Hillary's biggest problem is her face

American's elected Ronald Reagan.

Twice.

He was president at an advanced age.

But he projected energy.

You could even say he looked youthful.

I bring it up because Grandma Clinton is not the Hillary of 2008.

She looks old, she looks haggard, she looks tired.

No one's going to vote for that.

You could toss in that she's put on too many pounds but I think it's the haggard face alone that sets her up for a loss.

And the ridiculous hair do of late -- is that supposed to look like whipped cream on top of her head -- does her no favors either.

But the dead and tired look to her face means any challenger -- in the primaries, in the general -- stands a good chance of looking significantly more youthful and more energetic just by sharing the stage with her.

I don't see American -- a youth obsessed nation -- getting on board with Granny Clinton.


"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills): 

Monday, March 16, 2015,  Chaos and violence continue, Tehran-Bagdad forces take a four day break to rest up after (finally) reaching Tikrit, the press goes out of the way to avoid ABC News' scoop last week on human rights violations by Iraqi forces, David Petraeus shared classified information -- he's admitted to it and he'll be sentenced for it -- but somehow he's got a security clearance again, and much more.



Reuters reports, "Iraq said on Monday it had put its Tikrit offensive on hold and senior officials called for more air strikes to dislodge Islamic State (IS) militants,"

On hold?

Did they pause on Monday?

Because they paused on Saturday, remember?

Reuters explains in a longer report, "The offensive, the largest yet against insurgents has been stalled for four days after Iraqi security forces and Shia militia pushed into Tikrit last week."

Four days on hold.

And they took 12 days to reach Tikrit.

Loveday Morris (Washington Post) puts it this way, "Iraqi forces’ operation to retake the city of Tikrit has stalled as troops suffer heavy casualties at the hands of Islamic State militants, raising concerns about whether the pro-government fighters are ready for major offensives."


I would argue that the inability to reach Tikrit in a timely fashion made it clear that the Baghdad-Tehran forces were not "ready for major offensives."

Reaching it and then taking a break?  Then starting back up for a day before taking another break?


Anne Barnard (New York Times) reports:

As the days pass, critics are asking why the government’s 30,000-strong force has been unable to dislodge the last Islamic State fighters -- and whether the reduced pace is a bad sign for future efforts to root the militants out of their self-declared capital, the much larger city of Mosul.


Yeah, why can't do it anything?

"Hundreds" is the number of Islamic State fighters that were reported to be in Iraq when the Tehran-Baghdad forces arrived in Tikrit.

But the Islamic State is winning in Tikrit?


Nabih Bulos (Los Angeles Times) explains:

State media, meanwhile, displayed slogans announcing that there was "no backing down" from  the battle for Tikrit, hometown of Saddam Hussein, as reports came of the destruction of the former Iraqi strongman's grave in the city.
State media also broadcast interviews with various military officials who downplayed the stall, saying that military operations had not ceased and accusing opposition media of seeking to "demoralize people."



The destruction of the grave of former President Saddam Hussein?

Tikrit was chosen for one reason only: The motivation factor.

Shi'ites who loathed Saddam could be encouraged to charge, to behave like rabid dogs.

And with regards to Saddam's grave they did just that.

They destroyed it.

But apparently, that wasn't enough to motivate them to take on Tikrit.  (Saddam Hussein's grave is in nearby al-Owja village, not Tikrit itself.)



BBC News reports:

Poster-sized pictures of Saddam that once covered it have been replaced with Shia militia flags and pictures of militia leaders, including Iranian General Qassem Soleimani who advises the Shia militias.
Militia leaders said IS put up a strong fight for the village, and left many bombs and booby-traps behind, says BBC Middle East correspondent Jim Muir.
But there will be suspicions among many in Iraq's Sunni community that the tomb was deliberately destroyed by the Shia militias, he says.



Of course they'll believe that.

Look at who was involved.

Look at what happened after.

And this assault?  This attempt to wave a red flag to send the Shi'ite fighters on a rampage?

It was done when the US government already knew about the War Crime accusation.  Niles Williamson (WSWS) points out:


 ABC News reported last week that Iraqi military units and Shiite militias trained and armed by the United States are being investigated by the Iraqi government for possible war crimes, including the torture and summary execution of Sunni prisoners, in many cases by decapitation, and the desecration of corpses. ABC has known of these crimes since September last year, when it came across an online video posted by a member of the Iraqi security forces showing a handcuffed prisoner being shot in the head.
An investigation was reportedly opened by the Iraqi government after an ABC News journalist presented evidence of “uniformed soldiers from some of Iraq’s most elite units and militia members massacring civilians, torturing and executing prisoners, and displaying severed heads.”
Multiple images posted by ABC last week depict soldiers wearing the uniforms of the Iraqi Special Operations Forces and the Emergency Response Brigade, which operates under the authority of the Iraqi Interior Ministry, posing with severed heads. Others depict Iraqi Special Forces dragging corpses behind their Humvees. Another image shows a corpse being hung from the guard tower of an Iraqi military base.
Responding to the revelations of war crimes carried out by its proxies in Iraq, the Obama administration issued a statement declaring, “If these allegations are confirmed, those found responsible must be held accountable.”
Such statements are worthless. While there has been detailed reporting on the crimes of ISIS, next to nothing has been said by the American government or media about the activities of the US-backed forces. The New York Times has yet to dedicate a single column inch to the latest revelations.



There were two reports by ABC World News with David Muir.

The first was Wednesday evening with  James Gordon Meek, Brian Ross, Rym Momtaz and Alex Hosenball (ABC News) breaking the news that Shi'ites were committing War Crimes (they called it "human rights violations") in Iraq.


There was also the follow up on the Thursday broadcast of ABC World News with David Muir:


David Muir: Now to new fall out after our ABC investigation last night. It involves the fight against ISIS known for those awful videos, lining up their victims on the beach.  And now a new concern.  Are some of the Iraqi forces -- trained and paid for by US taxpayers -- using techniques that are just as brutal?  Well the State Dept tonight responding to our report and ABC's chief investigative reporter Brian Ross back on the job tonight.

