Forever Charmed

"I am human and I want to be loved . . ." Remember that?

It was the theme to "Charmed" for eight seasons.  But apparently they couldn't get the rights to the one they used when the show was still in production because at Netflix, the theme is instrumental.

I miss the vocals. 

Emily identified herself as a big, big big (three bigs in her e-mail) "Charmed" fan but hasn't watched the show since it went off the air  She wonders if it feels different watching it now?

Well I remember being furious that this show was getting the axe.  As UPN and WB merged to become CW, a number of awful shows ("Reba") were carried over to the new network.  "Charmed" was not one of them.  Despite the fact that "Charmed was a ratings hit for the net-lette.  They thought they could do better than the Halliwell sisters and I am very happy that the bulk of their shows have failed to deliver that size of an audience.

It may be petty but, hey, like the theme used to say, "I am human . . ."

The other thing that stands out.  I loathe Cole.  I'd forgotten how much.

I'm up to the part in season four where he is repeatedly attempmting to drive a wedge between Phoebe and her sisters, where he torments and targets Paige.  I'd forgotten all of that. 

During this period, I also began to hate Phoebe and it was a good season or two before I could  get over it.


"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):

Tuesday, December 20, 2011.  Chaos and violence continue, Iraq's political crisis continues, network news continues to ignore the political crisis, where did David Petreaus supposedly go, Camp Ashraf residents face a looming deadline, and more.     How bad are things in Iraq right now?  Reidar Visser (Iraq and Gulf Analysis) notes a rumor,  "The reported appearance of CIA director David Patraeus at a meeting of Iraqiyya yesterday seems somewhat extraordinary. If true, it could be indicative of how Washington sees the situation in Iraq after the withdrawal. Critics will claim that after two years dominated by Joe Biden diplomacy, it is perhaps somewhat late in the day to begin sending competent special envoys to Iraq."  The rumor may have truth to it, it may be completely false.  But its very existence, it merely being uttered goes to just how out of control things are in Iraq.   But the news is ignored repeatedly by broadcast media.  For example, last night the CBS Evening News with Scott Pelley led with a 'news' story.  Pelley informed as the theme music faded, "The Secretary of Defense says tonight that the United States will not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon."   This is your lead?  That Leon Panetta -- that any US Secretary of Defense -- states that?   Where have you been for the last ten years?  This is US policy.  You can explore whether it's wise or stupid, fair or hypocritcal.  But treating it as news?  That's really a joke.  Why would any US network newscast lead with five-day old, moldy mashed potatoes as their main dish?  Oh, Pelley quickly explained that Panetta made these remarks "in an interview for 60 Minutes."  So it wasn't the lead story because it was news, it was the lead story because it was advertising for CBS' Sunday night program.  The NewsHour had no mention of Iraq.  But they did do several segments to tell the country that Kim Jong-Il was dead, that Kim Jong-Il was still dead and that Kim Jong-Il was dead.  PBS will offer more details on Kim Jong-Il's death as they develop.  However, sources do say, today, that Kim Jong-Il remains dead.  World News with Diane Sawyer also jumped on the Kim Jong-Il is dead train.  And a 'hard hitting' look at citrus juices.  NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams offered a mix of what everyone else did because better they should all be wrong together, right?    While they ignored what's taking place in Iraq, Al Rafidayn noted Kurdistan Regional Government President Massoud Barzani is warning about the potential collapse of the Iraqi government as a result of Nouri's latest power grab. Barzani is calling for a national conference. Dar Addustour quotes Barzani stating that what took place Sunday at Baghdad International Airport-- pulling Iraqi Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi, Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq and Finance Minister Rafie al-Issawi off a flight and detaining them for several hours -- must not happen again. All three pulled from the plane belong to Iraqiya.  Barzani insists that while security is everyone's concern, detentions must be authorized by the judiciary. The little Nouri who cried Ba'athists. And cried terrorists.  Going to the well on that once too often and among the reasons he's so hard to believe today.   Jomana Karadsheh and Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) remind, "Since October, Iraqi security forces have rounded up hundreds of people accused of being members of Saddam Hussein's outlawed Baath Party or terrorists. Iraqiya says the majority of those people are members of its political bloc and that the prime minister is simply taking out his opponents." Which brings us to today.  Though it didn't make last night's newscasts, the issue was raised at the White House today in the press briefing.     Jake Tapper (ABC News):   On Iraq, the political crisis there seems to be escalating.  Aside from monitoring the situation, is the administration doing anything?  Has Vice President Biden been asked to step in and perhaps oversee this -- or intervene?   Jay Carney:  You're referring to?   Jake Tapper:  The -- al-Hashimi, the arrest warrant.   Jay Carney:  As I discussed yesterday, we're obviously concerned about this and we have -- we are always in conversations with Iraqi leaders.  We closely monitor the reports.  And we urge the Iraqi authorities charged with this responsibility to conduct their investigations into alleged terrorist activities in accordance with international legal norms and full respect for Iraqi law.  As I said, we are talking to all parties to express our concern regarding these developments.  We continue to urge all sides to work to resolve differences peacefully, through dialogue and in a manner that is consistent with the international standards of rule of law, transparency and the democratic political process.  Ambassador James Jeffrey, as well as other U.S. -- senior U.S. officials, have been in frequent contact with Iraqi leaders on this matter and will continue to do so.   Jake Tapper:   Is Vice President Biden one of those officials?   Jay Carney:  I don't have any conversations involving the Vice President to report out to you.  You correctly identify the fact that the Vice President is very engaged in Iraq as a rule, but I don't have any specific conversations of his to report out.   Zhang Ning and Wang Hongbin (Xinhua) observe, "Tension among Iraq's major political blocs has been rising, as the country's highest judiciary body issued an arrest warrant for Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi on terror charges Monday." Tony Karon (Time) explains it began with Iraqiya announcing they were withdrawing from Parliament over Nouri's inability to follow previously agreed to terms (such as the Erbil Agreement): Maliki's response came a day later with a furious attack on the country's two most senior Sunni politicians. First, he urged parliament to pass a vote of no confidence in Deputy Prime Minister Salih al-Mutlaq, who in a TV interview earlier this month had accused Maliki of creating a new dictatorship. More ominously, perhaps, Maliki on Monday ordered the arrest of Iraq's Sunni vice president, Tariq al-Hashimi. The warrant concerns an investigation into a bombing plot uncovered inside Baghdad's heavily protected Green Zone, in which three members of al-Hashimi's security detail have been under investigation. Maliki has claimed to have been the target of this alleged bomb plot. Critics said the judicial panel that issued the arrest order is under the Prime Minister's sway, and having kept the positions of Defense Minister and Interior Minister for himself, he has ensured that all of the country's security forces answer directly to him. Nouri aired 'confessions' from al-Hashemi's bodyguards. Like Marcia, we'll note Roy Gutman and Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reporting on the 'confessions': In more than half an hour of grainy black-and-white video recordings, three men described as al-Hashimi's bodyguards detailed bomb attacks they carried out going back to 2009 that were directed against government security forces. The weapons used were bombs and pistols with silencers. The men spoke in monotones, and it was impossible to determine if their statements were of their own free will, as claimed by al-Maliki aides, or coerced. It appeared that a small selection of their interrogations was presented, evidently edited to provide maximum support for the government position that al-Hashimi headed the chain of command of what amounted to assassination squads. Human rights organizations have long documented the use of torture to garner 'confessions' in Iraq. We'll note this from Human Rights Watch's [PDF format warning] "The Quality of Justice: Failings of Iraq's Central Criminal Court:" The reliance on confessions in the CCCI cases raises serious concerns about the fairness of those proceedings. Torture and other forms of abuse in Iraqi detention facilities, frequently to elicit confessions in early stages of detention, are well-documented. The reliance on confessions in the court's proceedings, coupled with the absence of physical or other corroborating evidence, raises the possibility of serious miscarriages of justice. Aswat al-Iraq notes that Iraqi President Jalal Talabani has declared he was not consulted about the arrest warrant. The Irish Examiner notes that al-Hashemi is currently in the KRG. Al Mada explains the warrant prevents him from leaving the country. The Herald Sun carries a wire story noting that al-Hashemi is stating that the case needs to be transferred to the Kurdistan Regional Government. Al Rafidayn provides a walk-through on the law including the the charges fall under Article IV and that a conviction could result in either life imprisonment or the death penalty. Reuters quotes Ayad Allawi (leader of Iraqiya) stating, "We fear the return of dictatorship by this authoritarian way of governing. It's the latest in a build-up of atrocities, arrests and intimidation that has been going on a wide scale."  And Reuters quotes Allawi stating  "It reminds me personally of what Saddam Hussein used to do, where he would accuse his political opponents of being terrorists and conspirators,"  Meanwhile Nouri's flunkies, Dar Addustour notes, are claiming he is the target of a death threat and that a team of assassins have been trained on foreign soil to kill him.     The arrest warrants were raised at the US State Dept in the press briefing spokesperson Victoria Nuland gave. QUESTION: Iraq. I have one. I just -- I was wondering if you had anything further on the communications between the U.S. Government and the Iraqi Government on those arrest warrants. Ambassador Jeffrey, as you said, has been in touch with all parties. Did he return to Iraq because of this issue? I know he was in town for the Maliki visit. Was that -- was his return in part because of this sectarian threat posed by these warrants?   MS. NULAND: Well, he's been doing laps back and forth. He was here for the Maliki visit, he was back, he was here for another ceremony in the U.S., now he's back. And as I said, we are eager to have him there because he has been talking to all of the interlocutors and encouraging them to work together, to work together within the constitution, within international standards of rule of law, and try to work through these issues. So he continues to be--   QUESTION: Is there -- Is there anything more you can tell us specifically on what that advice entails? I mean, what specifically is the U.S. hoping or urging the Iraqis to do to prevent another outbreak of sectarian violence pegged to this case?   MS. NULAND: Well, I think I went through the sort of whole menu of things that we're advising yesterday, but just to go through it again if that's helpful --   QUESTION: Yes.   MS. NULAND: With regard to the arrest warrant for Vice President al-Hashimi, we are urging the Iraqi authorities charged with the responsibility for these investigations to conduct these investigations into alleged terrorist activities in accordance with international legal norms and full respect for Iraqi law. More broadly, we're urging all political parties and activists to try to resolve their political differences peacefully, through dialogue, within the constitutional norms set forth within Iraq, and to really demonstrate their commitment to a unitary, sovereign Iraq that abides by its own constitution.   QUESTION: And looking at the -- looking at the warrants that are now out and given your prior experience with al-Hashimi, is -- do you have any reason to believe that these accusations are at all plausible or do you worry that this is a politically motivated legal proceeding?     MS. NULAND: I think I'm not going to give a value judgment one way or the other here. I think that from our perspective, the proof of this has to be in the conduct of the investigation of the legal procedures in a manner that comports with international law.   QUESTION: Toria, could you share with us if Mr. Jeffrey spoke with Vice President al-Hashimi in the last -- let's say this -- today or --   MS. NULAND: Without getting into too many details, suffice to say that he's spoken to pretty much every major Iraqi political actor in the last couple of days.   QUESTION: Including Vice President al-Hashimi?   MS. NULAND: I believe so, yes.   QUESTION: And Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq?   MS. NULAND: I can't speak to whether he's spoken to him since his arrest, but he --     QUESTION: Do you know their status? Are they on the run or are they hiding? What's --   MS. NULAND: I can't speak to that, Said.   QUESTION: [. . .] quick follow-up on this. Has anyone above Ambassador Jeffrey's level been in contact with the Iraqis on this? Assistant Secretary Feltman or the Secretary, anybody like that?   MS. NULAND: Well, I think you know that Vice President Biden has been in contact with a number of Iraqis. I'll refer you to his office. We -- I think I read out some of that earlier in the week.   QUESTION: In general, can you -- what's the Administration's opinion of the Iraqi justice system and its ability to provide due process to -- and due process in a fair, transparent trial for those who are charged with crimes?   