rupp: Certainly some of the refugees feel there is bigotry encountered and it is very difficult to confirm whether that is or isn't the case. But several reported they have been told by several prospective employers, that, "You are from Iraq, you are rich, there's no reason we have to worry about finding a position for you."
Sterling: Employers actually thought they were rich?
Rupp: Because of the oil resources that these few employers were aware that Iraq has. There's no question that refugees of all ethnicities often feel they have a special burden, a special hurdle to get over. But what is remarkable is how many of them feel the U.S. is welcoming, and is open, and does not discriminate against them. It's not surprising there are at least some instances in which people feel they were discriminated against and no doubt they were, but that is not a dominant pattern I don't think.
Turning to some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Sahar Issa and Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) report a Kirkuk roadside bombing wounded two police officers and a Mosul roadside bombing wounded four people.
Shootings?
Sahar Issa and Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) report the Sunni Endowment Office's Haider Hassoun was shot (wounded, not killed) in Baghdad while another employee of the Endowment was wounded in second attack, a Baquba home invasion in which a woman and her sons were killed (both sons were Sahwa) and 2 people were shot dead in Kirkuk "late Wednesday". Reuters notes 1 Sahwa member shot dead and three more injured in Kirkuk.
While the Senate Armed Services Committee debated the FY10 defense/war budget, the House passed Barack Obama's war supplemental request today. Jeremy Pelofsky (Reuters) reports that the $96.7 billion request (over $17 billion more than Barack requested) passed out of the House while the Senate continues working on their version. US House Rep Dennis Kucinich released the following statement:
America went to war against Iraq based on a lie. We were told back in 2002 that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. The previous administration even pursued torture to try to extract false confessions in order to justify the war. It is time to tell the truth. The truth is we should not have prosecuted a war against the Iraqi people. The truth is the Democratic Senate could have stopped the Iraq war in 202. The truth is we Democrats were given control of Congress in 2006 to end the war. The truth is this bill continues a disastrous war, which has cost the lives of thousands of soldiers. The truth is the occupation has fueld the insurgency. The truth is the Iraq war will cost the American and Iraqi people trillions of dollars and as many as a million innocent Iraqis have lost their lives as a result of this war.
Don't tell the American people that you are ending the war by continuing to fund the war. Don't tell the American people that the war will end when their plans leave 50,000 troops in Iraq. Don't tell the American people that the way out of Afghanistan is to escalate our presence.
Get out of Iraq. Get out of Afghanistan. Come home America.
Yesterday Barack broke another promise, he won't release the torture photos. At CNN, Col Janis Karpinski weighs in:
About-face! President Obama's reversal of his administration's decision to release more photographs of prisoner abuse is disappointing and infuriating.
It is sad and tragic. The reversal will absolutely stir up more controversy than release of the photographs, causing an outpouring of rampant speculation -- What is the government hiding? Who are the people in the photographs? How awful can these new photos be? And worse.
The president is going to Egypt, and discussions surrounding the photographs are inevitable. He is far better off armed with the ability to have open discussions on all topics instead of apologizing for holding back information. Withholding evidence is counterproductive and does not sound like "truth," and it surely does not sound like "change."
The truth is always helpful. If we put all the photographs on the table, clearing the air, then, and only then, we can get on with the discussion of how to make sure this never happens again. The truth will set us free -- free to find the roots of the problem, allowing us to do what we did best -- making the world a better place to live.
iraq
evan brightsteven d. green
brett barrouquere
cindy sheehan
kpfabonnie faulknerguns and butter
joe sterling
aaron glantz
the los angeles timesliz sly
alsumaria
abc newsluis martinezmartha raddatz kate barrett
kimberly dozier
60 minutescbs news
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Dreams, Daily Howler
Starting off with The Daily Howler:
Today, Barry sits on the D.C. city council. In that role, he recently entered this country’s ongoing debate about same-sex marriage. The city council had approved a bill to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions. Last Wednesday, Tim Craig reported Barry’s comments and actions, on the front page of the Washington Post:
CRAIG (5/6/09): The D.C. Council overwhelmingly approved a bill yesterday to recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere, in a vote that followed a sharp exchange between an openly gay member and a civil rights champion and set off shouts of reproach from local ministers.
The council passed the measure by a vote of 12 to 1. During the debate, council member David A. Catania (I-At Large) accused Marion Barry (D-Ward 8), who cast the dissenting vote, of having taken a "bigoted" position.
After the vote, enraged African American ministers stormed the hallway outside the council chambers and vowed that they will work to oust the members who supported the bill, which was sponsored by Phil Mendelson (D-At Large). They caused such an uproar that security officers and D.C. police were called in to clear the hallway.
Yesterday's action could be a precursor to a debate later this year over whether to legalize same-sex marriage in the city. "There is no turning back," said Catania, who plans to introduce a broader gay marriage bill in a few months.
Barry, who said he supports gay rights and civil unions, warned after the vote that the District could erupt if the council does not proceed slowly on same-sex marriage.
"All hell is going to break lose," Barry said. "We may have a civil war. The black community is just adamant against this.”
Is Barry right about the views of “the black community?” We hope—and assume—that he isn’t. (Our assumption is based on the 12-1 vote within the city council.) That said, Barry’s comments produced spirited reaction in, and from, the Washington Post. Three days later, for example, the Post printed an editorial condemning Barry’s statements (click here). “Mr. Barry's Ugly Words,” the headline said. “The D.C. Council member chose politics over principle in a vote against recognizing same-sex marriages.”
Barry is a major American politician, in a major American city. He sits where the rubber meets the road—inside a political body which may consider a bill to legalize same-sex marriages. We weren’t offended by Barry’s “ugly words” ourselves—although we hope (and assume) he was wrong in his sweeping assessment of the views within DC’s black community.
But it’s funny, ain’t it? You haven’t heard squat about Barry’s “ugly words” on your “progressive” cable news channel! But last night, The Dumbest Person in the World devoted another lengthy segment to ridicule of Carrie Prejean, an insignificant 21-year-old who recently made the mistake of saying something about same-sex marriage which Olbermann has never even bothered describing. (For the record, her view on the matter seems to resemble that of Barack Obama. And that of Hillary Clinton. And John Kerry and Al Gore.) The big nut went on for almost seven minutes mocking Prejean—and her breast implants. But it’s funny, ain’t it? You’ve never heard a word on this program about the things Marion Barry said.
Of course, the reasons for that are obvious:
Olbermann doesn’t have videotape of Barry walking around in a two-piece swim suit. And Barry is an older man, not a younger woman. As Olbermann has made dumb-foundingly clear, he seems to live for the opportunity to ridicule young women. He never says boo about older man—perhaps understanding they could come to his studio and engage in conduct which might require him to obtain a sphincter implant.
Olbermann’s a woman-trasher—a genuine nut on this matter. And no, we hate to break the news: He doesn’t do “progressive” television. He seems to do work designed to capture the eyeballs of well-meaning young liberals. And for some ungodly reason, he does television which has long been devoted to the ridicule of women’s brains and bodies.
Marion Barry doesn’t count. An insignificant creation of Donald Trump quite incessantly does.
(Background: Trump owns the Miss USA contest. He now engineers a dispute every year, hoping to bring his product parity with the more famous Miss America pageant.)
For sheer stupidity, we strongly recommend last night’s buffoonish segment, devoted to the eternal dumbness of Miss California. (To watch the segment, click this.) Olbermann plays you every way but blue, citing those breast implants two separate times (including in his opening paragraph) and failing to tell you why Prejean might be upset about the way she’s been treated. (He always forgets to explain this.) You see, in the world of “progressive cable,” calling a young woman a “c*nt” and a b*itch” isn’t worthy of comment—if she fails to hold pseudo-progressive views, that is. “Where are the feminists?” Laura Ingraham inquired. We would broaden her limited framework: Where are the progressives?
Oh, we forgot! They’re dragging their knuckles and sucking their thumbs, watching a 50-year-old nutcase get his eternal jollies. And drive his rating among the demo, putting millions of bucks in his pants.
My thoughts re: Marion Berry? I'm ashamed of him. Someone who has depended so often on forgiveness from others has no right to stand in the way of progress for anyone. That said, I fear he's correct re: the community. Things are not as bad as they were but they are still bad.
That's why my church worked on the issue (and continues to): The homophobia in the Black community. And people like Marion Berry continue the homophobia. He's a community leader that means he needs to lead. He doesn't need to be where the community is comfortable, he needs to be pulling the community, leading it.
As for the Miss California, her opions are her own. One thing I would point out is that Bob Somerby feels he's done something amazing in defending the woman. And while he has been largely alone, equally true is that before this attack on that woman started, Michael Winship was attacking another beauty queen for a statement/position. He was ridiculing her in his online commentary. As I recall, the only one to call that out was C.I.
Michael Winship works for Bill Moyers. I can't watch Bill Moyers anymore. He became a Barack Cult member and is just too nutty. He's like a crazed person. He makes no sense and he's so unhinged it's embarrassing to watch him.
He seems to orgasm on air while discussing Barack. And it's always been that way. He pimped Barry harder than anyone else on PBS -- and PBS was never an anti-Barry news outlet.
Okay, tonight's theme post. Stevie Nicks is a singer-songwriter. She rocks on her own and also with the group Fleetwood Mac. She wrote the band's biggest hit (number one) "Dreams" and she and Fleetwood Mac are on the road right now. So our theme tonight is dreams.
And dreams are something I really don't have time for. I usually go to bed so exhausted that whatever dreams I have I don't remember the next morning. The exception to that is Saturday morning where I sleep in a little. My Saturday dreams are sugar filled. I dream of pink cotton candy, sugar cookies, chocolate chip cookies, Girl Scout Cookies, Oreos, banana splits, sundaes, strawberry shortcake, brownies, fudge, you name it.
And I'm not someone who has a sweet tooth. I do have a secret stash of Whoppers (the round chocolate candy). And I'll dig into that about once every two weeks. But that's really it.
I have no idea why I dream of so many sweets lately.
It would make sense if I was dreaming of popcorn (I am always eating popcorn) or of chips (I have many favorite chips) but sweets?
I guess sometimes dreams don't make sense.
Nor do they have.
We get to take a little mini-vacation.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Wednesday, May 13, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, more details emerge in Monday's shooting, Steven D. Green's sentencing hearing continues (day three), Congress examines new techniques for veterans' treatment, the President of the KRG expresses disappointment in the US, Barack breaks another promise, and more.
Starting with Steven D. Green, convicted last Thursday in the gang-rape of 14-year-old Iraqi Abeer Qassim Hamza al-Janabi, her murder, the murder of her five-year-old sister and the murders of both of her parents. His sentence hearing is ongoing and on the third day. Evan Bright reports that the defense put Gary Solace ("a Vietnam War vet who testified about military training+combat stress and its effects") and Andrew Horn. Horn's a retired Marine. He knows Green from . . . well he doesn't. Green has been convicted. The defense is tossing up 'experts' and using damn little time to provide people who know Green. Green's been convicted. 'Experts' aren't the issue at this point. Yesterday was nothing but 'experts' except for Green's uncle Dr. Greg Simolke. Evan Bright reports of that testimony yesterday:
You could see the emotion growing in Simolke's face and demeanor. He spoke of Steven, Doug, and Danny not having many rules. When asked about Doug's "being tough" on Steve, he testified that "Doug...was hard on Steve...(pause)...it felt like that...wore on Steve. Doug was sort of..." At this point, Dr. Simolke broke down crying and had to pause for a few minutes to regain his composure. He was given some water and he continued. "Doug was sort of...in charge, but he was too young to manage Steve." Bouldin asked what his(Simolke's) thoughts were on Green and he "generally..I felt sorry for Steve. I felt that he wasn't completely normal....nothing drastic or super unusual...he was generally left out [throughout] his life. (pauses...more tears) Nothing ever worked out for him, he had a black cloud hanging over him..(pause)..I just didn't think life was workin' out for him." During all of this, Green was noticed staring straight ahead. Simolke testified that he wouldn't have called Steven Green a leader. "No....I don't want to be offensive...he wasn't a leader...anyone who knows Steve wouldn't say he was. He's a follower." Simolke testified about Green living with him for a few months, maintaining a C-average, before realizing that he was so far behind in school that wouldn't be able to graduate high school that year with the rest of his classmates; after which dropping out and moving back to his hometown of Midland, TX where he got his GED.
Instead of staying with that and pursuing that line, they offered 'experts'. Deborah Feverick (CNN) notes, "Defense lawyers trying to save their client from the death penalty argued Tuesday that former U.S. soldier Steven Green exhibited clear symptoms of acute stress disorder in Iraq and that a military psychiatric nurse-practioner failed to diagnose the troubled infantryman and pull him out of combat." The 'experts' didn't even know what they were talking about and one conflicted his account on the stand and better hope the jury doesn't learn what happened this weekend. Bright reports that Dr. Ruben Gur stated Green needed structure and was asked if Green would do well in military? Gur answered affirmative. After explaining the MRI said otherwise. Did no one catch that? He would also, according to Gur, do well in prison with the structure. AP reports Green "threw a lunch tray" in jail Saturday over needing to shave but not having (or, more likely, being given) a razor. Gur was an 'expert.' Another reason not to waste the jury's time with 'experts.' Guilt was already established. The issue now is the sentencing. Friends and family of Green is who needs to be put on the stand to humanize Green, not to turn him into a case study.
Yesterday CBS Evening News with Katie Couric offered a report by Bob Orr on the Sgt John M. Russell shooting five other service members in Iraq:
Bob Orr: His commander feared Sgt John Russell was on the edge. They took away his weapon and ordered him into counseling in a combat stress clinic in Baghdad. He went there yesterday, officials say, and opened fire killing five service men. 22-year-old John Michael Russell: He's got medals. And he was doing good for -- for the country. Bob Orr: Today at their home in Sherman, Texas, Russell's twenty-one year-old son struggled to understand how his dad on his third tour of duty in Iraq now faces five counts of murder. 22-year-old John Michael Russell: For him to do something like that, he couldn't have been in his right state of mind. They had to -- they had to put him to a breaking point and just -- he just had to have lost it. Just lost all train of thought to do anything like that. Bob Orr: [Sgt] Russell's father said he may have snapped fearing his military career could be ended by a stress diagnosis. Wilburn Russell: His life was over as far as he was concerned. He was going to lose everything. And I guess it was too much. Bob Orr: Military investigators don't know what triggered the shootings but say Russell was agitated when asked to leave the clinic after arguing with a counselor. A short time later, Russell returned to the stress center with a weapon he apparently stole from his armed escort. The rampage played out quickly. Gen David Perkins: The suspect was apprehended outside the clinic shortly after shots were heard. Bob Orr: The incident is the deadliest involving soldier-on-soldier violence in the six year Iraq War. In response the army has now launched an investigation to determine whether it needs more people and facilities in war zones to deal with combat stress and soldiers on the brink. Patrick Campbell (Iraq & Afghanistan Veterans of America): These are the canaries in the mine. If we don't start addressing these issues, people are going to get more and more injured and it's going to be harder to treat them. Bob Orr: For Sgt Russell who had planned to be home by July, it's too late. Wilburn Russell: His father's heartbroken, his mother's crying in their hiding. We're -- we're sorry for the families involved too. Cause they're going through heart ache. Bob Orr: His family says they knew of no warning sings. Russell in fact recently e-mailed his son on his birthday and just Sunday e-mailed his mother for Mother's Day.