Brian Ross:  The State Dept called these scenes today serious and disturbing.  Brutal images of what appear to be Iraqi forces and militias carrying out, celebrating, torture and beheadings.  In this torture scene, two US weapons against the wall. This video shows two civilians, pleading for their lives, about to be shot dead.  A man with an American supplied weapon walks by, a gunman with what appears to be the insignia of Iraqi Special Forces caught on tape.

US State Dept spokesperson Jen Psaki: Their behavior must be above reproach or they risk being painted with the same brush as ISIL fighters.


Brian Ross:  The Pentagon says it has already cut off money to some Iraqi units because of gross human rights violations.  But Senator Patrick Leahy says the ABC News report shows the government should cut off money to more Iraqi units.

Senator Patrick Leahy: When you look at at the videos and look at the uniforms being worn, do we really want to say the US condones that?

Brian Ross: US officials tonight tell ABC News that America's top military leader Gen Martin Dempsey, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, has repeatedly warned Iraqi leaders about the conduct of the Iraqi military and the militias that fight with them -- especially because the US is sending $1.5 billion to the Iraqi army and almost 3,000 American troops to help train them.



This was a major scoop.

The failure of most outlets to note it has been appalling and the silence telling.



One not staying silent?

1. 
   

1. The Intercept ‏@the_intercept 14h14 hours ago

   U.S.-backed forces in Iraq are committing same type of horrific war crimes as Islamic State fighters on other side. http://interc.pt/1FjPNnf 

   77 retweets 40 favorites

Good for The Intercept.

Now can someone explain KPFA to me?

I'm grateful that the weekend evening news -- which is produced solely by KPFA -- continues to cover Iraq.

Not just right now when it's in the news, but they've always made an effort.

So here's my problem.

They didn't note what Emma Graham-Harrison (Guardian) does:

Large numbers of civilians living north of Tikrit could be at risk if the Iraqi city is liberated and fighting moves towards their towns, a senior official with medical charity MSF has warned.
Long before the recent push to retake Saddam Hussein’s home town, the vast majority of Tikrit’s civilians had fled, leaving it vulnerable to destruction but most of its population safe from the fighting. However, if Islamic State loses control of the city and Iraqi fighters pursue them north towards Mosul, the two sides will be facing off in areas where many more people are still living in their homes and could be at risk during battles.


They didn't note the ABC News story either.  I find that appalling.

But I bring up the Guardian article because of what KPFA listeners had to sit through.

I thought we had a problem, on the left, with relying on the ex-generals?

That's all we got in the report.

An ex-general talking strategy and 'success' to Al Jazeera and that being rebroadcasted by KPFA.

There was no effort to include anyone discussing civilians or anything that wasn't strategy and kill-kill-kill.

I like the KPFA Evening News.

But I'm not really keen on reports which included pro-war voices only.

I get it.

KPFA whored out itself for Barack Obama.

So that makes it really hard, today, to stand against war.

I get that whores have destroyed the left in this country.

But I'm still not in place where I can pretend it's okay that KPFA aired a report which went out of its way to include a retired general offering arm chair rah-rah-rah while excluding voices against war or voices cautioning that the assault is not as wonderful as a pro-war voice makes it out to be.


AP notes:

Concerns are mounting that Iraq's Shiite militias, of which an estimated 20,000 are fighting in Tikrit, will carry out revenge attacks on this and other areas that are home to predominantly Sunni residents.
Amnesty International last year said the militias wear military uniforms but operate outside any legal framework and without any official oversight, adding that they are not prosecuted for their crimes. Earlier this month, Human Rights Watch echoed those concerns, calling on the Iraqi government to protect civilians in Tikrit and allow them to flee combat zones. Its statement noted "numerous atrocities" against Sunni civilians by pro-government militias and security forces.


But KPFA can't note that possibility?


There's also this:  James Cullum (Talk Radio News) reports,  "The two-week-long fight to retake Tikrit, the hometown of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, from ISIL terrorists is on hold, and, the Defense Department announced Monday that coalition bombers have left the City untouched."

Which really contradicts what the retired general had to offer.

And should go to the fact that retired generals really aren't the experts the MSM presents them as -- they're not the experts the MSM presents them as or that KPFA now pretends they are.


While the eradication of Tirkit appears stalled (it's not a liberation of the city, it's an attempt to obliterate the Sunnis and the region's history -- ISIS and Shi'ite thugs, different sides of the same coin), Tian Shaohui (Xinhua) reports:

Kurdish fighters on Monday recaptured three villages near Kirkuk from Islamic State (IS) militants, a Kurdish security source told Xinhua.
About 20 IS militants and three Kurdish fighters were killed in the battles to seize the villages of Wihda, Saad and Khalid, near the town of Daquoq, some 40 km south of Kirkuk, capital city of the province with the same name, the source said on condition of anonymity.

IANS covers the claims here.  EFE notes, "The Kurds shot dead over 25 IS militants and wounded many more, while the rest of the combatants escaped, according to the sources, adding that the operation had concluded thanks to U.S.-led international coalition air support."



What's interesting is that there are no posters of Barzani.

Isn't that what's done?

It's what Baghdad's doing.

Destroying areas and calling it 'liberation' as they rush to post posters of Iranians and others.

We'll note the Christian Science Monitor's Scott Peterson:

1. 
   

Scott Peterson ‏@peterson__scott 11h11 hours ago

My report: In north Iraq, casualties as Kurds push back Islamic State: "They are retreating, we are weakening them" http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2015/0316/In-northern-Iraq-casualties-as-Kurds-push-back-Islamic-State?cmpid=addthis_twitter …

28 retweets 14 favorites

On violence, Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) notes 258 violent deaths throughout Iraq today.