MS. NULAND: Well, I think you know that we've been working with the Iraqis to build their justice system for a number of years now. And again, each --   QUESTION: Yeah. How did that go?   MS. NULAND: Each case is a new case and has to meet the high standards expected of Iraq by its own constitution, and as I said, we will judge them by their ability to uphold their own constitution and international standards.   QUESTION: Right. Well, but I mean, you pronounce judgment on other countries' legal -- on your opinion of other countries' legal systems all the time. What is it -- what's your opinion of the Iraqi justice system?   MS. NULAND: The Iraqi justice system, in its latest iteration, has produced justice in some cases. It needs to continue to do so in these cases.   QUESTION: Well --   MS. NULAND: I'm not going to give them a grade if that's what you're asking for, Matt.     Patrick Cockburn (Independent) adds, "Two days ago Mr Maliki asked parliament for a vote of no confidence in the Sunni deputy prime minister Saleh al-Mutlaq for incompetence. Mr Mutlaq had accused Mr Maliki of being a dictator. Although Iraq nominally has a power-sharing government in practice it remains divided between parties and communities. All jobs are awarded through a patronage system making political leaders averse to giving up official posts."     Throughout the Iraq War, waves of attacks have taken place leading to waves of refugees, over 4.7 million refugees. It's the largest refugee crisis in the Middle East since 1948.  The Bush administratioin made a big to do, in its last years, of being concerned about the situation.  In 2008, the Special Immigrant Visa Program for Iraqis who worked with the US started -- created by Congress' Defense Authorization Act for FY08.  This was in addition to other programs already in place.  It had a quota of 5,000 yearly; however, if the 5,000 was not met, the remainder could be rolled over and used the next year.  For example, if in 2009, 4500 were admitted -- 500 short of 5000 -- the remaining 500 could be put on 2010 for a new total of 5500.  Barack Obama, as a candidate for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination, repeatedly asserted that he would address the refugee problem.  He is, in fact, doing a worse job than Bush.  Catholic Online covers the US Special Immigration Visas Program:   The SIV program is specially designed to expedite the visa application process for as many as 25,000 people over five years who worked with Americans and are found to be facing an ongoing threat in their country. But, the US has dragged its feet. President Obama mandated more detailed background checks which have only served to lengthen the process. Now, the average wait time for an applicant is at least nine months. That's a long time for someone living under the threat of assassination. In fact, it's too long for at least 300 people who have been killed for working with US. Today, only 7,000 visas have been issued according to the State Department, and more than 30,000 applications are still pending a decision.     Al Jazeera also notes the SIV program:   More than 140,000 Iraqis worked with the United States during the nearly nine-year war and occupation., and tens of thousands have since applied for immigration visas in the United States. The US issued only a handful in the early years of the war. A law passed in 2008 created the Special Immigrant Visas (SIV) programme, which was supposed to expedite the process: It allocated 25,000 visas over five years for Iraqis who worked with Americans and face an "ongoing threat" in their home country. But four years later, only about 7,000 of those visas have been issued, according to the State Department, with more than 30,000 applications pending a decision.   In Iraq, many people and groups are targeted.  Currently, Nouri's targeting Iraqiya, but also targeted are Iraqi women, Iraq's LGBT community and many other groups including Iraqi Christians.  Ruthie Epstein (Human Rights First) observed last week:   The conversation over the coming weeks must include an acknowledgement of the millions of Iraqis displaced by the war. Thousands lack permanent and safe housing in Iraq; thousands more languish without formal legal status in their countries of first asylum, awaiting protracted and uncertain resettlement processes.  Tens of thousands of children cannot access regular education and their parents cannot work legally.  Single or widowed women, LGBTI individuals, religious minorities, journalists, and academics still face threats or violence in their country, as do Iraqis who worked in some capacity with the United States or a U.S.-based organization. 39,000 Iraqis await resettlement processing by the United States inside Iraq, and 18,000 more are in the U.S. resettlement pipeline in Syria.     Michelle Bauman (Catholic News Agency) notes that the consequences from the illegal war that Pope John Paul II warned against have turned into realities with Father Firas Behnam Benoka stating "love wouldn't have been killed off in favor of violence and hate" if Pope John Paul II's warnings had been heeded.  Instead over half of the Chrisian population has fled Iraq since the start of the war and, the priest maintains, Iraqi Chrisians now worry about "extinction."     Meanwhile Irwin Cotler (Toronto Star) observes, "While the world prepares to celebrate the beginning of the New Year, the people of Camp Ashraf, Iraq, live in imminent peril. At the camp -- set up by American forces -- 3,400 Iranian refugees are facing prospective massacre at the hands of the Iraqi government. The majority of residents have survived until now because of U.S. protection, but with American forces leaving by the end of the year, the Iraqi government has imposed an arbitrary deadline of Dec. 31 for residents to leave. Those who have nowhere to go will likely be attacked and killed; yet, the international community has been largely silent to their plight."   AP's Matthew Lee raised the issue of Camp Ashraf at the US State Dept briefing today.   Matthew Lee:  Yeah. No, though I want to go to my other Iraq question, which is: What is your understanding of the situation right now at Camp Ashraf?   Victoria Nuland: Well, I think you know that we've been quite active in support of --   Matthew Lee: Well, I'm not asking about the negotiations. I want to know specifically, what's your understanding of the situation there at the camp, like, on the ground right now. There are members of -- residents who claim that the -- they've been subject to a blockade, that nothing is getting in -- food, fuel, that kind of thing.   Victoria Nuland: I don't have that information. I will take it and check on the status of the actual camp. As you know, we have been supporting strongly the efforts of the United Nations and Ambassador Kobler to try to negotiate between --   Matthew Lee: Right. That's not my question, though.   Victoria Nuland: -- the Government of Iraq and the residents of Ashraf to settle these issues peaceably and before the deadline, and particularly to help the Ashrafis get themselves resettled. So those efforts continue. I do not have any information at the moment with regard to difficulties at the camp today, but if that is not accurate, we will get back to you.     Camp Ashraf houses a group of Iranian dissidents (approximately 3,500 people). Iranian dissidents were welcomed to Iraq by Saddam Hussein in 1986 and he gave them Camp Ashraf and six other parcels that they could utilize. In 2003, the US invaded Iraq.The US government had the US military lead negotiations with the residents of Camp Ashraf. The US government wanted the residents to disarm and the US promised protections to the point that US actions turned the residents of Camp Ashraf into protected person under the Geneva Conventions. As 2008 drew to a close, the Bush administration was given assurances from the Iraqi government that they would protect the residents. Yet Nouri al-Maliki ordered the camp attacked twice. July 28, 2009 Nouri launched an attack (while then-US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was on the ground in Iraq). In a report released this summer entitled "Iraqi government must respect and protect rights of Camp Ashraf residents," Amnesty International described this assault, "Barely a month later, on 28-29 July 2009, Iraqi security forces stormed into the camp; at least nine residents were killed and many more were injured. Thirty-six residents who were detained were allegedly tortured and beaten. They were eventually released on 7 October 2009; by then they were in poor health after going on hunger strike." April 8th of this year Nouri again ordered an assault on Camp Ashraf (then-US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was again on the ground in Iraq when the assault took place). Amnesty International described the assault this way, "Earlier this year, on 8 April, Iraqi troops took up positions within the camp using excessive, including lethal, force against residents who tried to resist them. Troops used live ammunition and by the end of the operation some 36 residents, including eight women, were dead and more than 300 others had been wounded. Following international and other protests, the Iraqi government announced that it had appointed a committee to investigate the attack and the killings; however, as on other occasions when the government has announced investigations into allegations of serious human rights violations by its forces, the authorities have yet to disclose the outcome, prompting questions whether any investigation was, in fact, carried out." Nouri al-Maliki is seen as close to the government in Tehran. They have made it clear that they want the dissidents out of Iraq and returned to Iran -- where they would face trial at best, torture most likely. Nouri has announced he will be closing Camp Ashraf at the end of this year. UK MP Brian Binley (Huffington Post) has offered, "As things are evolving and if Maliki gets away with his plan to impose the deadline, just as the Christmas and New Year holidays are in full swing, the prospect is that the world will sit and watch while men and women are killed in cold blood or mutilated, crushed by US-supplied armoured personal carriers." Jamie Crawford (CNN) reports, "The Obama administration 'welcomes' a United Nations-led effort in Iraq to relocate a group on the State Department terrorism list, before an end-of-the-year deadline that could see heavy violence and a large humanitarian disaster unfold, senior administration officials said Monday." Do they welcome a UN-led effort?  The UN Secretary-General's Special Envoy to Iraq Martin Kobler outlined the plan  to the United Nations Security Council on December 6th:   SRSG Martin Kobler: The Secretary-General has spoken personally to Mr. Maliki to appeal for flexibility and for full support for the UN's efforts to faciliate this peaceful solution the government has assured that it seeks.  He has asked me to attach the highest priority to this case. In trying to facilitate a solution, we are emphasizing a number of important points.  First, that lives are at stake and must be protected. The government has a responsibility to ensure the safety, security and welfare of the residents.  Any forced action that results in bloodshed or loss of lives would be both ill-advised and unacceptable.  Second, we believe that any workable solution must be acceptable to both the government of Iraq and to the residents of Camp Ashraf. The solution must respect Iraqi soveriegnty on the one hand and applicable international humanitarian human rights and refugee law on the other hand. Third, a solution must also respect the principle of nonrefoulement. No resident of Camp Ashraf should be returned to his or her home country without consent.  While some progess has been made in our latest discussions in Baghdad, many obstacles remain to arriving at a plan that would meet the concerns and requirements of all concerned. Subject to all conditions being met, UNHCR is ready to begin verification and interviews for the purpose of refugee status determination; however, the process will take time to complete and clearly the situation cannot be fully resolved before December 31st.  I, therefore, appeal to the government of Iraq to extend this deadline in order to permit adequate time and space for a solution to be found.  I also appeal to the leadership and residents of Camp Ashraf to engage constructively and with an open mind to this process.  They should give serious consideration to the proposals under discussion.  There should be no provocation or violence from their side nor a challenge to Iraqi sovereignty.  Finally I appeal to the international community to do more to help.  A lasting solution cannot be found and as governments step forward and offer to accept Camp Ashraf residents to resettle in their countries.       What the UN proposed was that the deadline be extended beyond December 31st. This was addressed in an open session of the UN Security Council and the White House is damn well aware of that. I don't know if right now is a time that the White House wants to be viewed as complicit with Nouri al-Maliki. It should also be noted that the US State Dept has been court-ordered -- for over a year now -- to re-evaluate the status of the MEK. The current terrorist designation (already dropped by European countries) is preventing many countries from accepting the Camp Ashraf residents.  Barbara Slavin (IPS) notes, "Sanjeev Bery, advocacy director for the Middle East and North Africa at Amnesty International, told IPS in an email that the organisation 'is concerned that Camp Ashraf residents are at serious risk of severe human rights violations if the Iraqi government goes ahead with its plans to force the closure of the camp by the end of this month'."  Kasra Nejat (Columbia Tribune) argues, "America was the country that signed a personal pact with every member of the camp giving them protected-person status. It is time they were given what they were promised: protection from the despots in Iran and their henchmen in Iraq. Anything less will leave the United States politically and legally complicit in any future bloodshed."             iraq cbs evening news with scott pelley scott pelley diane sawyer world news tonight abc news pbs the newshour nbc nightly news brian williams xinhua zhang ning wang hongbin time magazine tony karon the telegraph of london the miami herald mcclatchy newspapers laith hammoudi roy gutman the new york times jack healy cnn jomana karadsheh mohammed tawfeeq dar addustour al mada the toronto star irwin colter cnn jamie crawford new jersey newsroom bob holt