James Dao and Lizette Alvarez (New York Times) report, "Lt. Col. Edward Brusher, the deputy director of behavioral health proponecy for the surgeon general, said in March that there was one provider for 640 service members in Iraq." They quote him stating, "There are currently enough behavioral health providers." As Elaine noted last night:The military is saying that speculation does no good but this is the same military that has closed the stress center. 1 US soldier just shot 5 others dead. If there were ever a time when a stress center was most needed, it would be right now. Had a shooting taken place at a support hospital or triage center, they would not have shut down.They wouldn't have had the option. The feeling would have been, "This is emergency work." But note the difference when it comes to the brain, to mental issues, to stress.They closed down the combat stress center yesterday. When it was most needed.
Meanwhile Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) identified two of those killed on Monday: Charles K. Springle and Michael Edward Yates. Luis Martinez, Martha Raddatz and Kate Barrett (ABC News) speak with Yates' stepfather, Richard Van Blarga Jr., who states, he thinks Yates mentioned Russell in a call on Sunday: "On the conversation with my wife on Mother's Day, he said that he had met a sergeant, that he was, in his words, he was a very nice guy, he could deal with him, but he had some major issues. He was out there on the branch hoping for somebody to help him." Stephanie Gaskell (New York Daily News) reports Christian Bueno-Galdos, Matthew Houseal and Jacob Barton are the other three who were shot dead on Monday. She also notes the phone call Yates made to his mother on Sunday and quotes Shawna Machlinski (his mother) stating, "I do have some sympathy and I do know that I can forgive him [Russell]." Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) notes, "The shootings concerned the military, which is preparing to withdraw troops from Iraq's cities by the end of June under the terms of the security agreement reached with the Iraqi government. Camp Liberty, part of the sprawling complex of bases that make up Camp Victory, will not close because both countries have decided that it is not part of Baghdad." The bases are in Baghdad and out of it (they sprawl). According to the treaty masquerading as the Status Of Forces Agreement, the US soldiers on them should be removed or else the US base could become a joint US-Iraqi base. Neither is happening, the much lauded SOFA is being violated. That's only one aspect. In a report that only Alsumaria currently has, the Status Of Forces Agreement doesn't apply to all of Iraq. That's the claim being offered by a US Major: "56th Combat brigade Chief in the US military Major Marc Ferrero clarified that his forces stationed in Taji are not included in the decision of US Forces withdrawal from Iraq cities since this region is out of Baghdad Province. He ruled out as well the possibility of violence spike in the regions under his command where security and stability reign." Back to the issue of the US soldiers and of injuries . . .
"I want to thank you all for being here," declared US House Rep Bob Finer bringing the House Veterans' Affairs Committee -- full committee, which he chairs -- to order [click here for prepared opening statement, I'm quoting what he actually said.] "The purpose is very simple. In my job and I'm sure everyone of my colleagues has the same experience, we come into contact with constituents in business or patients who have had contact or have invented or have manufactured instruments, technologies, treatments which would seem to have a great benefit for our veterans. And yet many have had a frustrating experience of dealingwith a bureaucracy that just doesn't seem to react very quickly to new ideas and treatments and people are frustrated."
The committee was holding a hearing this morning entitled Innovative Technologies and Treatments Helping Veterans. There were two panels of witnesses. The first panel was composed of David R. Bethune (Zila, Inc), Dr. David Sidransky (Johns Hopkins University), Robert A. Beckman (Brainport Technologies), David A. Broecker (Alkermes, Inc.), Mark Munroe (Mobile Medical International Corporation), Stanley Stern (TeleMed Network) and Dr. David Scadden (Harvard). The second panel was composed of Dr. Howard J. Federoff (Georgetown University), Dr. Nelson M. Handal (Harmonex, Inc) and James A. Schoeneck (BrainCells Inc). Click on the name for prepared statements (these are all non-PDF format, no worries). We'll be focusing on the first panel and largely one aspect.
The full committee was supposed to be present but that did not happen. "None of our Republican colleagues are here," Chair Bob Finer explained. "They decided somehow that special interests were invited." If so, wasn't it their job to call out special interests? Apparently Republicans on the Committee just needed a Snow Day.
Robert Beckman spoke of a portable device, the Brainport Vision Device, where a small camera ("with zoom capability") is hooked to other neurochannels ("such as the tongue"). Beckman stated, "One blind user with two glass eyes was able to successfully shoot a basketball and another used the Brainport Vision Device at an indoor rock climbing gym to see the next rock holds and at home with his daughter to play Tic-Tac-Toe."
"The Brainport Vision Device will not replace the cane or the sight dog," he continued. "But it will become an important, additional tool to improve the safety, mobility and quality of life for blind users. Some examples. Finding the open seat on a crowded bus or train. Identifying the direction to the target building in a confusing parking lot. Finding the handle in order to remove a hot pot from the stove. Wicab recently sponsored clinical testing of the Brainport Vision Device at the Atlanta VA. Dr. Michael Williams, the PI concluded, 'Bottom line, the device performs remarkably well for the tasks that we looked at in phase one'. To optimize the device we need feedback from a much larger pool of users who are blind. We would welcome the opportunity to further test the Brainport Vision Device at VA sites. Perhaps those willing soldiers who are blind as a result of a blast injury should be first in line to test this new technology?"
US House Rep Jerry McNerney's had a few questions.
Jerry McNerney: Mr. Beckman, the Brainport Vision Device. This sounds very -- How intrusive is the -- is the device that's on the tongue? Are you able to eat? Do you have to remove it for different activities? Or -- how intrustive is this?
Robert Beckman: Well for vision, the device does rest on top of the tongue. And so, yes, indeed, in its current form you would have to remove the device when you were eating, talking, etc. However, with additional funding there is no -- there are no technological barriers to making this device totally wireless so that the intra-oral device could be mounted on the upper pallette and blind people using wireless techonology would be able to use the device without anybody else knowing that they actually have the technology available to them.
Jerry McNerney: Well that's pretty exciting. I'm kind of thrilled by the technical aspect of this rather than the administrative aspect, if you can't tell.
US House Rep John Hall also had some questions.
John Hall: Mr. Beckman, I was wondering if you could tell us why Brainport Devices are not implantable and is that something that could change?
Robert Beckman: I think one of the key advantages of the Brainport Device is the fact that it's non-implantable. In fact, it's a portable device where there's no need to implant the techonology. Other technologies for vision such as retinal implants are being developed. But I think the fact that they involve surgery, that they're invasive, means that those technologies will likely not be available for probably ten years or more. Our technology is available today.
John Hall: I understand that and I can see the advantadges to either -- to both. Cochlear implants, for instance, have been and are being used by large number of people with some success. Is that because of the location in the brain of the nerves that one would need to get at and the centers one would need to get at that it's more difficult. Or is this something that you see happening in the future?
Robert Beckman: That was really, going back to my testimony, that was really one of Dr. Paul Bach-y-Rita's main hypothesis that the brain is not hard wired so, in other words, you can use an alternate sensor -- you can use an alternate sensor and also an alternate path to send that signal to the brain. And we have demonstrated that, for instance, people who are blind who perform a certain task with our device and while they're performing that task they are analyzed with PET [Positron Emission Tomography] imaging. We have demonstrated that those people process the visual information in the visual cortex of their brain. On the other hand, people who are sighted, that perform the exact same task, process that same information in the somata sensory region of their brain. So in other words, people do -- the brain is masterful in the way that it can process the information in the appropriate area
John Hall: And it can -- it can change? It can switch and adapt from one pathway to another?
Robert Beckman: Yes.
John Hall: What's the typical training -- You may have said this in response to a question before I got here -- what's the typical training time for someone to use --- to adapt to Brainport?
Robert Beckman: I think that's also an amazing part about this technology. We train blind people literally in hours to start to recongize symbols, pathways, doorways, etc. We have not, so far, had anybody except for one blind person, Erik Weihenmayer, use the device even more than ten hours. So all the -- we've got videos on our website, etc., that show some of the benefits. All of those people are performing the tasks that we show with less than ten hours of training. And I think what is most interesting is what will happen when we get this technology into the hands of many, many adults letting them take it home, use it on their own, explore the potential benefits of the technology on their own. That's where we'll start to really discover what the advantages and possibilites are for this technology.
Beckman also spoke of the Brainport Balance Device for those with balance problems. Broecker spoke of VIVITROL which was FDA approved in 2006 and treats alcoholism. How? He was more interested in discussing alcoholism. Were I testifying to Congress, I would assume the members were aware of alcoholism and would use my time to explain why my medicine needed government money and/or veterans access as opposed to offering a history of alcoholism. Bethune and Sidransky spoke of oral cancer, the rate of which is on the rise and veterans account for five-percent of all cases each year in the United States. Bethune explained, "Veterans are almost 3 times more likely to be diagnosed with oran cancer than are members of the general public." They were seeking to have ViziLite Plus used for early screening of veterans. Mark Munroe was asking for attention to and resources for Mobile Medical which is a "mobile surgical hospitals." It was used in Iraq on The Learning Channel's Little People, Big World, episodes nineteen and twenty which TLC described as follows, "When Matt Roloff learns of an Iraqi family with dwarf children who are in severe need of medical intervention, he is compelled to help them. Amy and the Roloff kids are concerned for Matt's safety as he makes the long, difficult and dangerous journey to Baghdad. Once there, he falls in with the U.S. military, who provides armed escort into the Green Zone -- where Matt meets the family and gains their trust. Touched by the familys heartwarming spirit, Matt gets photos and X-rays of the kids to bring back to America for evaluation by medical specialists." From those two episodes, let's note this clip where Matt Roloff speaks with Iraqi journalists
Matt Roloff: I think it was important for me to be able to communicate with the Iraqi people that it's important for their citizens to put value on all of their fellow citizens, even if they are little people. That's an important message we're still trying to communicate in the States and to be able to do it in another country is just as, if not more gratifying, just as gratifying.
There is a point in including the quote beyond the hearing. We'll get to it. Back to the hearing. Stanley Stern's focus was TeleMed Internet Endpoint (TIE) which would provide face to face (via phone calls) help with health care providers and could also allow a veteran to participate at any time in a group therapy session that runs around the clock. Scadden spoke of stem cell research including technology that would allow an adult stem cell to be taken back in maturation.
Remember Matt Roloff's words about everyone being respected? The Christian Science Monitor feels differently. They argue that religious leaders are being ignored in Iraq. But they reveal how STUPID they are by taking the word of professional con-artist and admitted LIAR Andrew White. White breezes in and out of Iraq but of course had his snit fit with the press after he offered testimony, under oath, which he did not know would be reported on. (Hence the snit fit.) White declared there were no more Jews in Iraq back in 2006 when Jews were still in Baghdad. And White was allegedly raising funds to help them. But he lied, under oath. White is a joke. He's a War Hawk who cheerleaded the illegal war and he doesn't speak Arabic. He stays hidden away in the Green Zone when he manages to make it to Iraq. No one needs to take White seriously but it is telling that Matt Roloff saw a need for all Iraqis to be treated equally and the Monitor wants to argue that religious clerics need to be elevated further. Further. The same religious clerics who have issued orders to kill gays and lesbians, the same fundamentalists who have turned Iraq from the most advanced MidEastern nation into a nightmare. Doug Ireland (ZNet) reported more news on the assaults of gay Iraqi males last week:
As the murder campaign targeting Iraqi gays intensifies, a leading Arabic television network last week revealed the use of a horrifying new form of lethal torture against Iraqi gay men -- anti-gay Shiite death squads are sealing their anuses with a powerful glue, then inducing diarrhea, which leads to a painful and agonizing death. The use of this stomach-turning new torture was first reported by the Al Arabiya network, which is headquartered in the United Arab Emirates and was alerted to the story by a leading Iraqi feminist and human rights activist.Yanar Mohammed, president of the Organization of Women's Freedom in Iraq (OWFI), told Al Arabiya that the torture substance "is an Iranian-manufactured glue that, if applied to the skin, sticks to it and can only be removed by surgery. After they glue the anuses of homosexuals, they give them a drink that causes diarrhea. Since the anus is closed, the diarrhea causes death. Videos of this form of torture are being distributed on mobile telephones in Iraq." Al Arabiya said its reporter confirmed the use of this anal torture by "visiting the Baghdad morgue in Bab-al-Moazaam in central Baghdad, where Neman Mohsen, the medical examiner, confirmed they have the bodies of seven homosexuals in the morgue. He said, 'We were not able to identify the culprits, who dumped the bodies in front of the morgue and fled without being seen.'" A two-person team from Human Rights Watch (HRW) currently in Iraq to investigate persecution of LGBT people has also confirmed the use of this form of torture. In a widely-circulated email from Iraq, the head of HRW's LGBT desk, Scott Long, said he and his colleague had gathered evidence which confirms the Al Arabiya report and that HRW would make its own detailed report after the organization's two staffers return to the United States next week. OWFI's Mohammed, the woman responsible for gathering information about the use of this sadistic anal torture and passing it on to Al Arabiya, told Gay City News that "the story was so horrific that when I first heard it from gay friends I didn't believe it. But then I investigated and found it was really true that the anuses of gay men were being glued shut." Speaking by telephone from Toronto, where she was on a brief visit to relatives before a scheduled return to Iraq next week, Mohammed told this reporter that, "Fortunately, Al Arabiya has a very good human rights reporter, to whom I told what I had found, and he was able to confirm it by visiting the morgue."