Changing topics, the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE) issued a statement today:

WASHINGTON — More than 60 Iraqi cultural treasures illegally smuggled into the United States were returned to the Republic of Iraq Monday, following five separate investigations led by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI). The objects were seized at the culmination of investigations led by HSI offices in New York; Baltimore, Maryland; Austin, Texas; and New Haven, Connecticut. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the Southern District of New York U.S. Attorney’s Office assisted in two of the investigations.

“These ancient treasures we are returning do not belong in the hands of any private collection or any one owner. They belong to the people of Iraq where they will be displayed and protected,” said Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security and ICE Director Sarah R. Saldaña. “ICE will not allow the illicit greed of some to trump the cultural history of an entire nation.”

“On behalf of the Government and people of Iraq, I would like to express my gratitude and appreciation to the U.S. Government and HSI special agents (the soldiers behind the scenes), and all those who contributed in restoring this priceless heritage that belongs to Iraq and its people, said Lukman Faily, Ambassador to the Republic of Iraq. “Today is a historic day that documents the deep relationship, cooperation and friendship between Iraq and the United States. While we stand here united with our friends and allies, we send a strong message to Daesh and its destruction that we are committed to defeating the terror, rebuilding our country and preserving its cultural heritage. The return of our looted archeological items is a national project and we call upon all countries to help us in preserving this heritage which is not only valuable for Iraq but for all mankind.”
One of the most significant items returned to Iraq is the Head of Assyrian King Sargon II, a limestone fragmentary head of Lamassu, the winged bull, from the Palace of Sargon II.
As part of “Operation Lost Treasure,” HSI New York special agents received information on June 30, 2008, that an antiquities dealer based in Dubai was selling looted Iraqi antiquities to dealers around the world. The special agents seized the limestone statue on Aug. 13, 2008, after it was shipped to New York by a Dubai-based antiquities trading company owned by the antiques dealer.
This investigation identified a broad transnational criminal organization dealing in illicit cultural property. Some of the network’s shipments were directly linked to major museums, galleries and art houses in New York.  The investigation has resulted in one arrest, multiple seizures of antiquities ranging from Libya, Egypt, and Afghanistan, and the return of many of artifacts. A repatriation ceremony with Afghanistan was held two years ago and future repatriations are anticipated.
In April 2012, HSI New Haven special agents received information that individuals were smuggling and transporting stolen goods, specifically gold plated items from Saddam Hussein’s private airport and palace. The individual obtained a water urn, door knocker and soap dish from in or around one of Hussein’s palaces.
HSI Austin special agents viewed a Craigslist posting selling objects consisting of swords, daggers and an ax from various time frames and regions.  In June 2012 special agents determined that a Luristan bronze ax from Early Sumeria (present day Iraq) was among the artifacts being sold. The seller had no importation documentation and the ax was among several other items that were subsequently abandoned by the individual.
In January 2014, HSI Baltimore received a tip reporting that a senior civilian employee working in Iraq in 2004 during Operation Iraqi Freedom, withdrew an Iraqi window seal from an Iraq government building and brought it home. 
Special agents met with the employee where he stated he was not aware that he required permission from the United States, Iraq or military authorities to export the item out of Iraq.
An investigation by HSI New York dubbed “The Mummy’s Curse” targeted an organization that smuggled cultural heritage objects into the U.S., sold them in antiquities markets and laundered the proceeds back to the source countries.  As part of the investigation, 37 Iraqi bronze objects, 21 clay reliefs and 18 pieces of Iraqi glass were forfeited to the U.S. government to be returned to the people of Iraq. This investigation was unique in utilizing money laundering charges, which allowed investigators to seize bank accounts containing the proceeds from the sale of smuggled cultural property. This allowed ICE to identify a large transnational criminal organization, resulting in the issuance of four arrests warrants. So far two convictions have been secured and the agency is seeking an international fugitive involved in the case.
ICE has returned more than 1200 items to Iraq in four repatriations since 2008.  Since 2007, more than 7,800 artifacts have been returned to over 30 countries including paintings from France, Germany, Poland and Austria, 15th-18th century manuscripts from Italy and Peru, cultural artifacts from China, Cambodia and Iraq, two Baatar dinosaur fossils to Mongolia and most recently 19 antiquities were returned to Italy.
Learn more about HSI cultural property, art and antiquities investigations. Members of the public who have information about suspected stolen cultural property are urged to call the toll-free HSI tip line at 1-866-DHS-2-ICE or to complete its online tip form.

Artifacts aren't the only thing returning to Iraq. David Petraeus is back in the news.  For example, UPI reports:



Abbe Lowell is the lawyer for Stephen Kim, a former U.S. Department of State contractor, who is serving a 13-month sentence for discussing classified information about North Korea to Fox News.
"The decision to permit General Petraeus to plead guilty to a misdemeanor demonstrates more clearly than ever the profound double standard that applies when prosecuting so-called 'leakers' and those accused of disclosing classified information for their own purposes," Lowell wrote to the U.S. Department of Justice.

Petraeus plead guilty to a misdemeanor charge of mishandling classified information by sharing it with his mistress. He is scheduled to be sentenced in April.

Yet he is now providing security advice on Iraq to the White House.  Ben Kamisar (The Hill) quotes White House spokesperson Josh Earnest declaring today, "General Petraeus is somebody who served for a number of years in Iraq, he commanded a large number of American military personnel in that country. Over that time, he developed strong relationships with some of his Iraqi counterparts and with some of Iraq's political leaders. He is, I think, legitimately regarded as an expert when it comes to the security situation on Iraq. So I think it makes sense for senior administration officials to on occasion consult him for advice."  AP reminds,  "A retired four-star general, Petraeus' vaunted career suffered a major blow from revelations he gave the biographer, Paula Broadwell, eight binders of classified material he had improperly kept. The 62-year-old agreed earlier this month to plead guilty to a misdemeanor count that carries a possible sentence of up to a year in prison. "


So let's just recap.