Still Charmed

Damn that Kat! :D

She's got me all into the "Charmed."

You can stream all 8 seasons of the show on Netflix.

I didn't realize that.

I'm on season three as is Kat.

We were talking about it on the phone tonight.  I just wasn't up to a Prue.

I'm sorry.  Prue dies during one of my pregnancies.  She lives at the end of season 3.  That's what the cliff hanger is all about.  But then, over the summer, Shannen's off the show.  So when season 4 starts up, Prue is dead.

I'm just not up to those episodes.  I took Prue's death very seriously.

So instead we started with the season Rose McGowan joins the cast as Paige.

I really like Paige.  And Piper and Phoebe.  I watched the show when it was on the WB and never missed an episode except for season five. 

But I don't know why Prue registered so with me.

She was equally a favorite as the other three but maybe it was the Janet-Leigh-"Psycho" thing.  How if Janet Leigh can die -- and early in the movie -- anyone can?

I don't know.  But if I happen upon the Prue episodes on TV (like back when TBS was airing them), I'll always stop and watch.  But I just can't plan to catch them. 


"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):

Monday, December 19, 2011.  Chaos and violence continue -- and that's just within the government as Iraq looks for a handbasket to go to hell in.   CNN reported this afternoon that an arrest warrant had been issued for Iraqi Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi by the Judicial Commitee with the charge of terrorism.  Omar al-Saleh (Al Jazeera) terms it a "poltical crisis" and states, "The government says this has nothing to do with the US withdrawal, that this has nothing to do with the prime minister consolidating his grip on power.  However, members of al-Iraqiya bloc, which Hashimis is a member of, say 'No, [Maliki] is trying to be a dictator."  Sam Dagher (Wall St. Journal) observes, "The arrest warrant puts Mr. Maliki on a possible collision course with the Kurds, who run their own semiautonomous region in the north and participate in the central government but have longstanding disputes with Baghdad over oil and land; and with Sunni Arabs in provinces like Anbar, Diyala, Nineveh and Salahuddin who have pressed in recent weeks for more autonomy from Baghdad with the backing of the Kurds."   What the hell is going on?    Over the weekend, Nouri went for another power grab.      It actually started before Saturday but the press was ga-ga over photo-ops.  'Last soldier out! No, really, last US soldier out! Except for the ones still there! Don't look behind the curtain!'   And apparently covering for Barack was more important than telling Americans what was taking place in Iraq.   Late Saturday night online (Sunday in print), Liz Sly (Washington Post) noted that the 'government' in Iraq is "unraveling faster than had been anticipated Saturday." Really?  All in one day.  Well,  no, not in one day.  She continued,  "In recent days, the homes of top Sunni politicians in the fortified Green Zone have been ringed by tanks and armored personnel carriers, and rumors are flying that arrest warrants will be issued for other Sunni leaders."   Days?   Plural.     "In recent days."       Golly, seems to me if you know -- for even just one damn day -- that Nouri's goons -- in tanks, no less -- are 'ringing' his political opponents home, you report it then.  Yet even with Sly reporting this late Saturday -- by which point it was already all over the Iraqi media -- you had Jim Axlerod (CBS News) filing garbage and crap and pretending that was covering Iraq.    There are actually two opponents Nouri is attacking.  Let's walk through.  Saturday,   Ines Tariq (Al Mada) reported on the controversy over whether or not the country's Supreme Court has issued an arrest warrant for Iraq's Sunni Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi. Yes, rumors were already swirling about an arrest warrant.   Now put al-Hashemi on hold for a moment and let's note the other politcal opponent Nouri's targeting and, don't worry, when we move over to Sunday, the strands come together.  Al Rafidayn reported Nouri al-Maliki was asking Parliament for a vote to withdraw confidence in Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq. Nouri declared al-Mutlaq is no longer fit for office as a result of an interview he gave to CNN. Last Tuesday, Arwa Damon and Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) reported: Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki is amassing dictatorial power as U.S. troops leave the country, risking a new civil war and the breakup of the nation, his deputy warned Tuesday. Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq told CNN that he was "shocked" to hear U.S. President Barack Obama greet al-Maliki at the White House on Monday as "the elected leader of a sovereign, self-reliant and democratic Iraq." He said Washington is leaving Iraq "with a dictator" who has ignored a power-sharing agreement, kept control of the country's security forces and rounded up hundreds of people in recent weeks. [. . .] "America left Iraq with almost no infrastructure. The political process is going in a very wrong direction, going toward a dictatorship," he said. "People are not going to accept that, and most likely they are going to ask for the division of the country. And this is going to be a disaster. Dividing the country isn't going to be smooth, because dividing the country is going to be a war before that and a war after that." Like Tareq al-Hashemi, Saleh al-Mutlaq is a member of the Iraqiya political slate. Dar Addustour reported that the homes of al-Hashemi and al-Mutlaq as well as the home of Rafi Hiyad al-Issawi had been surrounded by "tanks and special forces." Dr. Rafi Hiyad al-Issawi was the previous Deputy prime minister (2007 through 2010). He was the head of Falluja General Hospital prior to that and he is currently the Minister of Finance. Like the other two, al-Issawi is a member of Iraqiya.  Now that's Saturday.   And, hopefully, you'll agree that the above should have been news.  That the photo ops should have ceased immediately.  Let's move to Sunday where Nouri's still got a few tricks to play.  AFP reported, "Iraqi Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi and several of his bodyguards were escorted off a plane at Baghdad airport on Sunday because two of the guards were wanted on 'terrorism charges,' officials said, the latest step in a deepening political crisis." Also on the plane, I said the strands would meet, was Saleh al-Mutlaq. al-Mutlaq was also forced off the plane. On Sunday's All Things Considered (NPR), Kelly McEvers offered this take: Kelly McEvers: Here in Kuwait, just having crossed over the border, we have all these US commanders telling us that they're leaving Iraq in a better place, that it's a thriving democracy. Yet in Baghdad it looks like you have Prime Minister Maliki -- who is a Shi'ite and whose government is Shi'ite -- going after his rivals who are Sunnis. Just yesterday, charges were announced against the Vice President who is Sunni and troops surrounded his house. The Maliki government accuses him of being involved in a terrorist plot. But Maliki's detractors say this is sectarian revenge. So you know we've got these promises from US commanders that things are going really well but this kind of national reconciliation government looks like it's unraveling. That should have been the lead story on the Sunday evening newscasts (network evenings news).  Kelly McEvers filed in time for All Things Considered.  Other should have been filing as well.  Instead, you got this piece of garbage report by Jim Axelrod -- who damn well knows better -- airing on the CBS Evening News Sunday (link is text and video). Search in vain for any mention of arrest warrants or tanks around politicians' homes or politicians being pulled off planes in Baghdad.  You won't find them.  Jim whored.  Jim embarrassed himself.  And if I were Jim's age and his health record, I'd be seriously worried about my legacy because there may not be a lot of time left and I really wouldn't want to go out as a whore.     Are you in the news business or not?  If you are and you're filing a report on Iraq on Sunday, you damn well include what's going on. Sunday, Nizar Latif (The National) observed: Those moves have added to a fear among the prime minister's critics that he is seeking to eliminate rivals and consolidate power.Iraqiyya warned it would pull out of the coalition government unless Mr Al Maliki agreed to seek a solution that respects "democracy and civil institutions". "Iraq is now in a very difficult position. This is a critical time," said Eytab Al Douri, an MP with the Iraqiyya bloc. "If solutions are not found quickly, Iraq will be heading towards sectarian and ethnic divisions, and a return to civil war." Roy Gutman, Sahar Issa and Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reported that there were claims of confessions being made by other Tareq al-Hashemi guards. If so, it's worth noting that Iraqi 'confessions' often result from torture making them unreliable at best. Gutman, Issa and Hammoudi note Nouri's government planned to air the 'confessions' on TV: Iraq's Interior Ministry announced Saturday that it would televise the confessions of the first two suspects that night, but the plan touched off a firestorm. The U.S. Embassy, silent for most of the past year in the face of other political excesses, objected publicly. It said in a statement that U.S. officials had not yet seen the actual confessions and urged Iraq to investigate all allegations "in a transparent manner in accordance with Iraqi law." On Sunday, Iraq's supreme judicial authority ruled that the confessions of the alleged "cell" members couldn't be aired until the investigation is completed.   Today reporters asked about some of the above at the State Dept press briefing.     QUESTION: Yes, ma'am. Almost time for the departure of the last American soldier from Iraq. The Iraqi prosecutor general issued a warrant arrest for the Vice President Tariq al-Hashemi and the Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq. Both are Sunnis and from the Iraqiya or affiliated with the Iraqiya coalition. Do you have any comment on that?     MS. NULAND: Well, we are closely monitoring these reports that an arrest warrant has been issued, in particular for Vice President al-Hashemi. We are talking to all of the parties. We've expressed our concern regarding these developments. We're urging all political sides in Iraq to work out their differences peaceably, politically, through dialogue, and certainly in a manner that is consistent with democratic political processes and international standards of rule of law. Ambassador Jeffrey has been in contact with all of the parties in recent hours.     QUESTION: Victoria, I mean, coming so soon after Maliki's visit to Washington, is that Mr. Maliki saying that I'm really in Iran's camp? I mean, is that how it is interpreted in this building? Or should it be interpreted that way?     