When the cheesy ass editorial board of the Monitor wants to call out the attacks on Iraq's LGBT community, we may take them seriously. Until then, we'll just shake our heads at their gross stupidity. The Monitor's Jane Arraf (a reporter, not an editorial board member) sticks to reality and conducts multiple interviews with "senior US and Iraqi officials and US intelligence officers" who feel optimistic about some areas of Iraq 'stabilizing' and not so about others: "But the outlook for progress in some of the country's most volatile cities is less certain. Iraqi security officials in Mosul and Diyala Province have considstently said that they need the assistance of US troops past a June 30 deadline for American forces to leave Iraqi cities. But Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's recent statements that he will not ask US forces to stay in those cities, while domestically popular ahead of elections next year, has sent military planners scrambling." For the Baghdad suburb of Adhamiya, Natalia Antelava (BBC) reports the issue of the Sahwa ("the so-called Sahwa, or Awakening, Councils") the same, al-Maliki's government refuses to bring them, they're still having trouble being paid and they're just frustrated with the Shi'ite dominated government which, people tend to forget, is one reason they took arms (against the US and the Shi'ite controlled government) to begin with. "I think the Iraqi government is not capitalizing on the momentum. I think it's a huge blow to the momentum we've created." That quote by US Army Capt Jason Dudley about the failure to bring in Sahwa is highlighted by Thomas E. Ricks (Foreign Policy) who notes it "echoes the findings of the Silverman study I blogged the other day that concluded that there is widespread distrust of the central government not only among Sunni leaders but also among Shiites". Ricks is the author of The Gamble: General David Petraeus and the American Military Adventure in Iraq 2006-2008. Timothy Williams (New York Times) zooms in on the tensions in Nineveh Province where the governor of the province, Atheel al-Nujaifi (an Arab), was not allowed to enter Bashiqa Friday for a hot-air ballon exhibition. The ones owning the toll bridge? The Kurdish pesh merga. This may have led to the protest in Bashiqa and Mosul yesterday ("more than a thousand people") insisting the pesh merga leave the province. The tensions run high for a number of reasons including the still undecided fate of oil-rich Kirkuk (which was supposed to have been put to a resolution long ago). Meanwhile Missy Ryan and Shamal Aqrawi (Reuters) report that disappointment is being expressed by Kurdish leaders in Iraq over the US and their feeling that they have been let down. The President of the Kurdistan Regional Government Masoud Barzani states, "We have had a historic and friendly relationship, but frankly speaking, we were expecting more. They could have played a much larger role in solving this problem [Kirkuk] than they did." The disappointment comes at a time of multiple disappointments. As Ruth noted yesterday, the Kurds were informed Sunday that they could act on their oil contracts only to have Hussein al-Shahrastani, Minister of Oil, state yesterday that the contracts were "illegal". This is a huge mess and will only get worse. It's one of the many reasons Barack should have immediately began a withdrawal (something he led many to foolishly believe he was promising during his campaign). The US can't make the decision and can't impose it. The decision on Kirkuk has been delayed repeatedly. The decision on whether the region can sign their own oil contracts is still not settled. These are issues Iraq has to work out on its own. And as long as the US is there (propping up al-Maliki's puppet government), segments will expect the US to step in. (And stepping in means creating the new Israel-Palestine divide that will haunt the world for over a century. This is a decision for the players involved and that does not include the US.)
Turning to some of the reported violence for today . . .
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 person and wounded two more and "Sahwa sources in the area said that a low level Sahwa leader was killed with his son in the explosion" and a Mosul car bombing which claimed the lives of 2 Iraqi soldiers. Reuters notes a Baghdad sticky bombing which left five injured, a Ramadi roadside bombing which claimed the lives of 2 Iraqi soldiers, a Kirkuk roadside bombing which left three police officers wounded and a Mosul mortar attack which left one person injured.
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 Iraqi soldier shot dead in Mosul and 1 "employee in the integrity committee" shot dead in Baghdad.
Kidnappings?
Reuters notes "a doctor and his daughter" were rescued from kidnappers in Baghdad by the Iraqi military.
Turning to Barry O!, the celebrity in chief. As Trina, Cedric and Wally noted yesterday, he's already stabbed the LGBT community in the US in the back yet again. Today brought another. Margaret Talev and Jonathan S. Landay (McClatchy Newspapers) report Barack changed his mind and will not release the prisoner abuse photos from Iraq and Afghanistan: "The move is an about-face from the administration's decision last month to release 44 photographs in response to an order that a New York federal district court issued three years ago. The American Civil Liberties Union had sued the Department of Defense under President George W. Bush for the release of the photos. The Bush administration had challenged the release." In response, the ACLU issued the following:
The Obama administration announced today that it is reversing its promise to make public photos depicting detainee abuse by U.S. personnel overseas. The Department of Defense had told a federal judge that it would release a "substantial number" of photos in response to a court ruling in an American Civil Liberties Union Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.
The following can be attributed to Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director of the ACLU:
"The Obama administration's adoption of the stonewalling tactics and opaque policies of the Bush administration flies in the face of the president's stated desire to restore the rule of law, to revive our moral standing in the world and to lead a transparent government. This decision is particularly disturbing given the Justice Department's failure to initiate a criminal investigation of torture crimes under the Bush administration.
"It is true that these photos would be disturbing; the day we are no longer disturbed by such repugnant acts would be a sad one. In America, every fact and document gets known -- whether now or years from now. And when these photos do see the light of day, the outrage will focus not only on the commission of torture by the Bush administration but on the Obama administration's complicity in covering them up. Any outrage related to these photos should be due not to their release but to the very crimes depicted in them. Only by looking squarely in the mirror, acknowledging the crimes of the past and achieving accountability can we move forward and ensure that these atrocities are not repeated.
"If the Obama administration continues down this path, it will betray not only its promises to the American people, but its commitment to this nation's most fundamental principles. President Obama has said we should turn the page, but we cannot do that until we fully learn how this nation veered down the path of criminality and immorality, who allowed that to happen and whose lives were mutilated as a result. Releasing these photos -- as painful as it might be -- is a critical step toward that accounting. The American people deserve no less."
More information about the ACLU's FOIA lawsuit, which has resulted in the release of more than 100,000 government documents to date, can be found online at: www.aclu.org/torturefoia
iraq
evan brightsteven d. green
brett barrouquerecnndeborah feyerickcbs newsthe cbs evening news with katie couricbob orrthe washington posternesto londononatalia antelavajane arrafthe new york timestimothy williamsalsumariajames daolizette alvarez
doug ireland
abc world news tonightmartha raddatz
thomas e. ricks
mcclatchy newspapersjonathan s. landay
the los angeles timesliz sly
alsumaria
Today, Barry sits on the D.C. city council. In that role, he recently entered this country’s ongoing debate about same-sex marriage. The city council had approved a bill to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions. Last Wednesday, Tim Craig reported Barry’s comments and actions, on the front page of the Washington Post:
CRAIG (5/6/09): The D.C. Council overwhelmingly approved a bill yesterday to recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere, in a vote that followed a sharp exchange between an openly gay member and a civil rights champion and set off shouts of reproach from local ministers.
The council passed the measure by a vote of 12 to 1. During the debate, council member David A. Catania (I-At Large) accused Marion Barry (D-Ward 8), who cast the dissenting vote, of having taken a "bigoted" position.
After the vote, enraged African American ministers stormed the hallway outside the council chambers and vowed that they will work to oust the members who supported the bill, which was sponsored by Phil Mendelson (D-At Large). They caused such an uproar that security officers and D.C. police were called in to clear the hallway.
Yesterday's action could be a precursor to a debate later this year over whether to legalize same-sex marriage in the city. "There is no turning back," said Catania, who plans to introduce a broader gay marriage bill in a few months.
Barry, who said he supports gay rights and civil unions, warned after the vote that the District could erupt if the council does not proceed slowly on same-sex marriage.
"All hell is going to break lose," Barry said. "We may have a civil war. The black community is just adamant against this.”
Is Barry right about the views of “the black community?” We hope—and assume—that he isn’t. (Our assumption is based on the 12-1 vote within the city council.) That said, Barry’s comments produced spirited reaction in, and from, the Washington Post. Three days later, for example, the Post printed an editorial condemning Barry’s statements (click here). “Mr. Barry's Ugly Words,” the headline said. “The D.C. Council member chose politics over principle in a vote against recognizing same-sex marriages.”
Barry is a major American politician, in a major American city. He sits where the rubber meets the road—inside a political body which may consider a bill to legalize same-sex marriages. We weren’t offended by Barry’s “ugly words” ourselves—although we hope (and assume) he was wrong in his sweeping assessment of the views within DC’s black community.
But it’s funny, ain’t it? You haven’t heard squat about Barry’s “ugly words” on your “progressive” cable news channel! But last night, The Dumbest Person in the World devoted another lengthy segment to ridicule of Carrie Prejean, an insignificant 21-year-old who recently made the mistake of saying something about same-sex marriage which Olbermann has never even bothered describing. (For the record, her view on the matter seems to resemble that of Barack Obama. And that of Hillary Clinton. And John Kerry and Al Gore.) The big nut went on for almost seven minutes mocking Prejean—and her breast implants. But it’s funny, ain’t it? You’ve never heard a word on this program about the things Marion Barry said.
Of course, the reasons for that are obvious:
Olbermann doesn’t have videotape of Barry walking around in a two-piece swim suit. And Barry is an older man, not a younger woman. As Olbermann has made dumb-foundingly clear, he seems to live for the opportunity to ridicule young women. He never says boo about older man—perhaps understanding they could come to his studio and engage in conduct which might require him to obtain a sphincter implant.
Olbermann’s a woman-trasher—a genuine nut on this matter. And no, we hate to break the news: He doesn’t do “progressive” television. He seems to do work designed to capture the eyeballs of well-meaning young liberals. And for some ungodly reason, he does television which has long been devoted to the ridicule of women’s brains and bodies.
Marion Barry doesn’t count. An insignificant creation of Donald Trump quite incessantly does.
(Background: Trump owns the Miss USA contest. He now engineers a dispute every year, hoping to bring his product parity with the more famous Miss America pageant.)
For sheer stupidity, we strongly recommend last night’s buffoonish segment, devoted to the eternal dumbness of Miss California. (To watch the segment, click this.) Olbermann plays you every way but blue, citing those breast implants two separate times (including in his opening paragraph) and failing to tell you why Prejean might be upset about the way she’s been treated. (He always forgets to explain this.) You see, in the world of “progressive cable,” calling a young woman a “c*nt” and a b*itch” isn’t worthy of comment—if she fails to hold pseudo-progressive views, that is. “Where are the feminists?” Laura Ingraham inquired. We would broaden her limited framework: Where are the progressives?
Oh, we forgot! They’re dragging their knuckles and sucking their thumbs, watching a 50-year-old nutcase get his eternal jollies. And drive his rating among the demo, putting millions of bucks in his pants.
My thoughts re: Marion Berry? I'm ashamed of him. Someone who has depended so often on forgiveness from others has no right to stand in the way of progress for anyone. That said, I fear he's correct re: the community. Things are not as bad as they were but they are still bad.
That's why my church worked on the issue (and continues to): The homophobia in the Black community. And people like Marion Berry continue the homophobia. He's a community leader that means he needs to lead. He doesn't need to be where the community is comfortable, he needs to be pulling the community, leading it.
As for the Miss California, her opions are her own. One thing I would point out is that Bob Somerby feels he's done something amazing in defending the woman. And while he has been largely alone, equally true is that before this attack on that woman started, Michael Winship was attacking another beauty queen for a statement/position. He was ridiculing her in his online commentary. As I recall, the only one to call that out was C.I.
Michael Winship works for Bill Moyers. I can't watch Bill Moyers anymore. He became a Barack Cult member and is just too nutty. He's like a crazed person. He makes no sense and he's so unhinged it's embarrassing to watch him.
He seems to orgasm on air while discussing Barack. And it's always been that way. He pimped Barry harder than anyone else on PBS -- and PBS was never an anti-Barry news outlet.
Okay, tonight's theme post. Stevie Nicks is a singer-songwriter. She rocks on her own and also with the group Fleetwood Mac. She wrote the band's biggest hit (number one) "Dreams" and she and Fleetwood Mac are on the road right now. So our theme tonight is dreams.
And dreams are something I really don't have time for. I usually go to bed so exhausted that whatever dreams I have I don't remember the next morning. The exception to that is Saturday morning where I sleep in a little. My Saturday dreams are sugar filled. I dream of pink cotton candy, sugar cookies, chocolate chip cookies, Girl Scout Cookies, Oreos, banana splits, sundaes, strawberry shortcake, brownies, fudge, you name it.
And I'm not someone who has a sweet tooth. I do have a secret stash of Whoppers (the round chocolate candy). And I'll dig into that about once every two weeks. But that's really it.
I have no idea why I dream of so many sweets lately.
It would make sense if I was dreaming of popcorn (I am always eating popcorn) or of chips (I have many favorite chips) but sweets?
I guess sometimes dreams don't make sense.
Nor do they have.
We get to take a little mini-vacation.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Wednesday, May 13, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, more details emerge in Monday's shooting, Steven D. Green's sentencing hearing continues (day three), Congress examines new techniques for veterans' treatment, the President of the KRG expresses disappointment in the US, Barack breaks another promise, and more.
Starting with Steven D. Green, convicted last Thursday in the gang-rape of 14-year-old Iraqi Abeer Qassim Hamza al-Janabi, her murder, the murder of her five-year-old sister and the murders of both of her parents. His sentence hearing is ongoing and on the third day. Evan Bright reports that the defense put Gary Solace ("a Vietnam War vet who testified about military training+combat stress and its effects") and Andrew Horn. Horn's a retired Marine. He knows Green from . . . well he doesn't. Green has been convicted. The defense is tossing up 'experts' and using damn little time to provide people who know Green. Green's been convicted. 'Experts' aren't the issue at this point. Yesterday was nothing but 'experts' except for Green's uncle Dr. Greg Simolke. Evan Bright reports of that testimony yesterday:
You could see the emotion growing in Simolke's face and demeanor. He spoke of Steven, Doug, and Danny not having many rules. When asked about Doug's "being tough" on Steve, he testified that "Doug...was hard on Steve...(pause)...it felt like that...wore on Steve. Doug was sort of..." At this point, Dr. Simolke broke down crying and had to pause for a few minutes to regain his composure. He was given some water and he continued. "Doug was sort of...in charge, but he was too young to manage Steve." Bouldin asked what his(Simolke's) thoughts were on Green and he "generally..I felt sorry for Steve. I felt that he wasn't completely normal....nothing drastic or super unusual...he was generally left out [throughout] his life. (pauses...more tears) Nothing ever worked out for him, he had a black cloud hanging over him..(pause)..I just didn't think life was workin' out for him." During all of this, Green was noticed staring straight ahead. Simolke testified that he wouldn't have called Steven Green a leader. "No....I don't want to be offensive...he wasn't a leader...anyone who knows Steve wouldn't say he was. He's a follower." Simolke testified about Green living with him for a few months, maintaining a C-average, before realizing that he was so far behind in school that wouldn't be able to graduate high school that year with the rest of his classmates; after which dropping out and moving back to his hometown of Midland, TX where he got his GED.