David Petraeus had to step down for an affair. Step down as CIA head.  And it was discovered he did indeed pass on classified information.

And now Barack's bringing him back into the fold?

After you've leaked classified information how do you get a security clearance?

I am confused.

iraq

rudaw
the new york times
the washington post
loveday morris
all iraq news
abc news
james gordon meek
Brian Ross
rym momtaz
alex hosenball
david muir
abc world news

Hack and liar Ava DuVernay insists she's truthful

Deadline offers:

Selma director Ava DuVernay said today that as the seventh director offered the project, “I went into that film with one thought, singular and clear: Serve this story. You have to. It wasn’t made with any sort of achievement in mind.” In her keynote address to the South By Southwest Film Festival in Austin, Texas, DuVernay said she became happier and more fulfilled by not worrying about box office and awards — and focusing on the stories, USA Today reported. She was keenly conscious of the burden of history in making the first theatrical feature about Dr. Martin Luther King.

She's a hack and a liar.

Fortunately, her next film is fiction and maybe she can tell a story then.

However, if Coretta Scott King chose to believe -- or flat out believed -- that the rumors that MLK was cheating were false attacks, that was her choice.

For that liar Ava to invent a 'confrontation' that never happened between Coretta and her husband in a supposed  biographical film was outrageous and offensive.

White people rushed to applaud this lousy film -- especially the kooks at World Can't Wait.

Those of us who are Black were troubled by the portrayals, were troubled by the way important figures were either vanished or rendered obsolete.

We were not impressed with Ava's desire to turn MLK into a Democrat.

MLK was a revolutionary who opposed the war on Vietnam and the building of empire.



You will not find that in Ava's hideous film.

White Communists like Amy Goodman wet their panties over the film.

Which just proves how hollow their political beliefs are because they should have joined Black activists in calling out the portrayal of MLK.

It was, as C.I.'s noted, a "Disney-fication" of MLK.

Ava has nothing to be proud of though a large number of White people will continue to pretend that she does.

Selma is actually more outrageous than American Sniper.

And anyone who pretends otherwise discredits the legacy of MLK.


"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills):

Saturday, March 14, 2015.  Chaos and violence continue, the Tikrit attack proves to be humiliating for Baghdad and Tehran, lies and more lies from the US government on Iraq get exposed, we note the shooting death of an Iraqi in Dallas, Texas, and much more.


Qassim Abdul-Zahra (AP) reports that Badr militia leader Hadi al-Amiri has praised Iran for it's "unconditional" aid and support as contrasted with the US -- Iraqi leaders "kiss the hands of the Americans and get nothing in return."

Oh, Hadi, you're such an embarrassment, such an idiot.

Do you really think we've forgotten you or your weakling son?

Or the 2014 incident where your little baby (grown adult son) threw a tantrum because an airline refused to delay a flight for him.

Or that you, as Transportation Minister, then refused to allow the flight to land in Iraq?

Oh, Hadi, you stupid ass.

The world has not forgotten.

Nor has the world forgotten that, in your denials (lies) about the incident, you promised a full investigation.

There was never an investigation.

Which was good for your little boy, right?

Because you'd publicly insisted that if he was responsible, you'd turn him over to the authorities.

Poor little Hadi.  Such a joke on the world stage.

And part of the reason the US government did not back, last summer, Ammar al-Hakim for the post of prime minister.  Hadi's part of the al-Hakim led Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq.  All Iraq News reports Ammar met with Brett McGurk of the US State Dept to tell McGurk that Iraq doesn't need the US.

Good enough, let's pull all US troops out of Iraq (at last).


Wednesday the Senate Foreign Relations Committee held an important hearing on Iraq and the Authorization for the Use of Military Force that US President Barack Obama has requested.  We've covered the hearing in the Wednesday and Thursday snapshots and will cover it later in this one.  But for now, let's note what Ranking Member Robert Menendez stated as the hearing was coming to a close.



Ranking Member Robert Menendez:  Finally, I do hope that we can get to a point to find the right balance and that's not easy in this proposition to give you an AUMF that gives you the wherewithall to degrade and defeat ISIL but by the same token doesn't provide an open-ended check.  And I think that the real concern here  is for some of us who lived under shock and awe and were told that Iraqi oil was going to pay for everything and saw a lot of lives and national treasure spent, that even well intentioned efforts can move in a totally different direction.  And this is the most critical vote that any member of the Congress  will take which is basically a vote on war and peace and life and death.


As if to underscore the points he was making Wednesday, CBS News reported Friday:

A U.S. soldier at an Iraqi training base was injured by gunfire directed at the base, marking the first time an American soldier has been wounded by fire from the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), CBS News national security correspondent David Martin reports.
A Pentagon spokesman told Martin that the soldier received superficial wounds to his face after the incident, which occurred Wednesday at 3:00 a.m. Iraqi time.

National Iraqi News Agency adds, "The Spokesman of the Pentagon said that this is the first time that a US soldier wounded are carried out on the ground, since the United States began training Iraqi forces as part of coalition efforts to defeat the IS organization."  All Iraq News quotes the Pentagon spokesperson, Steve Warren, stating that "US soldiers returned fire."




Oh, what a beautiful city
Oh, what a beautiful city
Oh, what a beautiful city
Twelve gates to the city
Hallelujah
There are three gates in the east
And three to the west
There's three to the north
And three to the south
There's twelve gates to the city
Hallelujah
-- "Twelve Gates To The City," traditional song recorded by Carly Simon on her Christmas Is Almost Here



Twelve Gates To The City, and 12 days to reach Tikrit.

That's how long it's taken the Baghdad-Tehran alliance.  On Thursday, the 12th day of the operation, they finally reached Tikrit.  Apparently, there was no direct path so they had to take stop overs, possibly they traveled Jet Blue via Miami.