MS. NULAND: There are a number of issues that Iraqis have been struggling with for a number of years. We want to see, in this next phase of Iraq's development, this sovereign phase, Iraqis work together within Iraq's democratic institutions to preserve national unity, to address the underlying political issues that form the basis of these kinds of tensions. We want to see Iraq's sovereignty protected and their democratic institutions protected. So that is a goal that we share. We share that goal with most of Iraq's leaders, and we're urging them to work together on these issues.     QUESTION: Does the U.S. have anything to indicate that these warrants were issued in any way that doesn't comport with democratic processes? Do you doubt the motivation behind these reports of arrest warrants?     MS. NULAND: Well, I think I've addressed our general view that we want to ensure that, whatever is done, it's within the democratic possibilities of Iraq and within international standards of rule of law. We obviously have not been privy to the underlying documents, et cetera, and we don't know where this is going from here. But again, we want to see dialogue, and we want to see resolution of these things within Iraq's democratic processes.   We're being kind and I'm not inserting names but leaving "Question" in place.  Kind?  How the hell do you not know know who Saleh al-Mutlaq is?  When Nouri lodged the complaint with Al Jazeera against Inside Iraq, among the gripes was the charge that al-Mutlaq was able to dispense "propaganda" on Jassim al-Azzawi's program.  The reason we didn't fall of Al Jazeera's garbage passed off as Libyan War coverage is because I knew the background on what vanished Jassim al-Azzawi from his own program and then what got the program killed (he was allowed to host the final episode).  It was Nouri.  Nouri and the government of Qatar.  That's why their coverage is so embarrassing from Iraq.    From Inside Iraq that began airing January 22, 2010, they're discussing the efforts to keep al-Mutlaq off the ballot for the March 7, 2010 elections.       Jassim al-Azzawi: [Overlapping] Yes, I shall come to the scare tactics and the fear politics that you mention but before that, I guess our international audience would like to know, who stands behind this campaign to disbar more then 500 people?  Some of them such senior figures as yourself. The National Dialogue Front has about 12 members in Parliament.  You've been in politics for many, many years. I guess the logical question is: Who's behind it? It is my role as a presenter and a journalist to ask the tough questions and perhaps it's your role as a politician and even your perogative not to answer.  Let me give you a couple of options and see which one you lean on.  Is it Ahmed Chalabi, the former head of the de-Ba'athification?  Is it Prime Minister al-Maliki fearing that Saleh al-Mutlaq has the wind behind him and one day he might even become the president of Iraq?  Or is it another force? Who is exactly orchestrating this?   Saleh al-Mutlaq: Well Ahmed Chalabi could not do what was done alone.  I think there's a power behind that and my belief is that Iran is behind that and Ahmed Chalabi is only a tool -- Ahmed Chalabi agenda is a tool to do this.  And Ahmed Chalabi is not alone. We discovered that Ahmed Chalabi now has an intelligence association in Iraq and he worked with so many people outside the Iraqi government. And what happened really surprised everybody.  The same day that this decision was taken, everybody was saying, "I know nothing about it." You ask al-Maliki, he says, "I know nothing about it." You ask the president [Jalal Talabani], he says he knows nothing about it.  You ask the Chairman of the Parliament, he knows nothing about it. Then who is doing that?  We discover there is a small organization which does not exist legally.  The de-Ba'athification committee has been frozen -- including Ahmed Chalabi himself -- has been frozen by the prime minister and by the president.  And another committee, which is the Accountability, came in but it was not formed because the Parliament did not vote on the names that were being proposed by the prime minister because most of them are from al Dahwa Party [Nouri's party].   January 2010, J. Scott Carpenter and Michael Knights' "Iraq's Politics of Fear" (Foreign Policy) explained: The ban will mainly affect candidates from the Iraqiyya coalition, a cross-sectarian alliance dominated by secular nationalists and led by Iyad Alllawi, the first Iraqi prime minister of the post-Saddam era. Saleh Mutlaq, one of the three most senior leaders in the coalition, was among the candidates struck from the ballot -- along with all candidates from his party, the Iraqi Front for National Dialogue. Wathab Shakir, the Sunni Arab head of the national reconciliation committee, was also banned, alongside numerous candidates of the Unity of Iraq coalition, another cross-sectarian nationalist alliance.          Iraqiya was the slate most targeted with (false) charges of Ba'athism.  The charges came from the Justice and Accountability Committee steered by Ahmed Chalabi and his beloved Ali al-Lami whose fate was to be gunned down in May of 2011 with his brother Jamal Faisal gunned down in June -- reportedly it was Shia on Shia violence stemming from some deals al-Lami had going on the side.  (Deals?  He was allegedly peddling his ability to influence and allegedly either went back on a promise or didn't have the power he claimed.)     Despite Nouri targeting Iraqiya and picking off candidates (some of whom were barred from running, some of whom were assassinated) and despite the glowing press his State of Law political slate received in Iraq (see Deborah Amos' "Confusion, Contradiction and Irony: The Iraqi Media in 2010," Harvard's Joan Shorenstein Center) and despite his quickly tossed together projects ahead of the election (oh, look, water at last for our neighborhood), Nouri still couldn't pull out a win.   Political Stalemate I begins with the results of the March 7, 2010 elections, even after Nouri al-Maliki bitterly contested them and stamped his feet until a few post-election votes were tossed his way, were that Iraqiya still came in first and Nouri's political slate State of Law still came in second. Iraqis do not elect their prime minister, the Parliament does. Per the Constitution, Ayad Allawi, the leader of Iraqiya, should have had first crack at forming a government. First crack? You become prime minister-designate and then have thirty days to name a Cabinet (nominate people for positions and have Parliament vote in favor of them). If you can't accomplish that in 30 days, per the Constitution, a new prime minister-designate is supposed to be named. Political Stalemate I ended in November of 2010 with the Erbil Agreement hammered out in Erbil between the major political blocs (and the US) whereby every one was supposed to make concessions. The Kurds would get to keep Jalal Talabani as president. They thought they would get three vice presidents. Iraqiya won the elections in March 2010 and the political bloc was headed by Ayad Allawi. Nouri wasn't stepping down and the White House was backing Nouri. For Nouri to remain prime minister, Allawi was promised he would head a new, independent council over security issues. He was also promised that the Iraqiya candidates demonized as Ba'athists and forced out of the 2010 elections by Nouri's friends would have their names cleared. On November 11th, the new Parliament held their first real session. They voted Osama al-Nujaifi Speaker of Parliament (he was from Iraqiya and that was part of the Erbil Agreement), Jalal was named president and Nouri was named prime minister designate (but we were all informed in the following days that this was 'unofficial' -- once named prime minister-designate, you have 30 days, per the Constitution, to put together a Cabinet and get the Parliament to sign off on each member). But what of the security council? What of clearing the names of the falsely accused? That would come, State of Law insisted, in time. Allawi and a number of Iraqiya members walked out. They should have refused to participate from that day forward. Instead, they foolishly believed promises (from both State of Law and the White House). Nobember 25th, Jalal 'officially' named Nouri prime minister-designate. Nouri had created Political Stalemate I by refusing to surrender the prime minister post. He'd done that for eight months. In that time, he should have had some ideas about a Cabinet. But Nouri's problem was he over-promised to get support. So when it was time to name a Cabinet, suddenly the Cabinet had more ministers and deputy ministers than it had previously (from 37 in 2006 to 42 in 2010). And he still couldn't keep his promises to everyone. December 22nd, the Constitution was tossed by the wayside and Nouri was allowed to move from prime minister-designate to prime minister because he'd assembled a kind of Cabinet. He named 31 out of 42 ministers and people pretended that was good enough. He had failed to meet the Constitutional mandate of naming a Cabinet but everyone looked the other way. He refused to name the security posts: National Security, Interior and Defense. His defenders (including the White House) swore those posts would be named in a matter of weeks. His detractors saw the refusal as part of a pattern of power grabs on Nouri's part and stated he wouldn't fill the posts. This is the start of Political Stalemate II. Three days from now, it will be a year since Nouri was wrongly (per the Constitution, per the vote) named prime minister. And Iraq still has no Minister of Defense, Minister of Interior or Minister of National Security. The US press insisted to news consumers, back in December 2010, that it would only be a matter of weeks before Nouri named nominees for these posts.  Wiser Iraqis stated the vacancies were intentional and part of a power grab on Nouri's part. Nearly a year later, who looks like they were right and who looks like they were wrong?   Before we go further, al-Mutlaq was telling Al Jazeera viewers about how the political party Dawa controlled the Justice and Accountability Commission in 2010.  The head of Dawa is Nouri al-Maliki. (Visit the party website and use their "Ask the PM" feature if you'd like to communicate with a thug.) State of Law is a political slate.  (Some call it a "coalition."  That's not exactly wrong but, to form a government after parliamentary elections, a coalition is formed.  To avoid confusion, we call it -- and Iraqiya -- political slates and not "political coalitions.") Why bring up Dawa and its control of the Justice and Accountability Commission in 2010?  Because, as explained in the September 20, 2011 snapshot, Nouri was again attempting to continue the committee and to again put it under Dawa control (even Moqtada al-Sadr's bloc objected to that).   That should have been totally anticipated by the US government and yet another reason why they shouldn't have backed Nouri for a second term (they got the Kurds to set aside their objections and got SICI's leader to come on board as well, they then made deals with Ayad Allawi -- that the US government went back on -- to get him to go along with the Erbil Agreement).  