Instead of staying with that and pursuing that line, they offered 'experts'. Deborah Feverick (CNN) notes, "Defense lawyers trying to save their client from the death penalty argued Tuesday that former U.S. soldier Steven Green exhibited clear symptoms of acute stress disorder in Iraq and that a military psychiatric nurse-practioner failed to diagnose the troubled infantryman and pull him out of combat." The 'experts' didn't even know what they were talking about and one conflicted his account on the stand and better hope the jury doesn't learn what happened this weekend. Bright reports that Dr. Ruben Gur stated Green needed structure and was asked if Green would do well in military? Gur answered affirmative. After explaining the MRI said otherwise. Did no one catch that? He would also, according to Gur, do well in prison with the structure. AP reports Green "threw a lunch tray" in jail Saturday over needing to shave but not having (or, more likely, being given) a razor. Gur was an 'expert.' Another reason not to waste the jury's time with 'experts.' Guilt was already established. The issue now is the sentencing. Friends and family of Green is who needs to be put on the stand to humanize Green, not to turn him into a case study.
Yesterday CBS Evening News with Katie Couric offered a report by Bob Orr on the Sgt John M. Russell shooting five other service members in Iraq:
Bob Orr: His commander feared Sgt John Russell was on the edge. They took away his weapon and ordered him into counseling in a combat stress clinic in Baghdad. He went there yesterday, officials say, and opened fire killing five service men. 22-year-old John Michael Russell: He's got medals. And he was doing good for -- for the country. Bob Orr: Today at their home in Sherman, Texas, Russell's twenty-one year-old son struggled to understand how his dad on his third tour of duty in Iraq now faces five counts of murder. 22-year-old John Michael Russell: For him to do something like that, he couldn't have been in his right state of mind. They had to -- they had to put him to a breaking point and just -- he just had to have lost it. Just lost all train of thought to do anything like that. Bob Orr: [Sgt] Russell's father said he may have snapped fearing his military career could be ended by a stress diagnosis. Wilburn Russell: His life was over as far as he was concerned. He was going to lose everything. And I guess it was too much. Bob Orr: Military investigators don't know what triggered the shootings but say Russell was agitated when asked to leave the clinic after arguing with a counselor. A short time later, Russell returned to the stress center with a weapon he apparently stole from his armed escort. The rampage played out quickly. Gen David Perkins: The suspect was apprehended outside the clinic shortly after shots were heard. Bob Orr: The incident is the deadliest involving soldier-on-soldier violence in the six year Iraq War. In response the army has now launched an investigation to determine whether it needs more people and facilities in war zones to deal with combat stress and soldiers on the brink. Patrick Campbell (Iraq & Afghanistan Veterans of America): These are the canaries in the mine. If we don't start addressing these issues, people are going to get more and more injured and it's going to be harder to treat them. Bob Orr: For Sgt Russell who had planned to be home by July, it's too late. Wilburn Russell: His father's heartbroken, his mother's crying in their hiding. We're -- we're sorry for the families involved too. Cause they're going through heart ache. Bob Orr: His family says they knew of no warning sings. Russell in fact recently e-mailed his son on his birthday and just Sunday e-mailed his mother for Mother's Day.
James Dao and Lizette Alvarez (New York Times) report, "Lt. Col. Edward Brusher, the deputy director of behavioral health proponecy for the surgeon general, said in March that there was one provider for 640 service members in Iraq." They quote him stating, "There are currently enough behavioral health providers." As Elaine noted last night:The military is saying that speculation does no good but this is the same military that has closed the stress center. 1 US soldier just shot 5 others dead. If there were ever a time when a stress center was most needed, it would be right now. Had a shooting taken place at a support hospital or triage center, they would not have shut down.They wouldn't have had the option. The feeling would have been, "This is emergency work." But note the difference when it comes to the brain, to mental issues, to stress.They closed down the combat stress center yesterday. When it was most needed.
Meanwhile Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) identified two of those killed on Monday: Charles K. Springle and Michael Edward Yates. Luis Martinez, Martha Raddatz and Kate Barrett (ABC News) speak with Yates' stepfather, Richard Van Blarga Jr., who states, he thinks Yates mentioned Russell in a call on Sunday: "On the conversation with my wife on Mother's Day, he said that he had met a sergeant, that he was, in his words, he was a very nice guy, he could deal with him, but he had some major issues. He was out there on the branch hoping for somebody to help him." Stephanie Gaskell (New York Daily News) reports Christian Bueno-Galdos, Matthew Houseal and Jacob Barton are the other three who were shot dead on Monday. She also notes the phone call Yates made to his mother on Sunday and quotes Shawna Machlinski (his mother) stating, "I do have some sympathy and I do know that I can forgive him [Russell]." Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) notes, "The shootings concerned the military, which is preparing to withdraw troops from Iraq's cities by the end of June under the terms of the security agreement reached with the Iraqi government. Camp Liberty, part of the sprawling complex of bases that make up Camp Victory, will not close because both countries have decided that it is not part of Baghdad." The bases are in Baghdad and out of it (they sprawl). According to the treaty masquerading as the Status Of Forces Agreement, the US soldiers on them should be removed or else the US base could become a joint US-Iraqi base. Neither is happening, the much lauded SOFA is being violated. That's only one aspect. In a report that only Alsumaria currently has, the Status Of Forces Agreement doesn't apply to all of Iraq. That's the claim being offered by a US Major: "56th Combat brigade Chief in the US military Major Marc Ferrero clarified that his forces stationed in Taji are not included in the decision of US Forces withdrawal from Iraq cities since this region is out of Baghdad Province. He ruled out as well the possibility of violence spike in the regions under his command where security and stability reign." Back to the issue of the US soldiers and of injuries . . .
"I want to thank you all for being here," declared US House Rep Bob Finer bringing the House Veterans' Affairs Committee -- full committee, which he chairs -- to order [click here for prepared opening statement, I'm quoting what he actually said.] "The purpose is very simple. In my job and I'm sure everyone of my colleagues has the same experience, we come into contact with constituents in business or patients who have had contact or have invented or have manufactured instruments, technologies, treatments which would seem to have a great benefit for our veterans. And yet many have had a frustrating experience of dealingwith a bureaucracy that just doesn't seem to react very quickly to new ideas and treatments and people are frustrated."
The committee was holding a hearing this morning entitled Innovative Technologies and Treatments Helping Veterans. There were two panels of witnesses. The first panel was composed of David R. Bethune (Zila, Inc), Dr. David Sidransky (Johns Hopkins University), Robert A. Beckman (Brainport Technologies), David A. Broecker (Alkermes, Inc.), Mark Munroe (Mobile Medical International Corporation), Stanley Stern (TeleMed Network) and Dr. David Scadden (Harvard). The second panel was composed of Dr. Howard J. Federoff (Georgetown University), Dr. Nelson M. Handal (Harmonex, Inc) and James A. Schoeneck (BrainCells Inc). Click on the name for prepared statements (these are all non-PDF format, no worries). We'll be focusing on the first panel and largely one aspect.
The full committee was supposed to be present but that did not happen. "None of our Republican colleagues are here," Chair Bob Finer explained. "They decided somehow that special interests were invited." If so, wasn't it their job to call out special interests? Apparently Republicans on the Committee just needed a Snow Day.
Robert Beckman spoke of a portable device, the Brainport Vision Device, where a small camera ("with zoom capability") is hooked to other neurochannels ("such as the tongue"). Beckman stated, "One blind user with two glass eyes was able to successfully shoot a basketball and another used the Brainport Vision Device at an indoor rock climbing gym to see the next rock holds and at home with his daughter to play Tic-Tac-Toe."
"The Brainport Vision Device will not replace the cane or the sight dog," he continued. "But it will become an important, additional tool to improve the safety, mobility and quality of life for blind users. Some examples. Finding the open seat on a crowded bus or train. Identifying the direction to the target building in a confusing parking lot. Finding the handle in order to remove a hot pot from the stove. Wicab recently sponsored clinical testing of the Brainport Vision Device at the Atlanta VA. Dr. Michael Williams, the PI concluded, 'Bottom line, the device performs remarkably well for the tasks that we looked at in phase one'. To optimize the device we need feedback from a much larger pool of users who are blind. We would welcome the opportunity to further test the Brainport Vision Device at VA sites. Perhaps those willing soldiers who are blind as a result of a blast injury should be first in line to test this new technology?"
US House Rep Jerry McNerney's had a few questions.
Jerry McNerney: Mr. Beckman, the Brainport Vision Device. This sounds very -- How intrusive is the -- is the device that's on the tongue? Are you able to eat? Do you have to remove it for different activities? Or -- how intrustive is this?
Robert Beckman: Well for vision, the device does rest on top of the tongue. And so, yes, indeed, in its current form you would have to remove the device when you were eating, talking, etc. However, with additional funding there is no -- there are no technological barriers to making this device totally wireless so that the intra-oral device could be mounted on the upper pallette and blind people using wireless techonology would be able to use the device without anybody else knowing that they actually have the technology available to them.
Jerry McNerney: Well that's pretty exciting. I'm kind of thrilled by the technical aspect of this rather than the administrative aspect, if you can't tell.
US House Rep John Hall also had some questions.
John Hall: Mr. Beckman, I was wondering if you could tell us why Brainport Devices are not implantable and is that something that could change?
Robert Beckman: I think one of the key advantages of the Brainport Device is the fact that it's non-implantable. In fact, it's a portable device where there's no need to implant the techonology. Other technologies for vision such as retinal implants are being developed. But I think the fact that they involve surgery, that they're invasive, means that those technologies will likely not be available for probably ten years or more. Our technology is available today.
John Hall: I understand that and I can see the advantadges to either -- to both. Cochlear implants, for instance, have been and are being used by large number of people with some success. Is that because of the location in the brain of the nerves that one would need to get at and the centers one would need to get at that it's more difficult. Or is this something that you see happening in the future?
Robert Beckman: That was really, going back to my testimony, that was really one of Dr. Paul Bach-y-Rita's main hypothesis that the brain is not hard wired so, in other words, you can use an alternate sensor -- you can use an alternate sensor and also an alternate path to send that signal to the brain. And we have demonstrated that, for instance, people who are blind who perform a certain task with our device and while they're performing that task they are analyzed with PET [Positron Emission Tomography] imaging. We have demonstrated that those people process the visual information in the visual cortex of their brain. On the other hand, people who are sighted, that perform the exact same task, process that same information in the somata sensory region of their brain. So in other words, people do -- the brain is masterful in the way that it can process the information in the appropriate area
John Hall: And it can -- it can change? It can switch and adapt from one pathway to another?
Robert Beckman: Yes.
John Hall: What's the typical training -- You may have said this in response to a question before I got here -- what's the typical training time for someone to use --- to adapt to Brainport?
Robert Beckman: I think that's also an amazing part about this technology. We train blind people literally in hours to start to recongize symbols, pathways, doorways, etc. We have not, so far, had anybody except for one blind person, Erik Weihenmayer, use the device even more than ten hours. So all the -- we've got videos on our website, etc., that show some of the benefits. All of those people are performing the tasks that we show with less than ten hours of training. And I think what is most interesting is what will happen when we get this technology into the hands of many, many adults letting them take it home, use it on their own, explore the potential benefits of the technology on their own. That's where we'll start to really discover what the advantages and possibilites are for this technology.
Beckman also spoke of the Brainport Balance Device for those with balance problems. Broecker spoke of VIVITROL which was FDA approved in 2006 and treats alcoholism. How? He was more interested in discussing alcoholism. Were I testifying to Congress, I would assume the members were aware of alcoholism and would use my time to explain why my medicine needed government money and/or veterans access as opposed to offering a history of alcoholism. Bethune and Sidransky spoke of oral cancer, the rate of which is on the rise and veterans account for five-percent of all cases each year in the United States. Bethune explained, "Veterans are almost 3 times more likely to be diagnosed with oran cancer than are members of the general public." They were seeking to have ViziLite Plus used for early screening of veterans. Mark Munroe was asking for attention to and resources for Mobile Medical which is a "mobile surgical hospitals." It was used in Iraq on The Learning Channel's Little People, Big World, episodes nineteen and twenty which TLC described as follows, "When Matt Roloff learns of an Iraqi family with dwarf children who are in severe need of medical intervention, he is compelled to help them. Amy and the Roloff kids are concerned for Matt's safety as he makes the long, difficult and dangerous journey to Baghdad. Once there, he falls in with the U.S. military, who provides armed escort into the Green Zone -- where Matt meets the family and gains their trust. Touched by the familys heartwarming spirit, Matt gets photos and X-rays of the kids to bring back to America for evaluation by medical specialists." From those two episodes, let's note this clip where Matt Roloff speaks with Iraqi journalists
Matt Roloff: I think it was important for me to be able to communicate with the Iraqi people that it's important for their citizens to put value on all of their fellow citizens, even if they are little people. That's an important message we're still trying to communicate in the States and to be able to do it in another country is just as, if not more gratifying, just as gratifying.
There is a point in including the quote beyond the hearing. We'll get to it. Back to the hearing. Stanley Stern's focus was TeleMed Internet Endpoint (TIE) which would provide face to face (via phone calls) help with health care providers and could also allow a veteran to participate at any time in a group therapy session that runs around the clock. Scadden spoke of stem cell research including technology that would allow an adult stem cell to be taken back in maturation.
Remember Matt Roloff's words about everyone being respected? The Christian Science Monitor feels differently. They argue that religious leaders are being ignored in Iraq. But they reveal how STUPID they are by taking the word of professional con-artist and admitted LIAR Andrew White. White breezes in and out of Iraq but of course had his snit fit with the press after he offered testimony, under oath, which he did not know would be reported on. (Hence the snit fit.) White declared there were no more Jews in Iraq back in 2006 when Jews were still in Baghdad. And White was allegedly raising funds to help them. But he lied, under oath. White is a joke. He's a War Hawk who cheerleaded the illegal war and he doesn't speak Arabic. He stays hidden away in the Green Zone when he manages to make it to Iraq. No one needs to take White seriously but it is telling that Matt Roloff saw a need for all Iraqis to be treated equally and the Monitor wants to argue that religious clerics need to be elevated further. Further. The same religious clerics who have issued orders to kill gays and lesbians, the same fundamentalists who have turned Iraq from the most advanced MidEastern nation into a nightmare. Doug Ireland (ZNet) reported more news on the assaults of gay Iraqi males last week:
As the murder campaign targeting Iraqi gays intensifies, a leading Arabic television network last week revealed the use of a horrifying new form of lethal torture against Iraqi gay men -- anti-gay Shiite death squads are sealing their anuses with a powerful glue, then inducing diarrhea, which leads to a painful and agonizing death. The use of this stomach-turning new torture was first reported by the Al Arabiya network, which is headquartered in the United Arab Emirates and was alerted to the story by a leading Iraqi feminist and human rights activist.Yanar Mohammed, president of the Organization of Women's Freedom in Iraq (OWFI), told Al Arabiya that the torture substance "is an Iranian-manufactured glue that, if applied to the skin, sticks to it and can only be removed by surgery. After they glue the anuses of homosexuals, they give them a drink that causes diarrhea. Since the anus is closed, the diarrhea causes death. Videos of this form of torture are being distributed on mobile telephones in Iraq." Al Arabiya said its reporter confirmed the use of this anal torture by "visiting the Baghdad morgue in Bab-al-Moazaam in central Baghdad, where Neman Mohsen, the medical examiner, confirmed they have the bodies of seven homosexuals in the morgue. He said, 'We were not able to identify the culprits, who dumped the bodies in front of the morgue and fled without being seen.'" A two-person team from Human Rights Watch (HRW) currently in Iraq to investigate persecution of LGBT people has also confirmed the use of this form of torture. In a widely-circulated email from Iraq, the head of HRW's LGBT desk, Scott Long, said he and his colleague had gathered evidence which confirms the Al Arabiya report and that HRW would make its own detailed report after the organization's two staffers return to the United States next week. OWFI's Mohammed, the woman responsible for gathering information about the use of this sadistic anal torture and passing it on to Al Arabiya, told Gay City News that "the story was so horrific that when I first heard it from gay friends I didn't believe it. But then I investigated and found it was really true that the anuses of gay men were being glued shut." Speaking by telephone from Toronto, where she was on a brief visit to relatives before a scheduled return to Iraq next week, Mohammed told this reporter that, "Fortunately, Al Arabiya has a very good human rights reporter, to whom I told what I had found, and he was able to confirm it by visiting the morgue."