Thursday, All Iraq News reported that Khalid al-Khazrji (Deputy Chair of the Local Security Committee) was insisting, "The Iraqi forces have completely controlled over Tikrit."

Oh, the lies and the liars.

Like Khaled al-Obeidi.  Thursday, National Iraqi News Agency reported that Defense Minister al-Obeidi declared that the battle for Tikrit "will be today and will be a decisive battle."


Didn't happen.

But Iran and Baghdad's Shi'ite forces had finally made it to Tikrit.

And?



Jean Marc Mojon (AFP) didn't seem to grasp what he reported on Friday morning:


Iraqi forces on Friday battled jihadists making what looked increasingly like a last stand in Tikrit but the Islamic State group responded by vowing to expand its "caliphate".
Thousands of fighters surrounded a few hundred holdout IS militants, pounding their positions from the air but treading carefully to avoid the thousands of bombs littering the city centre.


The bulk of Islamic State fighters had left, only a "few hundred" remained and that was still too much for the combined might of Baghdad and Tehran.

Offering a more clear-eyed assessment on Friday was Saif Hameed (Reuters) who reported:

The offensive to retake Tikrit appeared to stall on Friday, two days after Iraqi security forces and mainly Shi’ite militia pushed into Saddam Hussein’s home city in their biggest offensive yet against the militants.
A source in the Salah Al-Din Operations Command said Iraqi forces would not move forward until reinforcements reached Tikrit, of which the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) still holds around half.

Using guerrilla warfare tactics, the militants have turned the city into a labyrinth of home-made bombs and booby-trapped buildings, and are using snipers to halt their progress.


Adam Rawnsley (War Is Boring) notes that, "in a sign of Tehran’s growing military presence in the Iraq, Iranian weapons were a nearly ubiquitous sight in images and videos coming out of the offensive to take the mostly Sunni city."  Yamei Wang (Xinhua) adds that Friday saw at least seventy-two security forces injured and another 26 killed.


And today?  Xinhua reports:

Iraqi security forces fighting to free the besiege city of Tikrit planned to clear the city from the Islamic State (IS) militants within 72 hours, a militia spokesman said on Saturday.
The city "will be liberated within 72 hours," Karim al-Nouri, a leading figure of the Shiite party Badr Organization and the spokesman of the government-backed militia of al-Hashed al-Shaabi, said in the town of Awja, south of Tikrit.


But reality is not what's above.  Reuters reports reality which is that the Islamic State still controls at least half of Tirkit and the security forces who entered the city?

They have "paused their offensive for a second day on Saturday as they awaited reinforcements, a military source said."

This is also echoed by the Oman Tribune, "Earlier, Iraqi forces and Shia militia battling to wrest full control of the city of Tikrit from Baghdadi militiamen paused their offensive for a second day on Saturday as they awaited reinforcements.  A source in the local military command centre said military commanders had reached a decision to halt the operation until a suitable, carefully set plan is in place to break into central Tikrit."

So the operation starts with claims that are never met (they were supposed to have entered and seized Tikrit two Fridays ago -- that is what the officials promised) and after they finally arrive in Tikrit and face significantly fewer Islamic State forces than they expected, they're still so inept that they have to pause their fighting and wait for reinforcements.

Hundreds of Islamic State fighters.

Thousands of security forces.

And the security forces have to wait for reinforcements before continuing the battle.

This was supposed to be a confidence builder.

It has been anything but.

Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi is again demonstrating he's no different than Nouri al-Maliki.

In 2008, you may remember, Nouri decided to attack Basra (and Sadr City in Baghdad).

It was an operation that the US was planning with Iraqi forces.

But Nouri jumped the gun.

And Iraqi forces, once fighting began, began deserting.

And Nouri hadto count on the US forces to rescue his plan.

But because the US government needed to promote Nouri as a leader, it was considered unkind to point out that it was only US forces that diverted the disaster.

And now there's Haider.

Who didn't want US help on this.

And the forces -- with all of Tehran's help -- couldn't even make it into Tirkit on time.

And when they did?

They can't even fight a much smaller than expected group of Islamic State fighters.

This was supposed to be the morale booster.

It should be the wake up call.

Yes, the US military assessment was correct:  Iraqi forces (with or without help from Tehran) are still not ready or maybe just still not committed to the actual fight.

Sending Shi'ites into Saddam Hussein's home town?

It was supposed to be a morale builder because Shi'ites hated (and continue to hate) the late Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

This was the area they would shoot up and destroy, feeding on their own hatred.

But even with all that, they still can't pull it off.

They're an embarrassment.

So is stupidity.

We're not even going to go into Nancy A. Youssef's idiotic efforts to claim a slice of Tikrit for the US -- she (and brass) feared the operation would be a success -- because they're unable to use their eyes and ears -- so she did a piece of whoring -- like what she used to do for McClatchy all the time.  We're not linking to her nonsense.

But we will go to greater stupidity.

Foreign Policy, we mean you.

Why did you ever hire idiots like David Frances and Sabine Muscat who wrote on Friday:

Congress sits by as Christians are besieged by the Islamic State. Last August, President Barack Obama signed a bill creating a special envoy charged with helping Iraq’s Christian communities and other minority religious groups targeted by the Islamic State. Seven months later, the post is still vacant, and Congress seems in no rush to fill it. FP’s Bethany Allen-Ebrahimian and Yochi Dreazen report on a “small but concrete example of Washington’s passivity in the face of an ongoing wave of atrocities against the Assyrian, Chaldean, and other Christian communities of Iraq and Syria.”



Leave out Yochi and Bethany because they don't argue what Frances and Muscat stupidly do.

Have you finished the third grade?

If so and you're an American citizen going to school in America you should be rolling your eyes at what Frances and Muscat wrote.

Congress isn't sitting by.

They're not the ones "in no rush to fill it."