Saturday night when the Iraqi press was conveying how bad things were going, we noted here that Barack was responsible.  And the Cult of St. Barack descended upon the public e-mail account and the Cult sayeth he is wise and all good and only a hater shall ever blame our modern day Christ-child.  "It was Bush's war!" chants the Cult.   No, it's Barack's war.  It became his war the minute he was sworn in.  It continued to be his war and, with the militarization of the State Dept, it remains his war.  As we noted Saturday: That's not an argument for staying. We have always favored immediate withdrawal. And we noted back when Barack won the election that he needed to get the troops out immediately. Had he done what many voters thought he was promising to do, the disaster that Iraq may become would be a Bush disaster. If Iraq had broken out into all out war in 2010 -- Barack having pulled all US troops out in 2009 -- that would be Bush's problem. And Barack could say that. And no one could have argued with him. He had a mandate from the voters to immediately end the Iraq War. But instead, he decided to own the war. And he decided to continue the occupation (by militarizing the State Dept). And he and his gang of idiots made one fatal mistake another another including backing Nouri over and over. Including repeatedly stabbing the Kurds in the back. Asking them time and again to ignore what was best for them and instead do what would help the White House. (That's not even counting all of the US money the CIA funneled into Goran -- a political party in the KRG that challenges the two existing parties.) As a friend in the administration said to me recently, there's really no marker left that the US can call in when it comes to the Kurds. The administration betrayed those who were friends to the US by supporting a thug named Nouri. In supporting a thug named Nouri, they betrayed the Iraqi people. In backing Nouri over the Iraqi Constitution, they sent a message and set a pattern that rule of law does not matter.   That's not just my opinion.  Last Tuesday on KCRW's To the Point, Warren Oleny addressed Iraq with many guests.  We'll note part of his conversation with Feisal Amin Rasoul Istrabadi -- the part where the realities of Political Stalemate II are addressed.   Warren Oleny: Is there anything the Obama administration should be doing differently from what it is?   Ambassador Feisal Istrabadi: Well, I mean, that's hard to say because obviously it's influence is somewhat waning.  The critical mistake the Obama administration made occurred last year when it threw its entire diplomatic weight behind supporting Nouri al-Maliki notwithstanding these very worrisome signs which were already in place in 2009 and 2010.  The administration lobbied hard both internally in Iraq and throughout the region to have Nouri al-Maliki get a second term -- which he has done.  Right now, the betting there's some question among Iraq experts whether we'll ever have a set of elections in Iraq worthy of the name.  I mean, you can almost get odds, a la Las Vegas, on that among Iraq experts. It's a very worrisome thing.  What can they do in the future? Well I suppose it would be helpful, it would be useful, if we stopped hearing this sort of Happy Talk coming from the administration -- whether its Jim Jeffreys in Baghdad, the US Ambassador or whether it's the president himself or other cabinet officers.  We're getting a lot of Happy Talk, we're getting a lot of Happy Talk from the Pentagon about how professional the Iraqi Army is when, in fact, the Iraqi Army Chief of Staff himself has said it's going to take another ten years before the Iraqi Army can secure the borders. So it would help, at least, if we would stop hearing this sort of Pollyanna-ish -- if that's a word -- exclamations from the administration about how swimmingly things are going in Iraq and had a little more truth told in public, that would be a very big help to begin with.     Critical mistake is correct.  As the Washington Post's David Ignatius observed last week, "I have a copy of a 1985 photograph, culled from the archives of a Beirut newspaper, that shows a circle of Iranian-backed conspirators gathered behind the pilots of the hijacked TWA Flight 847.  Some former U.S. officials say the balding man in the front row is Maliki; but even if that's wrong, his own Dawa Party bombed the U.S. Embassy in Kuwait in 1983.  A conspiratorial underground was his political education."     That's who the US government backed.  That was Bush's decision in 2006 and it was Barack's in 2010.   Things could be different in Iraq.  But the US government made the decision.     Nouri has often been at odds with Tareq al-Hashemi.  Both came to their current positions in the spring of 2006.  Nouri and State of Law objected strongly to Tareq's visiting neighboring countries in the region during Political Stalemate I and, most importantly, when Nouri was exposed as a liar (again) for lying about secret prisons (again) and prison conditions, al-Hashemi amplified the revelations by visiting the prison.  And Saleh al-Mutlaq?  Dar Addustour notes Nouri is also calling for confidence to be withdrawn on al-Mutlaq and that Shwani Khalid, head of the Parliamentary Legal Committee. Al Sabaah notes Nouri's trusted lackey Yassin Majeed went on television and stated that al-Mutlaq is not fit to hold office. If that is what Nouri is pursuing, that means he's attempting to prosecute al-Mutlaq for the statements that have Nouri enraged. For those who've forgotten, Nouri attempted to sue a member of Parliament (Sabah al-Saadi) only a few months back (September).  From the September 22nd snapshot: Hossam Acommok (Al Mada) reports on Moqtada al-Sadr's criticism of Nouri al-Maliki swearing out an arrest warrant for Sabah al-Saadi claiming that criticizing Nouri is a threat to national security (see yesterday's snapshot). al-Sadr has called out the move and compared it to a new dictatorship and issued a call for the government to work on inclusion and not exclusion. Another Al Mada report notes Sadr declaring that Nouri needs to drop this issue and focus on the needed political work. It's noted that the Sadr bloc waited until Moqtada issued a statement to weigh in and that the Kurdish Regional Government President Massoud Barazni declared that the Kurdish bloc would not support a vote to strip al-Saadi of his immunity. As a member of Parliament, Sabah al-Saadi should be immune to Nouri's arrest warrant for the 'crime' of speech. Currently, the warrant exists but cannot be executed due to the immunity members of Parliament have. So in addition to filing charges against al-Saadi, Nouri and State of Law (his political slate) are also attempting to strip a member of Parliament of his immunity. But that's not all. Nouri has a back up plan. Should the Parliament not agree to strip al-Saadi of his immunity, the warrant will stand through 2014 when al-Saadi's term expires (al-Saadi's decided not to run again or Nouri's made that decision and intends to utilize the Justice and Accountability Commission to keep him from running?) at which point all-Saadi would be a citizen (without immunity) and then the warrant can and will be executed. In addition, Al Mada notes the claim that immunity can be stripped of a member of Parliament if half-plus-one of those in attendance vote in favor of the motion. For those wondering how an insult, any insult, rises to the level of criminal, this AFP report (in French) explains that Nouri's complaint utilizes a law from the reign of General Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr, Article 226 of the 1969 Criminal Code which made it a crime for anyone to insult a member of Parliament, the government, the courts, armed forces, etc.     That was in September. Immunity prevented Nouri from going any further. And if MPs want to call Nouri a dictator they can. (Sadly they can only do that, under the current understanding of Iraqi law, because they have immunity as an MP. Citizens, under the current understanding of Iraqi law, most likely lack that freedom of expression in Iraq.) Nouri's efforts to have the man kicked out of Parliament failed so Team Nouri (advisors and attorneys) began telling the press that as soon as the man's term in Parliment expired (they didn't appear to think the man could be re-elected), he would be arrested. (For calling Nouri a dictator.) al-Mutlaq said Nouri was acting dictatorial. For that 'crime,' Nouri must strip him of his status which confers immunity if he's going to have him arrested.   Reuters notes a gun attack on a Mosul checkpoint which claimed the life of 1 Iraqi soldier, 1 grocer was shot dead in Mosul, one man was injured when police shot him n Mosul, a Balad roadside bombing injured three Iranian pilgrims and, dropping back to last night for both, a Kirkuk shooting in which two Sahwa were injured and a Mosul shooting that left two police officers injured.     Turning to the US, Senator Patty Murray is the Chair of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee. Her office notes: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Murray Press Office Monday, December 19, 2011 (202) 224-2834 VETERANS: Murray Applauds VA Implementation of Care for Newborn Children of Women Veterans (Washington, D.C.) -- Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray, Chairman of the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee, released the following statement after the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) issued regulations to cover the provision of care to newborn children of women veterans as required in the Caregivers and Veteran Omnibus Health Services Act of 2010. This provision, authored by Chairman Murray in her Women Veterans Health Care Improvement Act of 2009, would provide health services for newborns for up to seven days after the birth of the child if the mother delivered the child in a VA facility or in another facility pursuant to a VA contract for maternity services. "This is great news for our women veterans who have earned the right to expect high-quality health care services that are tailored to meet their unique needs," said Chairman Murray. "As our remaining troops departed Iraq yesterday and thousands more prepare to leave Afghanistan in the coming months, the VA system must be equipped to help our women veterans step back into their lives as mothers, wives, and citizens. I applaud today's announcement and will continue my push for benefits and services that will help our nation's women veterans receive high quality care." ### Meghan Roh Deputy Press Secretary Office of U.S. Senator Patty Murray @PattyMurray 202-224-2834 Get Updates from Senator Murray     iraq al mada ines tariq al rafidayn cnn arwa damon mohammed tawfeeq afp the national nizar latif the wall street journal sam dagher mcclatchy newspapers roy gutman sahar issa laith hammoudi npr all things considered kelly mcevers aswat al-iraq to the point warren onley david ignatius