When the cheesy ass editorial board of the Monitor wants to call out the attacks on Iraq's LGBT community, we may take them seriously. Until then, we'll just shake our heads at their gross stupidity. The Monitor's Jane Arraf (a reporter, not an editorial board member) sticks to reality and conducts multiple interviews with "senior US and Iraqi officials and US intelligence officers" who feel optimistic about some areas of Iraq 'stabilizing' and not so about others: "But the outlook for progress in some of the country's most volatile cities is less certain. Iraqi security officials in Mosul and Diyala Province have considstently said that they need the assistance of US troops past a June 30 deadline for American forces to leave Iraqi cities. But Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's recent statements that he will not ask US forces to stay in those cities, while domestically popular ahead of elections next year, has sent military planners scrambling." For the Baghdad suburb of Adhamiya, Natalia Antelava (BBC) reports the issue of the Sahwa ("the so-called Sahwa, or Awakening, Councils") the same, al-Maliki's government refuses to bring them, they're still having trouble being paid and they're just frustrated with the Shi'ite dominated government which, people tend to forget, is one reason they took arms (against the US and the Shi'ite controlled government) to begin with. "I think the Iraqi government is not capitalizing on the momentum. I think it's a huge blow to the momentum we've created." That quote by US Army Capt Jason Dudley about the failure to bring in Sahwa is highlighted by Thomas E. Ricks (Foreign Policy) who notes it "echoes the findings of the Silverman study I blogged the other day that concluded that there is widespread distrust of the central government not only among Sunni leaders but also among Shiites". Ricks is the author of The Gamble: General David Petraeus and the American Military Adventure in Iraq 2006-2008. Timothy Williams (New York Times) zooms in on the tensions in Nineveh Province where the governor of the province, Atheel al-Nujaifi (an Arab), was not allowed to enter Bashiqa Friday for a hot-air ballon exhibition. The ones owning the toll bridge? The Kurdish pesh merga. This may have led to the protest in Bashiqa and Mosul yesterday ("more than a thousand people") insisting the pesh merga leave the province. The tensions run high for a number of reasons including the still undecided fate of oil-rich Kirkuk (which was supposed to have been put to a resolution long ago). Meanwhile Missy Ryan and Shamal Aqrawi (Reuters) report that disappointment is being expressed by Kurdish leaders in Iraq over the US and their feeling that they have been let down. The President of the Kurdistan Regional Government Masoud Barzani states, "We have had a historic and friendly relationship, but frankly speaking, we were expecting more. They could have played a much larger role in solving this problem [Kirkuk] than they did." The disappointment comes at a time of multiple disappointments. As Ruth noted yesterday, the Kurds were informed Sunday that they could act on their oil contracts only to have Hussein al-Shahrastani, Minister of Oil, state yesterday that the contracts were "illegal". This is a huge mess and will only get worse. It's one of the many reasons Barack should have immediately began a withdrawal (something he led many to foolishly believe he was promising during his campaign). The US can't make the decision and can't impose it. The decision on Kirkuk has been delayed repeatedly. The decision on whether the region can sign their own oil contracts is still not settled. These are issues Iraq has to work out on its own. And as long as the US is there (propping up al-Maliki's puppet government), segments will expect the US to step in. (And stepping in means creating the new Israel-Palestine divide that will haunt the world for over a century. This is a decision for the players involved and that does not include the US.)
Turning to some of the reported violence for today . . .
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 person and wounded two more and "Sahwa sources in the area said that a low level Sahwa leader was killed with his son in the explosion" and a Mosul car bombing which claimed the lives of 2 Iraqi soldiers. Reuters notes a Baghdad sticky bombing which left five injured, a Ramadi roadside bombing which claimed the lives of 2 Iraqi soldiers, a Kirkuk roadside bombing which left three police officers wounded and a Mosul mortar attack which left one person injured.
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 1 Iraqi soldier shot dead in Mosul and 1 "employee in the integrity committee" shot dead in Baghdad.
Kidnappings?
Reuters notes "a doctor and his daughter" were rescued from kidnappers in Baghdad by the Iraqi military.
Turning to Barry O!, the celebrity in chief. As Trina, Cedric and Wally noted yesterday, he's already stabbed the LGBT community in the US in the back yet again. Today brought another. Margaret Talev and Jonathan S. Landay (McClatchy Newspapers) report Barack changed his mind and will not release the prisoner abuse photos from Iraq and Afghanistan: "The move is an about-face from the administration's decision last month to release 44 photographs in response to an order that a New York federal district court issued three years ago. The American Civil Liberties Union had sued the Department of Defense under President George W. Bush for the release of the photos. The Bush administration had challenged the release." In response, the ACLU issued the following:
The Obama administration announced today that it is reversing its promise to make public photos depicting detainee abuse by U.S. personnel overseas. The Department of Defense had told a federal judge that it would release a "substantial number" of photos in response to a court ruling in an American Civil Liberties Union Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.
The following can be attributed to Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director of the ACLU:
"The Obama administration's adoption of the stonewalling tactics and opaque policies of the Bush administration flies in the face of the president's stated desire to restore the rule of law, to revive our moral standing in the world and to lead a transparent government. This decision is particularly disturbing given the Justice Department's failure to initiate a criminal investigation of torture crimes under the Bush administration.
"It is true that these photos would be disturbing; the day we are no longer disturbed by such repugnant acts would be a sad one. In America, every fact and document gets known -- whether now or years from now. And when these photos do see the light of day, the outrage will focus not only on the commission of torture by the Bush administration but on the Obama administration's complicity in covering them up. Any outrage related to these photos should be due not to their release but to the very crimes depicted in them. Only by looking squarely in the mirror, acknowledging the crimes of the past and achieving accountability can we move forward and ensure that these atrocities are not repeated.
"If the Obama administration continues down this path, it will betray not only its promises to the American people, but its commitment to this nation's most fundamental principles. President Obama has said we should turn the page, but we cannot do that until we fully learn how this nation veered down the path of criminality and immorality, who allowed that to happen and whose lives were mutilated as a result. Releasing these photos -- as painful as it might be -- is a critical step toward that accounting. The American people deserve no less."
More information about the ACLU's FOIA lawsuit, which has resulted in the release of more than 100,000 government documents to date, can be found online at: www.aclu.org/torturefoia
iraq
evan brightsteven d. green
brett barrouquerecnndeborah feyerickcbs newsthe cbs evening news with katie couricbob orrthe washington posternesto londononatalia antelavajane arrafthe new york timestimothy williamsalsumariajames daolizette alvarez
doug ireland
abc world news tonightmartha raddatz
thomas e. ricks
mcclatchy newspapersjonathan s. landay
the los angeles timesliz sly
alsumaria
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
David Zeiger
This is an open letter from David Zeiger (ha! -- on spelling, I'll come back to that) who directed
Sir! No Sir!:
The letter below is a response I wrote to Michael Moore's piece on Bernard Madoff that was in Time Magazine's "2009 Time 100" issue. It's followed by his article.You can also read the entire exchange in The Rag Blog.
For the first time, I am breaking my own rule against sending you anything that is not directly related to GI resistance, and I apologize for that. But hey, it's my web site, right? And I won't do it again, I promise.
But before that, here are three items that are indeed about GI resistance:The U.S. Justice Department has dropped its case against LT. Ehren Watada. How the Army will proceed is still not decided. Read about it at The Seattle Times.
SPC Victor Agosto, facing a stop-loss tour of Afghanistan, has announced "There is no way I will deploy to Afghanistan. The occupation is immoral and unjust." Read his story in The Rag Blog.
Coming soon:
In Association with Iraq Veterans Against the War
This is Where We Take Our Stand
The new Web Series based on the
2006 Winter Soldier: Iraq/Afghanistan Investigation
Stay Tuned...
And now, An Open Letter to Michael Moore:
Dear Mike,
I read with much interest your piece "Bernie Madoff, Scapegoat" for Time Magazine. While I welcomed your main premise-that Madoff is a scapegoat and not more than a scab on the open, puss-filled, legal wound called the "American Financial System"-I was stunned to see you take a broad, uninformed swipe at everyone who invested money with Madoff. You say he "stole $65 billion from some already quite wealthy people," referring to his victims as his "own kind." Then you go on to make the incredible claim that most of these supposedly very rich people knew full well (or at least suspected) that they were part of a fraud and, essentially, hoped it would just go on forever. So they should stop their whining and just give all their stolen luchre back.
That's quite an argument. Let me say first of all, for full disclosure, that most of my family was among those supposedly "already quite wealthy people" who lost everything to Madoff. In our case, it was Stan Chais, one of his top "feeders," who gave over all of our life savings to him. But somehow I don't quite see us fitting your definition of people on his "side of the tracks," as you so casually claim. Yes, like the vast majority of the thousands of Madoff's investors, we weren't poor. Far from it. My father was a businessman who manufactured parts for airplanes and did quite well with his small company that he started in the fifties (as I always joked, he was the white man for the white time). He was a lifelong progressive liberal, who took great pride in hiring blacklisted writer friends in the fifties, fighting against the Vietnam War in the sixties, and leading the campaign for Pete Seeger to receive the Kennedy Center Honor in the nineties.
And yes, back in the late eighties he quite willingly joined Stan Chais's "investment" group-seeking stability and good, not massive, profits. And that's what he got for over twenty years, in the hands of a man who he, a smart businessman, trusted completely. And he brought all of his family and many of his friends into the fold because it was just too good to pass up. That included school teachers, artists, writers, doctors, lawyers, and one struggling documentary filmmaker (you remember what that was like). Maybe not the salt of the earth, but a far cry from the "one percenters" you have thrown us in with.
And if you go to the New York Times web site, you will find the letters from several hundred of Madoff's victims to the judge hearing the case-all with very similar stories, often with quite progressive backgrounds, mostly elderly people who had invested all of their retirement savings with him, many now penniless.
But, you claim, it should have been obvious to all of these supposedly intelligent people that the interest they were receiving was impossibly high and they were part of a fraud. Why, according to you, "Some have admitted they did have an inkling 'something was up.'" But you fail to mention that the people who didn't have an inkling "something was up" were the very ones most "intelligent" people look to for guidance-the SEC, who as recently as 2006 was telling the world that Madoff was right as rain despite the compelling evidence that they alone were privy to. Blaming Madoff's victims for not seeing what was being denied by every available source is absurd.
But whether they knew or not, if they took any money out they should give it back, right? "If I buy a stolen car from the guy down the street, the police will take that car from me regardless of whether I knew it was stolen." That's logical, but what if that guy was in my garage stealing my other car at the same time? That's how Ponzi schemes work, and the relatively few who made huge profits from it don't negate that reality.
Let's be honest and take your argument a step further. Hundreds of thousands of people over the last 20 years were conned into buying homes with sub-prime mortgages, all of which were pumped up and turned into massive boondoggles by the schemes called derivatives and credit default swaps (which make Madoff look like a rank amateur). They were, in essence, built on stolen "profits." So now should the people who bought those houses be made to give them back? You know full well that there are those making that argument, and in fact thousands are today being forced out of their houses by foreclosure. Are they getting their just desserts?
Of course you would never say that, but what's the difference here? Yes, there is an economic gap between people who invested with Madoff and people who bought houses with sub-prime mortgages, but the con is essentially the same, is it not?
Here's a thought: Given the quite liberal bent of many of Madoff's investors, I'd be willing to bet the little money I have left that somewhere, somehow, funds that had gone through Bernie's hands and came out bigger helped finance one of your films. I'm not being facetious here. I'm a big fan. But as you so cogently point out, in the Alice in Wonderland world of American finance the veil between "legal" and illegal is infinitely porous. And after all, if you buy a stolen car - well, you know.
In hindsight, every argument my father made in defense of this fund was glaringly and horrendously wrong. But that's easy to say now. I think I'm a pretty smart guy, and I wasn't even the one who got us into this thing, but even after Madoff was exposed I was still arguing it was impossible for Stan Chais to be part of such a scheme. My blinders were no smaller than my dad's, but by what twisted logic does gullibility put us on Madoff's "side of the tracks?"
Yes, many of us "benefited"-for a while and to varying degrees-from this scheme (that is, before losing everything). But putting us up there with the heads of Goldman Sachs and Bank of America? Please!
Yours in the spirit of healthy debate,
David Zeiger
P.S. I am producing a film about my family's situation, titled Ponzi & Me (catchy title, don't you think?). If you would like to invest in it, I can guarantee a return of 15-20%.
Great letter, no? On his name, I can never spell it right. I before e except after c . . .
But I spelled it right this time. And why?
C.I. had the boys bedroom decorated just for them. Let me back up. While I'm working in California for a year (job transfer), we're all staying at C.I.'s (and we all say thank you). So if you're late to the party, you're all caught up. My daughter had her own room even though I said, "Forget it, she'll be in bed with me every night." And she is. (She is also the baby.) So the boys room has all these posters and the boys love it and one is the Sir! No Sir! movie poster. My oldest was mature enough to see the film some time ago (I think right when it came out on DVD I let him see it but he'd seen it when we were visiting out here and it was playing). And he loved it and talked to his younger brother about it over and over. I didn't think he was mature enough for it until last November.
So they loved it and C.I. knew it and had one of the posters put up in their room. My daughter decided we needed in one in "our room." I told her we had pretty paintings (and we do) but she was insistent that we have one. So we do and I just have to look at the film poster to know how to spell David Zieger's last name or to find the website for Sir! No Sir!