Because, even though Frances and Muscat are too stupid to know it, Congress merely votes to confirm (or deny) someone the president nominates.

What kind of whores are Frances and Muscat to blame Congress for Barack's inaction?

Stupid whores if they think they can get away with it.

Again, the linked to article by Yochi and Bethany does not make the claim Frances and Muscat do.

Frances and Muscat are wrong, they're wrong about the Constitution and they really shouldn't be allowed to cover these topics anymore because either they're too stupid or they're too biased to be trusted.


Here's reality, Barack waited 10 days to sign the bill in question (passed by Congress) and did so quietly, as Yochi and Bethany note, "the White House quietly announced the signing in a late-afternoon press release that lumped it in with an array of other low-profile legislation. Neither Obama nor any prominent lawmakers made any explicit public reference to the bill."


When Barack's failure to nominate someone for the post results in two 'reporters' rushing to slam Congress, then Foreign Policy needs to do a house cleaning.  Frances and Muscat are not qualified to even write up synopsis so they shouldn't be working for Foreign Policy.

Yochi and Bethany write an even-handed report which includes:

Administration officials say they are paying close attention to the plight of Iraq’s religious minorities and doing all they can to help. In an interview, Rabbi David Saperstein, the State Department’s ambassador-at-large for international religious freedom, said that he has devoted the majority of his time since assuming his post last December to the plight of the Christians and other groups that find themselves in the crosshairs of the Islamic State.
Saperstein noted that when the Islamic State encircled thousands of members of the country’s Yazidi community and threatened to exterminate them last year, it was American warplanes that beat back the militants and allowed the civilians to escape their clutches. “There are scores of thousands of people who are alive because of what we did,” he said.

The issue is Iraqi Christians.

If Saperstein is too ignorant to know that Yazidis are not Christians may be he's not up for his job.

The Yazidis should have been (and were) provided with supplies dropped from planes.

In addition, they were used to put US forces (publicly) back into Iraq.

The Yazidis are now aligned with the neocons -- via their sole MP in Parliament who spends so much of her time in England, Canada and the United States.  They really don't need an advocate.

But Iraqi Christians have been very public about the fact that the Yazidis have gotten the world's attention while the slaughter of Iraqi Christians in Iraq goes largely unnoticed.

The so called objective press might want to explain to their news consumers why that is, why they ignore the Iraqi Christians while they provide tons of coverage to the group advocating for US combat troops in Iraq -- because that's what the Yazidi leadership signed off on when they agreed to take neocon money in an effort to publicize themselves.

On the battles in Iraq, Kareem Shaheen (Guardian) reports:

On Friday a prominent Iraqi Sunni preacher urged authorities to prevent Shia militias from carrying out revenge attacks. Sheikh Abdel Sattar Abdul Jabbar said that if the government failed to stop revenge attacks by Shia militias, the country would face reignited sectarian tensions such as the ones it witnessed at the height of the war in 2006 and 2007.
“We ask that actions follow words to punish those who are attacking houses in Tikrit,” Abdul Jabbar said during his Friday sermon in Baghdad. “We are sorry about those acting in revenge that might ignite tribal anger and add to our sectarian problems.

Analysts say the campaign to liberate Sunni areas must be led by members of the community, fearing retributions and revenge attacks that could upend the campaign to drive out Isis. 



Back to Wednesday's hearing.  Isakson questioned the need for a time limit on Barack's proposed AUMF -- which currently has a 3-year-provision calling for a review three years after it is passed.  Isakson wondered, "Wouldn't we be better off sending a clear signal that there is no end to this conflict as far as we are concerned until we win the victory?"  Click here for the press release from Senator Isakson's office.

For any wondering about the answer, Ash Carter repeatedly stated this was a "political consideration" and that the Good and Powerful Barack didn't want to tie anyone's hands.

Strange because Bully Boy Bush signed a three year agreement with Iraq after -- after -- the 2008 elections which saw Barack win the presidency.  Before Barack won the presidency, he (and Joe Biden) insisted they would oppose Bully Boy Bush doing any such agreement without the Senate signing off.  Immediately after the election -- Deletion You Can Believe In -- that promise disappeared from the campaign site and neither Barack nor Joe ever brought it up again.

Ash Carter is the Secretary of Defense.  He appeared at the hearing to offer testimony as did Secretary of State John Kerry and General Martin Dempsey who is the Chair of the Joint Chiefs.


Let's jump in on this exchange.


Senator Cory Gardner:  . .  . what weight of effort would you say that the Peshmerga or other fighting in the region are pursuing against ISIL?

Gen Martin Dempsey:  The early successes against ISIL were largely through the Peshmerga.  And that will evolve over time but they've been carrying the majority of the effort thus far.

Senator Cory Gardner:  And by majority of effort, is there a weight?  Like they're carrying out a third?   Three-quarters?  Ninety percent?

Gen Martin Dempsey:  No, Senator, I can't actually put

Senator Cory Gardner:  -- the weight of effort on it?

Gen Martin Depmsey:  -- but the early, uh, the early effort to blunt ISIL's momentum were north and therefore with the Peshmerga

Senator Cory Gardner:  And reports in the news and other places have stated the Peshmerga are only getting about 10% of the arms that have routed through -- that have been routed through Baghdad.  Is that correct?

Gen Martin Dempsey:  Uh, again, I don't have the percentage but I can certainly take it for the record.  But there were some friction early on with the willingness of the government of Iraq to provide weapons to the Peshmerga but we think we've-we've managed our way through that.

Senator Cory Gardner:  And so right now you feel confident that the process by which arms will reach Erbil have now been settled or resolved?

Gen Martin Dempsey:  I am confident that we've broke through the initial friction but it doesn't mean it won't return.


He was confident on Wednesday.

Is he still confident?

Or is he just a liar?

Massoud Barazani is the President of the Kurdistan Regional Government.