Some Charmed thoughts

Kat called and asked me to check out  her "Charmed"  to see what I thought because I was a huge fan of "Charmed."

I actually agree with her call.

She has The Third Estate Sunday Review's Ava as Paige
Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude as Phoebe
C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review as Piper
and Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz as Prue

She casts herself as Billie (season eight character).  But I think that's perfect.  Ava and C.I. are Paige and Piper.  That's so obvious.  (It is after Kat wrote about it.  I'm not sure I would have gotten it on my own.)

I also agree with Kat regarding the sexiest guy on the show.

With a qualifier.

I would toss Leo at the top just for sentimental reasons.  He was such a good guy.  And Andy from the first season (Prue's boyfriend who was the investigator) will always have a special place in my heart.  His partner Darrell would be on my short list because he didn't get any love scenes with the sisters but he was there for them when needed and he was hot, hot, hot.

But of all the guys, Ivan Sergie was the hottest.  From his first moment on the show -- busting Paige's charge, remember? -- he fit in with her.  I remember crying when they turned their engagement party into a wedding.  Henry was the one who accepted a Halliwell sister for what she was the easiest.  Even Leo had his road bumps early on and he was a White Lighter.

But Henry was about the love.  He really loved Paige.

And Ivan was hot.  I remember "Coop" (Cupid) showed up at the same time.  Victor Webster's a good looking guy but he just faded into the background on "Charmed" because few men could tear your eyes away from Ivan.


"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):