And I have to go because I promised my son (oldest) we would watch the season finale of Fringe. (Time stamp is EST. I'm on the west coast these days.) I told him we'd have snacks and make a big thing out of it.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Tuesday, May 12, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, Steven D. Green's sentencing for War Crimes continues, Sgt John M. Russell is identified as the shooter of five Iraqi soldiers yesterday, Tina Richards speaks truth to power (and to Prescod) and more.
Steven D. Green, convicted last Thursday in the gang-rape of 14-year-old Iraqi Abeer Qassim Hamza al-Janabi, her murder, the murder of her five-year-old sister and the murders of both of her parents. His sentence hearing is ongoing. Today Evan Bright reports the defense put Dr. Ruben Gur on the stand: "Got one hell of a biology lesson on the brain and its functions from Dr. Ruben Gur of UPenn. 'Green acts on impulses and does as he's told'." And that Greg Simolke, Green's uncle, testified. Brett Barrouquere (AP) reports, "Gur told jurors that Green likely suffered closed head injuries." Evan Bright reports of yesterday's hearing:
And so it began. Marisa Ford of the prosecution opened up by speaking about murdering children and how terrified Abeer Al-Janabi must have been before she was killed. "The murder of a child is an unspeakable act, especially an innocent child, which all children are. Abeer's last moments must have been filled with terror as she was raped while her parents and little sister were shot in the room next door. And then, by one of the men who was sent there to protect them, she was murdered." Lots of legal jargon made it's way into the opening statements. Marisa Ford reminded the jury that they are encouraged and in fact, required to reconsider the evidence which was heard in the guilty phase of the trial. She spoke of imposing the death penalty, and how doing so requires that they, the jury, by law, must outline and note the aggravating circumstances, especially in the death of Abeer, which according to Ford was committed in an "especially heinous, cruel, and depraved manner." She repeated how the four soldiers committed the crime on March 12th, 2006, and reiterated how they agreed on the plan, changed clothes, "brought weapons and took tools to complete their mission," and how they worked to cover up the evidence. She told the jury how they would hear of the impact on the victims, and how the Al-Janabi family was like many families from both Iraq and "right here in Paducah, Kentucky." She ended her opening by elaborating on a quote from Winston Churchill: "All the great things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." Ford defiantly expressed, "The defendant Steven Dale Green failed to live up to his duty, he didn't show mercy to Abeer, he took away the two remaining brother's hope for a normal life, he doesn't deserve mercy."
Last night, Ruth summarized the AP reporting on yesterday's hearing:The Associated Press' Brett Barrouquere reports that today's sentence hearing for Steven D. Green included testimony from members of Abeer Qassim Hamza al-Janabi's family. He reports that cousin Abu Farras stated Abeer's brothers Mohammed and Ahmed no longer attend school because the killing of their two sisters and parents "destroyed their future. I'm sure if they died with their family it would be better for them." Mohammed is the older of the two brothers and he told the jury of "how his father taught him to ride a bike". Bright's reports that Abeer's aunt also testified and "spoke of having a good relationship with Qassim" (Abeer's father): "What I say about him ... isn't enough. He cared for all our family." The aunt said of Abeer, "She was proud of being young, and she was proud of the freedom her father gave her. She was spoiled, her father never suppressed her." Dave Alsup (CNN) notes, " Green might become the first former U.S. soldier to face the death penalty for war crimes before a civilian court. The reason for the distinction: Green was discharged from the military before his crimes came to light." Meanwhile the Daily 49er editorializes that "War is turning Americans into what we despise most:"The second incident is a clear-cut case of unjustifiable brutality. Last week, former Army Pfc. Steven Dale Green was found guilty of raping and murdering a 14-year-old Iraqi girl and killing her family. He now faces either death of life in prison.According to the AP, Green's defense team had asked jurors to consider the "context" of war, saying "soldiers in Green's unit … lacked leadership." Defense attorneys also said the Army missed signs that Green was struggling after the loss of friends in combat, and offered little help to him and other members of his unit.It is right that Green be punished, but there is little doubt his vicious acts were at least provoked by the horrors of war. If that's the case, why is he getting the book thrown at him while Ayala is receiving only probation?
Yesterday, a US soldier shot five others in Baghdad. Ernesto London (Washington Post) reported this morning that Sgt John M. Russell is the soldier who shot the five. The story actually caused the networks to snap to attention last night. ABC's ABC World News Tonight did the best job (click here for Martha Raddatz and Luis Martinez' text report and the video -- video is of the report aired on World News Tonight).Charlie Gibson: There was a tragic incident in Iraq today that is a stark reminder that while the demands on US forces in Iraq may be diminishing, the mental stress on service members remains high. A soldier this afternoon opened fire in a clinic in Baghdad that was treating military personnel for stress and suicide prevention. 5 American soldiers were killed, four others wounded including the shooter who is in custody. It was the worst case of soldier on soldier violence since this war began. ABC's Martha Raddatz, with us now. Lt Col Beth Salisbury: This is the entrance into our facility in Camp Liberty. Martha Raddatz: It was just days ago that Lt Col Beth Salisbury showed ABC News the very same combat stress control center where today's horrific shooting took place. Lt Col Beth Salisbury: They will sign in at our front desk. They'll be greeted by our staff here. Martha Raddatz: Salisbury, who runs the center, was not hurt but of the dead, two were on her clinical staff and three were soldiers waiting for treatment. The shooter, who officials say is a Sgt on his third deployment to Iraq, went on a rampage down these hallways and offices in one of the few places where those who were attacked would not have been armed. Lt Col Beth Salisbury: Their weapons are taken for safety and we secure those here for the safety of our staff and themselves. Martha Raddatz: The Sgt being held for the murders is married and based in Germany. ABC News has learned he had been having problems during his deployment. Initial indications are that he did not seek mental health treatment voluntarily but that his unit had referred him for care. It is unclear whether he had yet received treatment. Col Salisbury said recently soldiers are encouraged to look for signs of stress in others. Lt Col Beth Salisbury: The great thing is to have a leader bring in a soldier, come in -- leadership staff -- come in and ask us how that we can help them take care of their soldiers. Martha Raddatz: These centers are part of the response to a dramatic spike in army suicides a record 143 in the last year. Today the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said the shooting will be investigated to see if the stress of multiple and frequent deployments contributed to it. Adm Mike Mullen: It speaks to the issue of--of multiple deployments, you know , increasing dwell time, all those things that we're focused on to try to improve to relieve that stress. Martha Raddatz: It can't be understated what a terrible blow to any unit this is when soldiers are killed by fellow soldiers, especially soldiers who were trying to help others. Charlie?
On yesterday's Free Speech Radio News, Aaron Glantz reported on the story
Aaron Glantz: "Veterans advocates say the details of the incident will be critical in assessing whether the killings could have been prevented. Paul Sullivan is Executive Director of Veterans for Common Sense.
Paul Sullivan: We need to know if this soldier was examined by a physician before or after deployment and if any mental health symptons were observed. We know from repeated Congressional investigations and hearings that the military has knowingly sent soldiers back with physical and mentalh health diagnosis and severe symptoms back to the war zone in some of those case the service members killed themselves or others.
Today Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) quotes Maj Gen David Perkins stating of Russell, "The commander of the suspect had taken his weapon away. He had been referred to counseling a week beforehand. There was a concern that he should not have a weapon." Corinne Reilly (McClatchy Newspapers) explains he's been charged "with five counts of murder and one count of aggravated assault" and that "Two of the victims worked at the clinic, Perkins said. Both were officers, one in the Army and one in the Navy. The three other victims were enlisted soldiers." Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) observes, "Confiscating the weapon of a noncommissioned officer in charge of other soldiers would be an extremely serious step. Russell, from Sherman, Texas, has served previous deployments in Bosnia and Kosovo. . . . Perkins said the sergeant, whom he said had been deployed to Iraq 'at least two other times' had been referred to counseling about a week before the shooting. He was being treated as an outpatient and it was not known whether he had been prescribed medication." Jenny Booth (Times of London) notes Russell "was due to leave Iraq soon" and a difference between the story out of Iraq that Russell got a hold of gun in the clinic and the story out of DC that that Russell left the clinic and returned with a weapon. CNN explains the timeline this way, "A defense official said that Russell was escorted out of the stress clinic Monday by a fellow soldier. Russell and that soldier apparently struggled over the soldier's weapon in a vehicle after they began to drive away, the official said. Russell then walked back to the clinic, the official said, after apparently obtaining the weapon." CNN quotes Perkins decrying the speculation. The entire last 24 hours have been speculation including retired Col Jack Jacobs, now a military propagandist, who told Brian Williams on NBC Nightly News yesterday (Click here for video page, here for transcript) that the problem was too much time on your hands -- a ridiculous assertion unless you know Jacobs has been opposed to increasing dwell time between deployments. "Speculation does not serve us well or rumor," insisted Perkins . . . while CNN notes that the clinic has been closed at least briefly. Gee, a stress clinic closed. How well does that serve? Especially after the shooting?
Veterans for Peace's Mike Wong explained this morning on KPFK's Sojourner Truth:
Well we don't know the exact circumstances In this particular incident so it's hard to comment on this particular incident other than -- other than the obvious observation that a lot of troops have been doing multiple tours, third, fourth and, in some cases, fifth tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan and they're under a lot of stress. There's a lot of really bad things that have happened in the war including torture, atrocities, accidental shootings, deliberate shootings of civilians. There's been a lot of dissent within the army. There was a poll taken back in, I think it was '06 when 72% of the troops in Iraq said that they disagreed with the war. In talking to soldiers today, I find that if anything that percentage has risen. So there are a lot of troops who are unhappy with the situation, unhappy with the war, being deployed and redeployed, they are under a great deal of stress and dissent is growing. Iraq Veterans Against the War started several years ago with about seven members and they have grown to the point where they now have many hundreds of members approching thousands probably and they have chapters clear across the country. They have chapters in Europe, they have a chapter in Canada and they have soldiers blogging against the war from Iraq. So dissent within the military is growing and if you see the movie Sir! No Sir! you'll see how it grew within the military during the Vietnam War. And you had people fragging their officers, throwing fragmentation grenades into their bunkers. You had people shooting their own officers.
Cloy Richards mother, Tina Richards was also on the broadcast.
Tina Richards: My oldest son is a Marine who did two tours in Iraq, came back with traumatic brain injury and severe Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. And he was actually out, he was honorably discharged and they stop-lossed him and they were going to send him back for his third tour and he literally told me that he would kill himself before he was going to go back and participate in an illegal and immoral war in Iraq. And I went to Capitol Hill and I stopped it but my other son who did a tour in Iraq and he suffers from PTSD and it took years to finally convince him to seek help. He's in the army right now and he's facing a second deployment in June and he got help went through the PTSD clinic in the army. They told him he was perfectly fine and ready to be deployed and two days later he beat his wife, he was thrown in jail and my son never would have struck a woman. And the DA dropped the charges so that he could be deployed. So still facing this deployment when he's obviously suffering severe PTSD is just insane. This soldier that did this [yesterday's shooting] he was on his, finishing up his third tour over in Iraq and he was, obviously, he needed help. And often when they're in the field and they report stress or that they're in trouble, they're given a handful of pills and they're sent back out onto the battlefield. I've talked to hundreds of soldiers that that's their exact experience when they report that they're having problems processing what they're doing over there.
Steve Mraz (Stars and Stripes) adds, "The alleged shooter fits the Army's profile of troops who are more vulnerable to mental health problems when deployed. Noncomissioned officers on their third and fourth deployments are more than twice as likely to have mental health problems as NCOs serving on their first deployment, according to the latest Army report on the mental health of deployed soldiers."
In Iraq, water is an issue for Iraqis and US service members. Waleed Ibrahim (Reuters) reports an action by the Parliament which attempts to force Iran, Syria and Turkey to share the water resources and, if that doesn't happen, "lawmakers agreed to block any treaty or agreement signed with the three nations that does not include a clause granting Iraq a fairer share of water resources." This as CBS' Houston affiliate KHOU reports "that some soldiers were forced to ration water, perhaps as little as 2-3 liters per day, because there was never enough"
Turning to today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Sahar Issa and Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) report two Baghdad roadside bombings which left six injured, a Diyala Province roadside bombing left six Iraqi soldiers injured, a Kirkuk car bombing claimed the lives of 6 police officers and left twelve people injured and a Mosul roadside bombing left one person injured.
Corpses?
Sahar Issa and Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) report the corpse of 13-year-old girl was discovered in Diyala Province today -- two days after she'd been kidnapped. Yesterday, the corpse of a 5-year-old boy turned up in Baghdad. He'd been kidnapped as well (and a ransom demand issued). The kidnappings never stopped.
Returning to KPFK's Sojourner Truth to note several things.
Eric Gjertsen: Yes, well, these kinds of things, I mean they've been going on under the radar of the media for years now. But now it's become mainstream. As you said the rate of suicides, the level of PTSD and brain damage of soldiers who are returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. The fact, the fact that it's mainstream news that US officials were responsible for torture policies -- these are all things that we have to recognize are victories of the anti-war movement and that they only became mainstream because there were soldiers and families of soldiers and survivors who spoke out and refused and blew the whistle and that there was a movement there to support them and so one of our aims in publishing the Refusing to Kill website is to circulate this news about refusers in different countries internationally and really to build this movement to end the war.
Lt Ehren Watada is the first officer to publicly refuse to deploy in the illegal war. He went public in June of 2006 after working for months (as his superiors requested) with the military to attempt to work out some thing other than deployment to Iraq (he'd offered, for example, to deploy to Afghanistan). If you can hold your nose or just ignoring Margret Prescod's whoring for Barack, KPFK's Sojourner Truth spoke with Ken Kagan. Did you know we don't have a US Justice Dept, we have an "Obama Justice Department"? In the Cult of Saint Barack, that's what they have. Poor Ken Kagan, forgot to say "Barack Justice Dept" and forgot to make Barack the AG and the Solicitor General (Elana Kagan). Margret needs to take her multiple orgasms off the air. If she can't, between gasps can she explain how her Lord and Savior Barack 'rescued' Ehren only partially?
Ken Kagan: In addition, he was also on trial for two charges they referred to as "conduct unbecoming an officer" and that related to statements he made in press interviews critical of the war, critical of the president for bringing us into war under false premises and indicating that the commission of war crimes would be taking place by anyone who participated in a war of aggression.
Those are the charges that were unaffected by Elana Kagan's decision not to pursue the three charges that US District Judge Benjamin Settle has already ruled were over due to the Constitution's barring double-jeopardy. The two charges remain up in the air. Why can he still be charged with those? Kagan stated that two charges were set aside. He told Prescod that it's not Ehren's fault that the trial ended in a mistrial. And that due process should have allowed the charges to be dismissed. Prescod offered that the other side is that those charges weren't brought before the jury and so those charges haven't been pursued yet. Not stated was that the charges weren't just set aside and this all goes to the stipulation.