Hours after the hearing, The NewsHour (PBS -- link is text, audio and video) aired an interview with Barzani which included Barzani declaring:


We are satisfied with the [US] air support. We are getting good support, but, in reality, to this present moment, we have the same view as in the past on arming and equipping the Peshmerga forces with the right weapons.  It’s not to the standard we want.


If that's confusing for anyone -- possibly confusing for Dempsey, the title of the segment is "Kurdish leader says more U.S. weapons needed in fight against Islamic State."


Peshmerga forces include women and Cale Salih has written about that for CNN here.

But to the point of Dempsey's dishonesty?

That's all the hearing offered: dishonesty from the witnesses.

Hour after the hearing,  James Gordon Meek, Brian Ross, Rym Momtaz and Alex Hosenball (ABC News) broke the news that Shi'ites were committing War Crimes (they called it "human rights violations") in Iraq.


At the hearing, John Kerry lied non-stop including, "So as long as we continue to work on the integration, the  internal inclusivity of Iraq and its government -- to help the Iraqis to be able to do this themselves, help the region feel empowered by it, that is a long term recipe for the United States not to have as much risk and not to have to put ourselves on the line the way we have historically."

There is no 'inclusivity' in Iraq.  Shi'ites forces are targeting, terrorizing and killing Sunni civilians.

A fact Kerry didn't raise before the Committee.

Let's again note, the Thursday broadcast of ABC World News with David Muir:


David Muir: Now to new fall out after our ABC investigation last night. It involves the fight against ISIS known for those awful videos, lining up their victims on the beach.  And now a new concern.  Are some of the Iraqi forces -- trained and paid for by US taxpayers -- using techniques that are just as brutal?  Well the State Dept tonight responding to our report and ABC's chief investigative reporter Brian Ross back on the job tonight.

Brian Ross:  The State Dept called these scenes today serious and disturbing.  Brutal images of what appear to be Iraqi forces and militias carrying out, celebrating, torture and beheadings.  In this torture scene, two US weapons against the wall. This video shows two civilians, pleading for their lives, about to be shot dead.  A man with an American supplied weapon walks by, a gunman with what appears to be the insignia of Iraqi Special Forces caught on tape.

US State Dept spokesperson Jen Psaki: Their behavior must be above reproach or they risk being painted with the same brush as ISIL fighters.


Brian Ross:  The Pentagon says it has already cut off money to some Iraqi units because of gross human rights violations.  But Senator Patrick Leahy says the ABC News report shows the government should cut off money to more Iraqi units.

Senator Patrick Leahy: When you look at at the videos and look at the uniforms being worn, do we really want to say the US condones that?

Brian Ross: US officials tonight tell ABC News that America's top military leader Gen Martin Dempsey, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, has repeatedly warned Iraqi leaders about the conduct of the Iraqi military and the militias that fight with them -- especially because the US is sending $1.5 billion to the Iraqi army and almost 3,000 American troops to help train them.



The hearing on Iraq?  John Kerry should have informed the Committee.

Especially since this was Senator Bob Menendez's concern.

Not his concern today.

His concern back in November of 2013.

He was very concerned -- and very public about it -- that the US government would be arming thugs who would use the weapons to terrorize the people.

The White House not only assured him that would not happen, they promised that if it did, they would -- as the law requires -- cut off all arm shipments to Iraq.


Starting to understand why John Kerry lied and failed to disclose the abuses to Congress?

It was one lie after another.

And Kerry was also caught this week in yet another lie.

Last month, he was grandstanding in Munich -- yet again acting as though he were the Secretary of Defense -- and he created a figure -- how very Brian Williams of him -- that really didn't exist as he claimed that 50% of the Islamic State's leadership had been decimated in Syria and in Iraq.

Eli Lake and Josh Rogin (Daily Beast) reported Friday:



When asked about Kerry's 50 percent claim, Army Captain John J. Moore, a spokesman for U.S. Central Command, told us: "We currently don't have a percentage attached to that statistic."
Experts told us Kerry’s estimate is tough to understand, because defining the Islamic State’s “leadership” is subjective. Cole Bunzel, a Princeton University scholar of Near Eastern Studies who closely follows Islamic State, said its leadership structure is opaque, and not much is known about the true membership of its Shura and Sharia councils, which play an important role in the organization. When the Islamic State has announced major decisions, such as its decision to expand into Syria or declare itself a caliphate, said Bunzel, it has made clear that one or both of those councils were consulted by Baghdadi.
"I am very skeptical of the claim that the coalition has killed 50 percent of the leadership of the Islamic State, whatever that means,” said Bunzel.
He later added, "The Islamic State has publicly announced when senior members of the group have been killed. But they have never talked about anyone in the core leadership being killed since 2010."


It's just been one lie after another.

And that's why Congress should be very alarmed at the wording in Barack's requested AUMF.

In the hearing, Senator Chris Murphy noted:


I remain as frustrated as many of my colleagues with this question over these definitions
I think the problem is in part every different member of the administration  we talk to does seem to have a slightly different interpretation of what these words mean and I can't blame them because, I think, as Secretary Carter said there's no historical operational definition of these words.  But I think the lack of consistency has hampered our efforts to get on the same page together.


Senator Rand Paul noted in the hearing, "It's disdainful to say, 'We want you to pass something but it really doesn't matter, we'll just use 2001' -- which is really absurd.  It just means that Congress is inconsequential and so are the people and the country,"

And it was disdainful for the witnesses to lie to Congress.

And Kerry's entire presentation was disdainful and, yes, shameful.

He needs to learn to shut his mouth.

Yeah, he chaired the Committee -- back when people traveled in wagons.  He's Secretary of State now and he needs to learn to shut his mouth.

At one point, the Chair told him he was done.

Kerry insisted he wasn't.

Chair Bob Corker said he was done with his "speech" and that he had taken five minutes and 20 seconds to 'answer' a question.  The time was up.  The Senator asking questions had already pushed the time limit before finally giving Kerry a chance to speechify. It was time for the next Senator to ask questions.