Friday, December 16, 2011.  Chaos and violence continue, Bradley Manning's Article 32 hearing begins, Nouri's hold on Iraq seems ever more fragile, Tom Hayden publishes political porn, and more.   A gleeful and pompous Geraldo Rivera (Fox News) announces he's back in Iraq.  I don't think he's been so giddy since he did the 20/20 segment that was supposed to be an interview with John Travolta (then promoting Staying Alive) that Geraldo turned into a workout session.  If viewers can be thankful for little else, Geraldo has thus far kept his shirt on.  So lightheaded and deranged, he forgets to note his previous visit to Iraq.  March 31, 2003, CNN reported, "The U.S. military said Monday that Fox News Channel Correspondent Geraldo Rivera was being expelled from Iraq for divulging details of a future military operation, though later in the day a Central Command spokesman said he was not sure whether the newsman would be forced out."  The following day, Chris Plante (CNN) would report, "Fox News Channel executives and the Pentagon reached a deal Monday in which correspondent Geraldo Rivera, who raised the military's ire when he reported operational details, will leave Iraq voluntarily rather than be expelled, Pentagon officials told CNN. [. . .] In the live broadcast, Rivera told his photographer to aim the camera at the sand in front of him. Rivera then outlined a map of Iraq, and showed the relative location of Baghdad and his location with the 101st Airborne. He then showed where the 101st would be going next." Peter Arnett did a journalistic courtesy and gave an interview to Iraqi television on March 31st.  Fox News personalities immediately began demonizing him on air non-stop.  By April 1st, NBC, MSNBC and National Geographic had all dumped Arnett.  Though Arnett gave out no information that could have endangered anyone, Rivera did.  He still works for Fox News despite violating a US military policy he agreed to when he entered the embed program. Geraldo was also a war cheerleader.  They don't get punished.  They don't have to admit they were wrong.  They're allowed to lie and then lie about lying.  That's how it works -- and not just at Fox News (or right wing outlets -- this is the mainstream, it's the left, it's everywhere, there's very little integrity in the press).     But on the second hour of The Diane Rehm Show (NPR) today, Diane and her guests -- Nadia Bilbassy (MBC TV), Robin Harding (Financial Times of London) and David Ignatius (Washington Post) offered some reality on Iraq.   Diane Rehm: David Ignatius, the war in Iraq is finally over. In your view, what has been accomplished?   David Ignatius: Well that's really the hardest question to answer for Americans and Iraqis with this week's visit to Washington by Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.  You had to say, in terms of specific commitments going forward, very little.  We have an Iraqi democracy but it's headed by someone who's widely regarded as no paragon of democracy.  He hasn't succeeded really in reaching out to other Iraqis.  I'm struck, Diane, this week, a war that began famously with shock and awe, as we termed our spectacular bombardment of Iraq, ended with the muted, somber sense of how difficult this proved to be, how many mistakes the United States made. And, in the terms of measurable outcomes, how little the US got out of it, at the loss of nearly 4,500 US soldiers, 1000,000 -- at least -- Iraqis killed. So it's a painful story but we would have to say most of all for Iraqis.   Diane Rehm: 32,000 US troops wounded, more than $800 billion spent.     I'm not interested in silly spin.  The president's campaign?  He' is the one over it.  He decides, he says yes or he says no.  You can't claim that he is downplaying it but his campaign -- this entity over which he has no control -- isn't.  Don't create this false wall that doesn't exist.   Barack's campaign is Barack.  I'll further point out that Barack did three days of press on this and that's just this week.  So stop pretending that he tried to keep it low key.  Stop pretending?   Tom Hayden's pretended to be human for years now.  Apparently having pickled his mind with booze, he seems to think he can continue to lie and get away with it.  Forgetting his huge, massive failure in the LA mayoral election, the Los Angeles Times runs tired Tom's sad little brew of fantasy which include:     It was a brave stance to take for an ambitious politician at a time when American support for war with Iraq was building. He went on to become the first president to campaign on a promise to end an ongoing American war, and the peace movement helped put him into office.   He's referring to Barack's stupid 2002 speech which did not oppose going to war with Iraq, it opposed rushing to war.  Barack didn't say no to war, he said the case wasn't yet made.  He would spend the next years -- check the New York Times archives especially in 2004 and WHORE Tom knows this -- changing his stance.  But in 2002, he wasn't running for national office, not even the Senate.  And there's no way in hell his state legislature district would have supported him unless he took some stance -- no matter how tiny -- against the drums of war.  Also, the peace movement helped put him into office?  No, the Cult of St. Barack did.  A lot of dirty whores like Tom Hayden who never made an honest buck and, in fact, would be depending on charity today were it not for the ridiculous and unmanly move of demanding millions to end a marriage.  Greedy little whore, that's Tom-Tom. In the years leading up to the 2008 election, there were at least 10 national antiwar demonstrations that drew more than 100,000 participants each. The movement helped Rep. Barbara Lee to rise from a lone war opponent in Congress to the leader of a bloc of as many as 200 representatives calling for an end to the wars in Iraq and/or Afghanistan. Those combined forces -- the peace movement and lawmakers who opposed continuing the Iraq war -- created a political climate that enabled Obama to end the Iraq war over the objections of many in the Pentagon and most of his Republican presidential rivals. What a trashy whore.  Tom's not going to be welcomed into the DNC.  He has no real money left (not to throw around on donations which is all the DNC would want from a low life like Tom to begin with).  Whores tend to spend other people's money a bit too quickly.  So he'll always be on the low rung he's lived since his divorce.  But he seems to believe that if he just lies long enough, the DNC will embrace him.  Seriously?   After Barack repeatedly -- in 2007 and 2008 -- ridiculed "Tom Hayden Democrats" -- publicly ridiculed them, the little whore Tom thinks he's ever going to rise even one tiny step up the ladder?  Please.   Reality, as everyone knows, Barack was planning to keep thousands of US troops in Iraq.  Iraq wouldn't grant immunity from the Parliament.  (Nouri was prepared to grant it himself.) So what happened then?  They followed the deal the Bush administration negotiated in November 2008.  Tom's praising George W. Bush.  You kind of get the feeling that for a few more of the millions Jane earned while Tom relaxed on his ass and cheated, for just a few more, he'd blow George W. Bush in downtown LA at high noon.  And swallow with a smile.   Another reality?  Negotiatons never ended.  This week Osama al-Nujaifi publicly declared that the Parliament was prepared to give "partial immunity."  A step up from the stance in October of no immunity.  That's what negotiations do, they see each side stake out a position and then see if they can move closer to one another's position as talks continue.  Nouri has stated -- and Panetta told the Senate Armed Services Committee he felt it would happen -- that they can pick up the issue of "trainers" in the new year.    Want some reality from the press that few offered this week?  David S. Cloud and David Zucchino (Los Angeles Times) observed, "The Obama administration had adopted its own version of the Bush administration claim that the conflict was worth the cost because it helped free Iraq from Hussein."  We'll pick back up with The Diane Rehm Show when Nadia gets honest or closer to it.  If she's only now aware of the 4.5 million internal and external Iraqi refugees which have been in the news since 2006, that doesn't say very much for her information base level (her intelligence level is brutally low but we'll address that on Sunday).   Nadia Bilbassy: In research I've been doing for the last week about the war, I came across something really striking. I mean, looking at -- looking at -- just to give you an example -- I found that, for example, 2 million people are internally displaced inside Iraq.  Two and a half million refugees are outside the country in neighboring countries like Syria and like Jordan.  Twenty-three precent of Iraq is under -- live under poverty line, that's $2 a day.  This is a rich country that's sitting on the second largest oil resource in the world. They have -- 34,000 doctors left the country and forty-percent is the unemployment level.  So, in a way, yes, they got a democracy in terms of the process of voting but this government, as David said, where the strong man like Prime Minister Maliki still holds the ministry of national security and defense, unable to bring somebody into the country -- into the government.   Salah Nasrawi (Al-Ahram Weekly) looks at Nouri and Barack's meet-up from a number of angles including what took place in Iraq while the bulk of the press kept their eyes on DC:   As Al-Maliki visited Washington on Monday and Tuesday, seven people died in shootings and explosions in Iraq itself, seen by many Iraqis as having been motivated by sectarian considerations. On Tuesday, two bombs set off a blaze at an oil pipeline in Basra, Iraq's main oil refinery in the south of the country. Even more troubling than the security weaknesses has been the erosion of the fragile political process established under the US occupation, which has been eroding since the formation of the current governing coalition in Iraq. Many Iraqis believe that Al-Maliki is pursuing his own sectarian agenda that focuses on consolidating Shia power and monopolising control of the state and security forces under his Daawa Party. Al-Maliki's failure to preserve a multi-ethnic political accommodation in Iraq has increasingly pushed the country's Sunni minority population to demand semi-autonomous status.   Let's discuss the provincesnd the semi-autonomous issue.  Iraq is a country composed of 18 provinces. Three are semi-autonomous (Erbil, Dahuk and Sulaymaniyah) and they form the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG). The other 15, at present, are under the control of the Baghdad-based government. Thursday, October 27th, Salahuddin Province's council voted to go semi-autonomous. Monday, Diyala Province's council passed a decision for the province to become semi-autonomous. Xinhua explains: Iraqi constitution says 'one or more governorates (provinces) shall have the right to organize into a region based on a request to be voted on in a referendum submitted in one of the following two methods: First: a request by one-third of the council members of each governorate intending to form a region. Second: a request by one-tenth of the voters in each of the governorates intending to form a region." Al Mada notes that 30 residents of Diyala Province staged a protest which quickly turned into a sit-in. The protesters were registering their objection to the decision for Diyala Province to move to semi-autonomy. Sam Dagher (Wall St. Journal) notes that protests took place in Baquba yesterday for the third day in a row -- with "hundreds" participating. Alsumaria TV adds, "Sadr movement stated, on Thursday, that Diyala Region's declaration was advanced in a provocative and challenging way. Head of Diyala Province is spurring discord between the province's different components, the movement accused while asserting that the Iraqi Central Government is responsible for demands to establish federal regions." Bryar Mohammed (Zawya) adds, "Baghdad is trying to bully Diyala Province out of trying to become an autonomous region, AKnews has learnt. Suhad Hayli from the Iraqiya List party says he expects the Iraqi government will use force to quash the autonomy demands of the Province to the north east of Baghdad, bordering Iran. Diyala Provincial Council's demand for regional autonomy was announced two days ago, almost two months after another Sunni dominated province Salahaddin called for the same." On Salahuddin Province, the Kurdish Globe notes the events leading up to the October vote: The provincial council of Salahadin last October unanimously supported making the province an autonomous region after the dismissal of faculty members from the University of Tikrit and mass arrests in Salahaddin province. Last October, the Baghdad Ministry of Higher Education dismissed 140 faculty members from the University of Tikrit in Salahaddin Province. The ministry pointed out that "it was simply following the parliamentary directive on "de-Baathification." Later, Iraqi security forces started an operation in the central and southern provinces, arresting former members of the Baath Party and accusing them of plotting a coup against Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's government after the complete withdrawal of U.S. troops at the end of this year. The arrest came after Maliki received information from former Libyan interim leader Mahmoud Jibril, whose rebel forces obtained documents indicating that former Libyan President Moammar Gadhafi tried to support an attempt by Baath members to overthrow the Iraqi government. That's one problem Nouri faces.  There are many more.  Many, many more.   