Sarah Olson and Dahr Jamail were being asked to testify. Dahr didn't whine. Dahr didn't try to make it about him. Sarah? Norman Solomon's 'protegee' made it all about herself. She went all over the place whining, "Stop them! They're trying to make me testify!" Would she testify? She didn't know, she didn't want to talk about her legal strategy. Norman hand-held with her on Flashpoints in one of her less hysterical interviews. Norman got all of his friends to write bad columns in defense of Sarah (Phil Donahue had no clue what Ehren had done or had not done but he wrote a column about Sarah). As Panhandle Media's circus continued, Ehren agreed to a stipulation -- drawn up and approved by both the prosecution and the defense and overseen by the judge (Judge Toilet, John Head). He was not going to dispute any comments in the press. That left Sarah Olson off the hook and her 'gratitude' was so immense that she waited a few months before trashing him publicly.
Should Ehren be tried on those charges (which each could carry a year sentence), he'd be punished for trying to be a nice guy and also doing the country a favor by getting whiny Sarah Olson off any and every open mike.
Kagan was upset by some who have called Ehren a pacifist. Who? Maybe one of Norman's friends, it certainly described Phil's column. Mike Wong (Vietnam era objector) joined the group and noted the lobbying effort that took place with people phoning and e-mailing Elana Kagan asking that the charges against Ehren be dropped. (Margret didn't have much interest in that but it doesn't allow her to sing "Glory, glory, Lord Obama, glory, glory . . .") Mike Wong talked about things that took place in Vietnam and the shocker there, as he spoke of it ("In Vietnam, entire units would go out on patrol and instead of patrolling as they were supposed to, they would just go out in the bush a short distance"), was how little anyone's paid attention. (Hint, the New York Times reported on that in Iraq in an article no one seems to have ever noticed.)
Ken Kagan: Well the army has to make a decision and they have to make it soon about whether they are really going to try to proceed against Lt Watada on the two remaining criminal charges. It obviously is in their interest, time is on their side. They can wait -- they think they can wait as long as they want to but there's actually a clock ticking on the speed with which they have to proceed once they're free to do so. Which is now. And so we would urge them to make a decision quickly and we're working on that quietly behind the scenes to point out to them why it is that they have to make a decision quickly. We kind of -- We would like to be able to bring this matter before a court so that we can lay out our case for why those two remaining charges should be dismissed If they are there would then be no discipline pending against Lt Watada and, if he wished, he could resign from the army, resign honorably his commission. But he's not able to do so now. The army will not accept his resignation while there is discipline pending.
If Margret Prescod's Cult of St. Barack babbles get on your nerves, be sure not to miss the moment when Tina Richard put some real truth onto the program.
Tina Richards: I'd like to actually focus on one thing really quick. Jeremy Scahill recently wrote about this. I'd like one quote from him, that "by September of this year, Obama will have sent more troops into combat than Bush" We, as military families, we feel this. We see the rest of the numbers going down in protests and peace activities because everyone kind of feels like, well, they did their job, they voted Obama in, and the job is over and everything is winding down. It's not winding down. We are getting increased deployments. We are -- you know, the processes that led us to this are actually being accelerated under Obama and I just really want to emphasize as a military family that we really need your help and support out there when we have these events like on Sunday or Winter Soldier on Saturday we need people to attend and listen to our stories because things are actually ramping up in these wars especially with the drone attacks and the destabilization and what's happening in Pakistan. It's only going to get worse, not better. We have a lot of work to do.
Margret's snippy little reply? "You'll have the opportunity to give your website out in a minute." Me-ow, Maggie The Cat, Me-ow.
iraq
evan brightsteven d. green
brett barrouquere
cnndave alsup
the daily 49er
the washington posternesto londonoabc world news tonightmartha raddatzabc news
nbc nightly newsbrian williams
the los angeles timesliz sly
jane arraf
aaron glantz
ehren watada
kpfk
sojourner truth
margaret prescod
tina richards
jeremy scahill
Sir! No Sir!:
The letter below is a response I wrote to Michael Moore's piece on Bernard Madoff that was in Time Magazine's "2009 Time 100" issue. It's followed by his article.You can also read the entire exchange in The Rag Blog.
For the first time, I am breaking my own rule against sending you anything that is not directly related to GI resistance, and I apologize for that. But hey, it's my web site, right? And I won't do it again, I promise.
But before that, here are three items that are indeed about GI resistance:The U.S. Justice Department has dropped its case against LT. Ehren Watada. How the Army will proceed is still not decided. Read about it at The Seattle Times.
SPC Victor Agosto, facing a stop-loss tour of Afghanistan, has announced "There is no way I will deploy to Afghanistan. The occupation is immoral and unjust." Read his story in The Rag Blog.
Coming soon:
In Association with Iraq Veterans Against the War
This is Where We Take Our Stand
The new Web Series based on the
2006 Winter Soldier: Iraq/Afghanistan Investigation
Stay Tuned...
And now, An Open Letter to Michael Moore:
Dear Mike,
I read with much interest your piece "Bernie Madoff, Scapegoat" for Time Magazine. While I welcomed your main premise-that Madoff is a scapegoat and not more than a scab on the open, puss-filled, legal wound called the "American Financial System"-I was stunned to see you take a broad, uninformed swipe at everyone who invested money with Madoff. You say he "stole $65 billion from some already quite wealthy people," referring to his victims as his "own kind." Then you go on to make the incredible claim that most of these supposedly very rich people knew full well (or at least suspected) that they were part of a fraud and, essentially, hoped it would just go on forever. So they should stop their whining and just give all their stolen luchre back.
That's quite an argument. Let me say first of all, for full disclosure, that most of my family was among those supposedly "already quite wealthy people" who lost everything to Madoff. In our case, it was Stan Chais, one of his top "feeders," who gave over all of our life savings to him. But somehow I don't quite see us fitting your definition of people on his "side of the tracks," as you so casually claim. Yes, like the vast majority of the thousands of Madoff's investors, we weren't poor. Far from it. My father was a businessman who manufactured parts for airplanes and did quite well with his small company that he started in the fifties (as I always joked, he was the white man for the white time). He was a lifelong progressive liberal, who took great pride in hiring blacklisted writer friends in the fifties, fighting against the Vietnam War in the sixties, and leading the campaign for Pete Seeger to receive the Kennedy Center Honor in the nineties.
And yes, back in the late eighties he quite willingly joined Stan Chais's "investment" group-seeking stability and good, not massive, profits. And that's what he got for over twenty years, in the hands of a man who he, a smart businessman, trusted completely. And he brought all of his family and many of his friends into the fold because it was just too good to pass up. That included school teachers, artists, writers, doctors, lawyers, and one struggling documentary filmmaker (you remember what that was like). Maybe not the salt of the earth, but a far cry from the "one percenters" you have thrown us in with.
And if you go to the New York Times web site, you will find the letters from several hundred of Madoff's victims to the judge hearing the case-all with very similar stories, often with quite progressive backgrounds, mostly elderly people who had invested all of their retirement savings with him, many now penniless.
But, you claim, it should have been obvious to all of these supposedly intelligent people that the interest they were receiving was impossibly high and they were part of a fraud. Why, according to you, "Some have admitted they did have an inkling 'something was up.'" But you fail to mention that the people who didn't have an inkling "something was up" were the very ones most "intelligent" people look to for guidance-the SEC, who as recently as 2006 was telling the world that Madoff was right as rain despite the compelling evidence that they alone were privy to. Blaming Madoff's victims for not seeing what was being denied by every available source is absurd.
But whether they knew or not, if they took any money out they should give it back, right? "If I buy a stolen car from the guy down the street, the police will take that car from me regardless of whether I knew it was stolen." That's logical, but what if that guy was in my garage stealing my other car at the same time? That's how Ponzi schemes work, and the relatively few who made huge profits from it don't negate that reality.
Let's be honest and take your argument a step further. Hundreds of thousands of people over the last 20 years were conned into buying homes with sub-prime mortgages, all of which were pumped up and turned into massive boondoggles by the schemes called derivatives and credit default swaps (which make Madoff look like a rank amateur). They were, in essence, built on stolen "profits." So now should the people who bought those houses be made to give them back? You know full well that there are those making that argument, and in fact thousands are today being forced out of their houses by foreclosure. Are they getting their just desserts?
Of course you would never say that, but what's the difference here? Yes, there is an economic gap between people who invested with Madoff and people who bought houses with sub-prime mortgages, but the con is essentially the same, is it not?
Here's a thought: Given the quite liberal bent of many of Madoff's investors, I'd be willing to bet the little money I have left that somewhere, somehow, funds that had gone through Bernie's hands and came out bigger helped finance one of your films. I'm not being facetious here. I'm a big fan. But as you so cogently point out, in the Alice in Wonderland world of American finance the veil between "legal" and illegal is infinitely porous. And after all, if you buy a stolen car - well, you know.
In hindsight, every argument my father made in defense of this fund was glaringly and horrendously wrong. But that's easy to say now. I think I'm a pretty smart guy, and I wasn't even the one who got us into this thing, but even after Madoff was exposed I was still arguing it was impossible for Stan Chais to be part of such a scheme. My blinders were no smaller than my dad's, but by what twisted logic does gullibility put us on Madoff's "side of the tracks?"
Yes, many of us "benefited"-for a while and to varying degrees-from this scheme (that is, before losing everything). But putting us up there with the heads of Goldman Sachs and Bank of America? Please!
Yours in the spirit of healthy debate,
David Zeiger
P.S. I am producing a film about my family's situation, titled Ponzi & Me (catchy title, don't you think?). If you would like to invest in it, I can guarantee a return of 15-20%.
Great letter, no? On his name, I can never spell it right. I before e except after c . . .
But I spelled it right this time. And why?
C.I. had the boys bedroom decorated just for them. Let me back up. While I'm working in California for a year (job transfer), we're all staying at C.I.'s (and we all say thank you). So if you're late to the party, you're all caught up. My daughter had her own room even though I said, "Forget it, she'll be in bed with me every night." And she is. (She is also the baby.) So the boys room has all these posters and the boys love it and one is the Sir! No Sir! movie poster. My oldest was mature enough to see the film some time ago (I think right when it came out on DVD I let him see it but he'd seen it when we were visiting out here and it was playing). And he loved it and talked to his younger brother about it over and over. I didn't think he was mature enough for it until last November.
So they loved it and C.I. knew it and had one of the posters put up in their room. My daughter decided we needed in one in "our room." I told her we had pretty paintings (and we do) but she was insistent that we have one. So we do and I just have to look at the film poster to know how to spell David Zieger's last name or to find the website for Sir! No Sir!
And I have to go because I promised my son (oldest) we would watch the season finale of Fringe. (Time stamp is EST. I'm on the west coast these days.) I told him we'd have snacks and make a big thing out of it.
"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):
Tuesday, May 12, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, Steven D. Green's sentencing for War Crimes continues, Sgt John M. Russell is identified as the shooter of five Iraqi soldiers yesterday, Tina Richards speaks truth to power (and to Prescod) and more.
Steven D. Green, convicted last Thursday in the gang-rape of 14-year-old Iraqi Abeer Qassim Hamza al-Janabi, her murder, the murder of her five-year-old sister and the murders of both of her parents. His sentence hearing is ongoing. Today Evan Bright reports the defense put Dr. Ruben Gur on the stand: "Got one hell of a biology lesson on the brain and its functions from Dr. Ruben Gur of UPenn. 'Green acts on impulses and does as he's told'." And that Greg Simolke, Green's uncle, testified. Brett Barrouquere (AP) reports, "Gur told jurors that Green likely suffered closed head injuries." Evan Bright reports of yesterday's hearing:
And so it began. Marisa Ford of the prosecution opened up by speaking about murdering children and how terrified Abeer Al-Janabi must have been before she was killed. "The murder of a child is an unspeakable act, especially an innocent child, which all children are. Abeer's last moments must have been filled with terror as she was raped while her parents and little sister were shot in the room next door. And then, by one of the men who was sent there to protect them, she was murdered." Lots of legal jargon made it's way into the opening statements. Marisa Ford reminded the jury that they are encouraged and in fact, required to reconsider the evidence which was heard in the guilty phase of the trial. She spoke of imposing the death penalty, and how doing so requires that they, the jury, by law, must outline and note the aggravating circumstances, especially in the death of Abeer, which according to Ford was committed in an "especially heinous, cruel, and depraved manner." She repeated how the four soldiers committed the crime on March 12th, 2006, and reiterated how they agreed on the plan, changed clothes, "brought weapons and took tools to complete their mission," and how they worked to cover up the evidence. She told the jury how they would hear of the impact on the victims, and how the Al-Janabi family was like many families from both Iraq and "right here in Paducah, Kentucky." She ended her opening by elaborating on a quote from Winston Churchill: "All the great things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." Ford defiantly expressed, "The defendant Steven Dale Green failed to live up to his duty, he didn't show mercy to Abeer, he took away the two remaining brother's hope for a normal life, he doesn't deserve mercy."
Last night, Ruth summarized the AP reporting on yesterday's hearing:The Associated Press' Brett Barrouquere reports that today's sentence hearing for Steven D. Green included testimony from members of Abeer Qassim Hamza al-Janabi's family. He reports that cousin Abu Farras stated Abeer's brothers Mohammed and Ahmed no longer attend school because the killing of their two sisters and parents "destroyed their future. I'm sure if they died with their family it would be better for them." Mohammed is the older of the two brothers and he told the jury of "how his father taught him to ride a bike". Bright's reports that Abeer's aunt also testified and "spoke of having a good relationship with Qassim" (Abeer's father): "What I say about him ... isn't enough. He cared for all our family." The aunt said of Abeer, "She was proud of being young, and she was proud of the freedom her father gave her. She was spoiled, her father never suppressed her." Dave Alsup (CNN) notes, " Green might become the first former U.S. soldier to face the death penalty for war crimes before a civilian court. The reason for the distinction: Green was discharged from the military before his crimes came to light." Meanwhile the Daily 49er editorializes that "War is turning Americans into what we despise most:"The second incident is a clear-cut case of unjustifiable brutality. Last week, former Army Pfc. Steven Dale Green was found guilty of raping and murdering a 14-year-old Iraqi girl and killing her family. He now faces either death of life in prison.According to the AP, Green's defense team had asked jurors to consider the "context" of war, saying "soldiers in Green's unit … lacked leadership." Defense attorneys also said the Army missed signs that Green was struggling after the loss of friends in combat, and offered little help to him and other members of his unit.It is right that Green be punished, but there is little doubt his vicious acts were at least provoked by the horrors of war. If that's the case, why is he getting the book thrown at him while Ayala is receiving only probation?
Yesterday, a US soldier shot five others in Baghdad. Ernesto London (Washington Post) reported this morning that Sgt John M. Russell is the soldier who shot the five. The story actually caused the networks to snap to attention last night. ABC's ABC World News Tonight did the best job (click here for Martha Raddatz and Luis Martinez' text report and the video -- video is of the report aired on World News Tonight).Charlie Gibson: There was a tragic incident in Iraq today that is a stark reminder that while the demands on US forces in Iraq may be diminishing, the mental stress on service members remains high. A soldier this afternoon opened fire in a clinic in Baghdad that was treating military personnel for stress and suicide prevention. 5 American soldiers were killed, four others wounded including the shooter who is in custody. It was the worst case of soldier on soldier violence since this war began. ABC's Martha Raddatz, with us now. Lt Col Beth Salisbury: This is the entrance into our facility in Camp Liberty. Martha Raddatz: It was just days ago that Lt Col Beth Salisbury showed ABC News the very same combat stress control center where today's horrific shooting took place. Lt Col Beth Salisbury: They will sign in at our front desk. They'll be greeted by our staff here. Martha Raddatz: Salisbury, who runs the center, was not hurt but of the dead, two were on her clinical staff and three were soldiers waiting for treatment. The shooter, who officials say is a Sgt on his third deployment to Iraq, went on a rampage down these hallways and offices in one of the few places where those who were attacked would not have been armed. Lt Col Beth Salisbury: Their weapons are taken for safety and we secure those here for the safety of our staff and themselves. Martha Raddatz: The Sgt being held for the murders is married and based in Germany. ABC News has learned he had been having problems during his deployment. Initial indications are that he did not seek mental health treatment voluntarily but that his unit had referred him for care. It is unclear whether he had yet received treatment. Col Salisbury said recently soldiers are encouraged to look for signs of stress in others. Lt Col Beth Salisbury: The great thing is to have a leader bring in a soldier, come in -- leadership staff -- come in and ask us how that we can help them take care of their soldiers. Martha Raddatz: These centers are part of the response to a dramatic spike in army suicides a record 143 in the last year. Today the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said the shooting will be investigated to see if the stress of multiple and frequent deployments contributed to it. Adm Mike Mullen: It speaks to the issue of--of multiple deployments, you know , increasing dwell time, all those things that we're focused on to try to improve to relieve that stress. Martha Raddatz: It can't be understated what a terrible blow to any unit this is when soldiers are killed by fellow soldiers, especially soldiers who were trying to help others. Charlie?
On yesterday's Free Speech Radio News, Aaron Glantz reported on the story
Aaron Glantz: "Veterans advocates say the details of the incident will be critical in assessing whether the killings could have been prevented. Paul Sullivan is Executive Director of Veterans for Common Sense.
Paul Sullivan: We need to know if this soldier was examined by a physician before or after deployment and if any mental health symptons were observed. We know from repeated Congressional investigations and hearings that the military has knowingly sent soldiers back with physical and mentalh health diagnosis and severe symptoms back to the war zone in some of those case the service members killed themselves or others.
Today Liz Sly (Los Angeles Times) quotes Maj Gen David Perkins stating of Russell, "The commander of the suspect had taken his weapon away. He had been referred to counseling a week beforehand. There was a concern that he should not have a weapon." Corinne Reilly (McClatchy Newspapers) explains he's been charged "with five counts of murder and one count of aggravated assault" and that "Two of the victims worked at the clinic, Perkins said. Both were officers, one in the Army and one in the Navy. The three other victims were enlisted soldiers." Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) observes, "Confiscating the weapon of a noncommissioned officer in charge of other soldiers would be an extremely serious step. Russell, from Sherman, Texas, has served previous deployments in Bosnia and Kosovo. . . . Perkins said the sergeant, whom he said had been deployed to Iraq 'at least two other times' had been referred to counseling about a week before the shooting. He was being treated as an outpatient and it was not known whether he had been prescribed medication." Jenny Booth (Times of London) notes Russell "was due to leave Iraq soon" and a difference between the story out of Iraq that Russell got a hold of gun in the clinic and the story out of DC that that Russell left the clinic and returned with a weapon. CNN explains the timeline this way, "A defense official said that Russell was escorted out of the stress clinic Monday by a fellow soldier. Russell and that soldier apparently struggled over the soldier's weapon in a vehicle after they began to drive away, the official said. Russell then walked back to the clinic, the official said, after apparently obtaining the weapon." CNN quotes Perkins decrying the speculation. The entire last 24 hours have been speculation including retired Col Jack Jacobs, now a military propagandist, who told Brian Williams on NBC Nightly News yesterday (Click here for video page, here for transcript) that the problem was too much time on your hands -- a ridiculous assertion unless you know Jacobs has been opposed to increasing dwell time between deployments. "Speculation does not serve us well or rumor," insisted Perkins . . . while CNN notes that the clinic has been closed at least briefly. Gee, a stress clinic closed. How well does that serve? Especially after the shooting?
Veterans for Peace's Mike Wong explained this morning on KPFK's Sojourner Truth:
Well we don't know the exact circumstances In this particular incident so it's hard to comment on this particular incident other than -- other than the obvious observation that a lot of troops have been doing multiple tours, third, fourth and, in some cases, fifth tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan and they're under a lot of stress. There's a lot of really bad things that have happened in the war including torture, atrocities, accidental shootings, deliberate shootings of civilians. There's been a lot of dissent within the army. There was a poll taken back in, I think it was '06 when 72% of the troops in Iraq said that they disagreed with the war. In talking to soldiers today, I find that if anything that percentage has risen. So there are a lot of troops who are unhappy with the situation, unhappy with the war, being deployed and redeployed, they are under a great deal of stress and dissent is growing. Iraq Veterans Against the War started several years ago with about seven members and they have grown to the point where they now have many hundreds of members approching thousands probably and they have chapters clear across the country. They have chapters in Europe, they have a chapter in Canada and they have soldiers blogging against the war from Iraq. So dissent within the military is growing and if you see the movie Sir! No Sir! you'll see how it grew within the military during the Vietnam War. And you had people fragging their officers, throwing fragmentation grenades into their bunkers. You had people shooting their own officers.
Cloy Richards mother, Tina Richards was also on the broadcast.
Tina Richards: My oldest son is a Marine who did two tours in Iraq, came back with traumatic brain injury and severe Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. And he was actually out, he was honorably discharged and they stop-lossed him and they were going to send him back for his third tour and he literally told me that he would kill himself before he was going to go back and participate in an illegal and immoral war in Iraq. And I went to Capitol Hill and I stopped it but my other son who did a tour in Iraq and he suffers from PTSD and it took years to finally convince him to seek help. He's in the army right now and he's facing a second deployment in June and he got help went through the PTSD clinic in the army. They told him he was perfectly fine and ready to be deployed and two days later he beat his wife, he was thrown in jail and my son never would have struck a woman. And the DA dropped the charges so that he could be deployed. So still facing this deployment when he's obviously suffering severe PTSD is just insane. This soldier that did this [yesterday's shooting] he was on his, finishing up his third tour over in Iraq and he was, obviously, he needed help. And often when they're in the field and they report stress or that they're in trouble, they're given a handful of pills and they're sent back out onto the battlefield. I've talked to hundreds of soldiers that that's their exact experience when they report that they're having problems processing what they're doing over there.
Steve Mraz (Stars and Stripes) adds, "The alleged shooter fits the Army's profile of troops who are more vulnerable to mental health problems when deployed. Noncomissioned officers on their third and fourth deployments are more than twice as likely to have mental health problems as NCOs serving on their first deployment, according to the latest Army report on the mental health of deployed soldiers."
In Iraq, water is an issue for Iraqis and US service members. Waleed Ibrahim (Reuters) reports an action by the Parliament which attempts to force Iran, Syria and Turkey to share the water resources and, if that doesn't happen, "lawmakers agreed to block any treaty or agreement signed with the three nations that does not include a clause granting Iraq a fairer share of water resources." This as CBS' Houston affiliate KHOU reports "that some soldiers were forced to ration water, perhaps as little as 2-3 liters per day, because there was never enough"
Turning to today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Sahar Issa and Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) report two Baghdad roadside bombings which left six injured, a Diyala Province roadside bombing left six Iraqi soldiers injured, a Kirkuk car bombing claimed the lives of 6 police officers and left twelve people injured and a Mosul roadside bombing left one person injured.
Corpses?
Sahar Issa and Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) report the corpse of 13-year-old girl was discovered in Diyala Province today -- two days after she'd been kidnapped. Yesterday, the corpse of a 5-year-old boy turned up in Baghdad. He'd been kidnapped as well (and a ransom demand issued). The kidnappings never stopped.
Returning to KPFK's Sojourner Truth to note several things.
Eric Gjertsen: Yes, well, these kinds of things, I mean they've been going on under the radar of the media for years now. But now it's become mainstream. As you said the rate of suicides, the level of PTSD and brain damage of soldiers who are returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. The fact, the fact that it's mainstream news that US officials were responsible for torture policies -- these are all things that we have to recognize are victories of the anti-war movement and that they only became mainstream because there were soldiers and families of soldiers and survivors who spoke out and refused and blew the whistle and that there was a movement there to support them and so one of our aims in publishing the Refusing to Kill website is to circulate this news about refusers in different countries internationally and really to build this movement to end the war.
Lt Ehren Watada is the first officer to publicly refuse to deploy in the illegal war. He went public in June of 2006 after working for months (as his superiors requested) with the military to attempt to work out some thing other than deployment to Iraq (he'd offered, for example, to deploy to Afghanistan). If you can hold your nose or just ignoring Margret Prescod's whoring for Barack, KPFK's Sojourner Truth spoke with Ken Kagan. Did you know we don't have a US Justice Dept, we have an "Obama Justice Department"? In the Cult of Saint Barack, that's what they have. Poor Ken Kagan, forgot to say "Barack Justice Dept" and forgot to make Barack the AG and the Solicitor General (Elana Kagan). Margret needs to take her multiple orgasms off the air. If she can't, between gasps can she explain how her Lord and Savior Barack 'rescued' Ehren only partially?
Ken Kagan: In addition, he was also on trial for two charges they referred to as "conduct unbecoming an officer" and that related to statements he made in press interviews critical of the war, critical of the president for bringing us into war under false premises and indicating that the commission of war crimes would be taking place by anyone who participated in a war of aggression.
Those are the charges that were unaffected by Elana Kagan's decision not to pursue the three charges that US District Judge Benjamin Settle has already ruled were over due to the Constitution's barring double-jeopardy. The two charges remain up in the air. Why can he still be charged with those? Kagan stated that two charges were set aside. He told Prescod that it's not Ehren's fault that the trial ended in a mistrial. And that due process should have allowed the charges to be dismissed. Prescod offered that the other side is that those charges weren't brought before the jury and so those charges haven't been pursued yet. Not stated was that the charges weren't just set aside and this all goes to the stipulation.
Sarah Olson and Dahr Jamail were being asked to testify. Dahr didn't whine. Dahr didn't try to make it about him. Sarah? Norman Solomon's 'protegee' made it all about herself. She went all over the place whining, "Stop them! They're trying to make me testify!" Would she testify? She didn't know, she didn't want to talk about her legal strategy. Norman hand-held with her on Flashpoints in one of her less hysterical interviews. Norman got all of his friends to write bad columns in defense of Sarah (Phil Donahue had no clue what Ehren had done or had not done but he wrote a column about Sarah). As Panhandle Media's circus continued, Ehren agreed to a stipulation -- drawn up and approved by both the prosecution and the defense and overseen by the judge (Judge Toilet, John Head). He was not going to dispute any comments in the press. That left Sarah Olson off the hook and her 'gratitude' was so immense that she waited a few months before trashing him publicly.
Should Ehren be tried on those charges (which each could carry a year sentence), he'd be punished for trying to be a nice guy and also doing the country a favor by getting whiny Sarah Olson off any and every open mike.
Kagan was upset by some who have called Ehren a pacifist. Who? Maybe one of Norman's friends, it certainly described Phil's column. Mike Wong (Vietnam era objector) joined the group and noted the lobbying effort that took place with people phoning and e-mailing Elana Kagan asking that the charges against Ehren be dropped. (Margret didn't have much interest in that but it doesn't allow her to sing "Glory, glory, Lord Obama, glory, glory . . .") Mike Wong talked about things that took place in Vietnam and the shocker there, as he spoke of it ("In Vietnam, entire units would go out on patrol and instead of patrolling as they were supposed to, they would just go out in the bush a short distance"), was how little anyone's paid attention. (Hint, the New York Times reported on that in Iraq in an article no one seems to have ever noticed.)
Ken Kagan: Well the army has to make a decision and they have to make it soon about whether they are really going to try to proceed against Lt Watada on the two remaining criminal charges. It obviously is in their interest, time is on their side. They can wait -- they think they can wait as long as they want to but there's actually a clock ticking on the speed with which they have to proceed once they're free to do so. Which is now. And so we would urge them to make a decision quickly and we're working on that quietly behind the scenes to point out to them why it is that they have to make a decision quickly. We kind of -- We would like to be able to bring this matter before a court so that we can lay out our case for why those two remaining charges should be dismissed If they are there would then be no discipline pending against Lt Watada and, if he wished, he could resign from the army, resign honorably his commission. But he's not able to do so now. The army will not accept his resignation while there is discipline pending.
If Margret Prescod's Cult of St. Barack babbles get on your nerves, be sure not to miss the moment when Tina Richard put some real truth onto the program.
Tina Richards: I'd like to actually focus on one thing really quick. Jeremy Scahill recently wrote about this. I'd like one quote from him, that "by September of this year, Obama will have sent more troops into combat than Bush" We, as military families, we feel this. We see the rest of the numbers going down in protests and peace activities because everyone kind of feels like, well, they did their job, they voted Obama in, and the job is over and everything is winding down. It's not winding down. We are getting increased deployments. We are -- you know, the processes that led us to this are actually being accelerated under Obama and I just really want to emphasize as a military family that we really need your help and support out there when we have these events like on Sunday or Winter Soldier on Saturday we need people to attend and listen to our stories because things are actually ramping up in these wars especially with the drone attacks and the destabilization and what's happening in Pakistan. It's only going to get worse, not better. We have a lot of work to do.
Margret's snippy little reply? "You'll have the opportunity to give your website out in a minute." Me-ow, Maggie The Cat, Me-ow.
iraq
evan brightsteven d. green
brett barrouquere
cnndave alsup
the daily 49er
the washington posternesto londonoabc world news tonightmartha raddatzabc news
nbc nightly newsbrian williams
the los angeles timesliz sly
jane arraf
aaron glantz
ehren watada
kpfk
sojourner truth
margaret prescod
tina richards
jeremy scahill
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)