Monday, November 28th, a car bomb was detonated near Parliament -- apparently  targeting Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi and members of Parliament. Nouri al-Maliki was no where near the building (he was out of the country) and not scheduled to appear in the building that week; however, his spokesperson and then Nouri himself began insisting that the bombing was an attack on him. Al Mada reports that Parliament's investigation committee noted yesterday that it was a suicide car bombing which claimed the life of the driver, that none of the four people who've been taken into custody on suspicion of involvement work for the Parliament and that early signs are a group of people (men and women) based in Baghdad and Anbar Province were behind the bombing. In other explosive news, Al Mada reports that Iraqiya has announced it is breaking off talks with the ruling bloc. Iraqiya is the political slate that came in first in the March 2010 elections. The results of the March 7th elections, even after Nouri al-Maliki bitterly contested them and stamped his feet until a few post-election votes were tossed his way, were that Iraqiya still came in first and Nouri's political slate State of Law still came in second. Iraqis do not elect their prime minister, the Parliament does. Per the Constitution, Ayad Allawi, the leader of Iraqiya, should have had first crack at forming a government. First crack? You become prime minister-designate and then have thirty days to name a Cabinet (nominate people for positions and have Parliament vote in favor of them). If you can't accomplish that in 30 days, per the Constitution, a new prime minister-designate is supposed to be named. Political Stalemate I ended in November of 2010 with the Erbil Agreement hammered out in Erbil between the major political blocs (and the US) whereby every one was supposed to make concessions. The Kurds would get to keep Jalal Talabani as president. They thought they would get three vice presidents. Iraqiya won the elections in March 2010 and the political bloc was headed by Ayad Allawi. Nouri wasn't stepping down and the White House was backing Nouri. For Nouri to remain prime minister, Allawi was promised he would head a new, independent council over security issues. He was also promised that the Iraqiya candidates demonized as Ba'athists and forced out of the 2010 elections by Nouri's friends would have their names cleared. On November 11th, the new Parliament held their first real session. They voted Osama al-Nujaifi Speaker of Parliament (he was from Iraqiya and that was part of the Erbil Agreement), Jalal was named president and Nouri was named prime minister designate (but we were all informed in the following days that this was 'unofficial' -- once named prime minister-designate, you have 30 days, per the Constitution, to put together a Cabinet and get the Parliament to sign off on each member). But what of the security council? What of clearing the names of the falsely accused? That would come, State of Law insisted, in time. Allawi and a number of Iraqiya members walked out. They should have refused to participate from that day forward. Instead, they foolishly believed promises (from both State of Law and the White House). Nobember 25th, Jalal 'officially' named Nouri prime minister-designate. Nouri had created Political Stalemate I by refusing to surrender the prime minister post. He'd done that for eight months. In that time, he should have had some ideas about a Cabinet. But Nouri's problem was he over-promised to get support. So when it was time to name a Cabinet, suddenly the Cabinet had more ministers and deputy ministers than it had previously (from 37 in 2006 to 42 in 2010). And he still couldn't keep his promises to everyone. December 22nd, the Constitution was tossed by the wayside and Nouri was allowed to move from prime minister-designate to prime minister because he'd assembled a kind of Cabinet. He named 31 out of 42 ministers and people pretended that was good enough. He had failed to meet the Constitutional mandate of naming a Cabinet but everyone looked the other way. He refused to name the security posts: National Security, Interior and Defense. His defenders (including the White House) swore those posts would be named in a matter of weeks. His detractors saw the refusal as part of a pattern of power grabs on Nouri's part and stated he wouldn't fill the posts. This is the start of Political Stalemate II. Six days from now, it will be a year since Nouri was wrongly (per the Constitution, per the vote) named prime minister.  And Iraq still has no Minister of Defense, Minister of Interior or Minister of National Security. When announcing that talks were over, Al Mada notes Iraqiya stated that they had given up a great deal for the good of Iraq but there was no compromise from another. That's a reference to Nouri's State of Law as well as the coalition he now heads. In giving up the right to prime minister, Iraqiya was promised (and the Erbil Agreement is in writing) that an independent security commission would be created and that Ayad Allawi would head it. That's among the many broken promises Nouri made to keep his claws on the post of prime minister.   Tuesday on KCRW's To the Point, Warren Oleny addressed Iraq with many guests.  We'll note part of his conversation with Feisal Amin Rasoul Istrabadi -- the part where the realities of Political Stalemate II are addressed.   Warren Oleny: Feisal Istrabadi is a dual Iraqi- U.S. citizen.  He was Iraq's Deputy Ambassador to the United Nations.  He drafted the country's interim constitution.  He is now Director of the Center for the Study of the Middle East at Indiana University.  Mr. Ambassador, thank you very much for being on our program.   Ambassador Feisal Amin Rasoul Istrabadi: My pleasure to be with you again.     Warren Oleny: Why did you sever yourself from the current government of Iraq?  You're no longer the ambassador and you're here at Indiana University.   Ambassador Feisal Istrabadi: I am.  Well Indiana University happens to be my alma mata anyway.  But, at the time, in 2007, I left at the height of the sectarian violence in Iraq.  And I simply felt [clears throat], excuse me, I simply felt that the government and many entities in the government were complicit in the ethnic cleansing of Baghdad and other places throughout the country and I felt no longer able to speak on behalf of that government so I left.   Warren Oleny:  Are you concerned that that sort of thing will continue now that American troops are gone?   Ambassador Feisal Istrabadi: I very much am concerned as your previous guests also were discussing.  The current prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, has made a number of moves which indicate that he intends to continue to act against particularly the Sunnis of Iraq.  And this, of course, is likely to lead to further deterioration in the country and most likely lead to further violence.  It's a very, very worrisome sign to me.   . . .   [Clip of Barack Obama speaking on Monday, specifically this, "Mr. Prime Minister, you've said that Iraqis seek democracy, 'a state of citizens and not sects.'  So we're partnering to strengthen the institutions upon which Iraq's democracy depends  -- free elections, a vibrant press, a strong civil society, professional police and law enforcement that uphold the rule of law, an independent judiciary that delivers justice fairly, and transparent institutions that serve all Iraqis." but click here for full remarks.]   Warren Oleny: Feisal Istrabadi, how close is Iraq to achieving the kinds of thing that we just heard the president describe?   Ambassador Feisal Istrabadi:  If this is a check list of what Iraq needs to do to establish the rule of law and Constitutional democracy, Iraq is failing on each of those items.  Let me start with, being a lawyer, what's nearest and dearest to my heart, the judiciary. The judiciary has become a rubber stamp for the government.  Constitutional cases -- a number of Constitutional cases have been decided by the Iraqi judiciary, in each case, given Maliki precisely what he wants.  He has maintained control over the Interior Ministry which controls the -- he is acting Interior Minister, in fact -- which controls the-uh-the-uh internal security structure.  He is, Nouri al-Maliki is, acting Defense Minister which controls the army.  And he is also acting Minister of State Security.  So he has the entire state security infrastructure, he has direct control over the entire state security infrastructure which, if you'll recall, is the way that Saddam Hussein rose to power in the 1970s -- precisely by controlling the state security infrastructure. We are repeating the same lessons of Iraq's past unfortunately.  Each of these criteria, ticked off by President Obama, is a cause for deep concern for anybody concerned about democracy and the rule of law in Iraq.   Warren Oleny: Is there anything the Obama administration should be doing differently from what it is?   Ambassador Feisal Istrabadi: Well, I mean, that's hard to say because obviously it's influence is somewhat waning.  The critical mistake the Obama administration made occurred last year when it threw its entire diplomatic weight behind supporting Nouri al-Maliki notwithstanding these very worrisome signs which were already in place in 2009 and 2010.  The administration lobbied hard both internally in Iraq and throughout the region to have Nouri al-Maliki get a second term -- which he has done.  Right now, the betting there's some question among Iraq experts whether we'll ever have a set of elections in Iraq worthy of the name.  I mean, you can almost get odds, a la Las Vegas, on that among Iraq experts. It's a very worrisome thing.  What can they do in the future? Well I suppose it would be helpful, it would be useful, if we stopped hearing this sort of Happy Talk coming from the administration -- whether its Jim Jeffreys in Baghdad, the US Ambassador or whether it's the president himself or other cabinet officers.  We're getting a lot of Happy Talk, we're getting a lot of Happy Talk from the Pentagon about how professional the Iraqi Army is when, in fact, the Iraqi Army Chief of Staff himself has said it's going to take another ten years before the Iraqi Army can secure the borders. So it would help, at least, if we would stop hearing this sort of Pollyanna-ish -- if that's a word -- exclamations from the administration about how swimmingly things are going in Iraq and had a little more truth told in public, that would be a very big help to begin with.   Al Sabaah reports that Allawi met with Iraqi President Jalal Talabani on Tuesday and that they discussed various topics including oil-rich, disputed Kirkuk. Jalal is an increasingly unpopular figure in the KRG -- which is why Massoud Barzani's competing political party continues to have greater support and why the new emerging Goran party continues to grow. Jalal's popularity won't be helped by the news that Dar Addustour reports: There's been no reduction in his salary or in the salaries of the vice presidencies. Not only that, the promised (in February) bill was never voted on by the Parliament. In January and early February, scattered protests began to alarm Nouri al-Maliki. The protesters wanted improved basic services (potable water, dependable electricity, etc.), jobs and for the government to stop "disappearing" people. The protesters were also noting the vast corruption in Iraq and how an election had been held but the president, vice presidents and prime minister remained the exact same people who held the posts before the election. Facing this discontent as discontent raged throughout the region (most prominently in Egypt), Nouri attended to head off the protests (and Moqtada al-Sadr rushed in to help Nouri) by promising a number of things. He would solve the corruption in 100 days -- just give him 100 days, Moqtada insisted -- and, right now, Nouri would promise reductions in government salaries, including his own. His salary was never reduced nor was Jalal's. More broken promises from Nouri (and Iraq's First Lady Moqtada al-Sadr). Polling brings more bad news for Nouri. Al Sabaah reports on a poll of Iraqis in which 70% say that they do not have access to all items the ration cards are supposed to provide. That's bad enough but it gets worse. All of Nouri's February promises of improvement? The people aren't seeing it. 80% of Iraqis say that there's been no efforts to repair the sewage systems in the areas that they live in, 68% state that there's no improvement in the water. Meanwhile Al Mada reports on a poll by the Arab Center for Studies which found that most in the MidEast region feel Iraq will be the next country hit by the "Arab spring." This is not good news for Nouri who rightly feared in February that the Iraqi people were more than just disappointed in him. On the issue of the "disappeared" -- arresting peole and disappearing them so that families have no idea if their loved ones are even alive, that's not been addressed and Nouri's latest crackdown on "Ba'athists" (he sses them everywhere) only reminded Iraqis of the lack of improvement.   Reuters notes two police officers were injured in a Falluja shooting, that the Baghdad "convoy" of Baghdad security spokesperson Qassim al-Moussawi was attacked and one bystander was left injured, and, dropping back to last night, a Kirkuk sticky bombing injured one student, a Kirkuk roadside bombing injured one Iraqi military officer and a Mosul home invasion left 1 police officer dead.     In the US, Bradley Manning's Article 32 hearing began today at Fort Meade, Maryland.  Monday April 5th, WikiLeaks released US military video of a July 12, 2007 assault in Iraq. 12 people were killed in the assault including two Reuters journalists Namie Noor-Eldeen and Saeed Chmagh. Monday June 7, 2010, the US military announced that they had arrested Bradley Manning and he stood accused of being the leaker of the video. Leila Fadel (Washington Post) reported in August 2010 that Manning had been charged -- "two charges under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The first encompasses four counts of violating Army regulations by transferring classified information to his personal computer between November and May and adding unauthorized software to a classified computer system. The second comprises eight counts of violating federal laws governing the handling of classified information." Manning has been convicted in the public square despite the fact that he's been convicted in no state and has made no public statements -- despite any claims otherwise, he has made no public statements. Manning has been at Quantico in Virginia, under military lock and key, for months. In March, David S. Cloud (Los Angeles Times) reported that the military has added 22 additional counts to the charges including one that could be seen as "aiding the enemy" which could result in the death penalty if convicted. David E. Coombs is Bradley's attorney and he provided a walk through on Article 104. Today, Ellen Nakashima (Washington Post) reports, Coombs requested that Lt Col Paul Almanza step down as presiding officer in the hearing due to the fact that, in addition to the military, Almanza also works for the Justice Dept which has an ongoing WikiLeaks investigation.  Almanza refused to recuse himself. Scott Shane (New York Times) adds, "Mr. Coombs appealed the recusal decision to the Army Court of Criminal Appeals and asked the court to halt the hearing until it could rule. A decision on a possible postponement could come as early as Saturday, when testimony is scheduled to resume at 10 a.m."  Nancy A. Youssef (McClatchy Newspapers' Miami Herald) offers, "Making his first court appearance, Manning sat unemotionally behind the defense table wearing dark-rimmed glasses and a combat patch from the 10th Mountain Division on his Army uniform. He stared ahead, not glancing at the row of supporters sitting behind him and his defense team, which includes two military lawyers. After 19 months in military custody at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., he appeared thin but healthy."   iraq npr the diane rehm show the los angeles times david zucchino al mada dar addustour al sabaah alsumaria tv the wall st. journal sam dagher zawya bryar mohammed xinhua the kurdish globe