When the Chair tells you that, you don't keep talking, you don't argue.

You just shut your damn mouth.

When he chaired the Committee, Kerry certainly understood that.

His preening ego, however, prevents from understanding it today.


Moving from Kerry's never ending jaw boning and lying to violence in the US, All Iraq News notes the fatal shooting of Iraqi Ahmed al-Jumaili in Dallas, Texas.  Al-Jumaili was an Iraqi refugee who had only recently arrived in the US.  CBS News reports:


The victim's wife, Zahraa Altaie, told the station they noticed the men that night but paid no attention to them nor did anything to provoke them. She said the shooting appeared to be random.
"I put my hand on his heart. I still feel his heart beating. I tried to stop his bleeding, but I couldn't," said Zahraa.

Iraqi community members are e-mailing asking where the left is on this?

They note that the American left was calling out the movie American Sniper.  (Some were calling it out.  I didn't call it out.)  They note the protests in Ferguson over the killing of an African-American (Michael Brown) by police.

So why isn't this faction of the left also objecting to the murder of Ahmed, the e-mails ask?

That's a question they'll have to answer.  I don't think it will be a pretty answer so I'm guessing those that called out a film -- Debra Useless Sweet, Cindy Sheehan and all the others -- will not call out the killer who, for the record, is African-American.  Nykerion Nealon is the killer's name.

Rachelle Blinder (New York Daily News) reports:


Nealon, who went by the nickname Kaca, did not know al-Jumaili and shot him while seeking revenge, Cotner said. Someone reportedly shot at his girlfriend's apartment in a neighboring complex, making Nealon round up three buddies to look for the suspect, a witness told police. They went to Nealon's apartment to get his assault rifle and then headed to Al-Jumaili's apartment complex.
The thug saw al-Jumaili taking pictures of the snow and raised his rifle, one of his friends told police. The friend took cover under bushes and heard shots ring out, he said. 

Al-Jumaili ran back to his apartment as Nealon followed him with his eyes, continually aiming his rifle and firing at him, Cotner said. Al-Jumaili was shot in the chest.

15 shell casings were found at the crime scene.


Let's also note that the claim of Kaca's girlfriend's apartment being shot at was made -- in a phone call to the police -- after Kaca shot dead Ahmed.  After.  Whether the claim is true or not, no one knows.

Whether it's true or not, it does not justify Kaca grabbing a gun and killing anyone.

But it's important to remember the claim came after the fact.

It's important to remember Kaca shot dead Ahmed.  Kaca and friends then ran to girlfriend's apartment. Then the police were called and the alleged shooting at girlfriend's apartment was reported to the police but they didn't report the murder of Ahmed.  They didn't report that Kaca had shot Ahmed.


As Telemundo reports, the police only discovered Kaca shot Ahmed because Kaca was caught on security cameras (with his rifle).

I wouldn't believe, were I on the jury, the claim of a shooting at an apartment without physical evidence.  That said, were I the defense attorney, I would be sure to put Walnut Bend Apartments on trial and note that the ownership (BH Management) is notorious for its shoddy practices -- including falsely telling renters that  eviction processes had been started, including failure to salt frozen stairs and walk ways, etc.  They have one of the worst images of any in the region.  They do not have security, they often arrange drive throughs with local police.  Were I the defense attorney, I'd be asking what the security was like and how responsive the management was to security concerns.

Regardless of whether or not the shooting at his girlfriend's apartment can be proven, if BH Management did their usual poor job of security and of responding to safety concerns, a case for Kaca could be built around that.  And it's winter -- almost over -- so BH Management probably distributed in January or February a flier to the residents of Walnut Bend Apartments that would basically make clear how little responsibility BH Management takes for their properties.  I'd get a copy of that, were I the defense attorney, to explain why Kaca might have felt it was necessary to defend his girlfriend himself.

If he is convicted?  A few e-mails from Iraqi community members ask about the death penalty? Texas is a death penalty state.  If tried as an adult (Kaca is 17), the killer could face the death penalty.

(We are not calling the victim, Ahmed, by his last name because we humanize people by calling them by their first names here.  Due to the accused's age, we're also going with something other than the last name.  And we would have gone with his first name but when people have a preferred name that is on the record -- such as Ed Snowden always introducing himself as "Ed" -- we call them by the name they prefer.)






iraq
cbs news
david martin
pbs
the newshour
eli lake
bloomberg news
abc news
james gordon meek
Brian Ross
rym momtaz
alex hosenball
david muir
abc world news

If I were a lawyer for the Iranian government . . .

I would tell them not to make a treaty with the US government.

When has a treaty with the US ever protected a country that wasn't a European country?

The US wanted inspectors in Iraq and there would be no war and other blah blah.

Saddam Hussein lets them in and Bully Boy Bush still declares war.

Momhar Qaddafi enters into a relationship with the US government during Bully Boy Bush's reign and, next thing you know, Barack's president and attacking Libya.

From the Native Americans on down the line, I don't see a treaty or deal that ever helped anyone except European countries.



"Iraq snapshot" (The Common Ills): 

Thursday, March 13, 2015. Chaos and violence continue, the Iraqi forces violence against Sunnis gets serious media attention, CodeStink needs to pack it in having done too much damage (they aren't the only ones doing damage), and much more.



On the Thursday broadcast of ABC World News with David Muir, Iraq was covered:

David Muir: Now to new fall out after our ABC investigation last night. It involves the fight against ISIS known for those awful videos, lining up their victims on the beach.  And now a new concern.  Are some of the Iraqi forces -- trained and paid for by US taxpayers -- using techniques that are just as brutal?  Well the State Dept tonight responding to our report and ABC's chief investigative reporter Brian Ross back on the job tonight.

Brian Ross:  The State Dept called these scenes today serious and distuuing.  Brutal images of what appear to be Iraqi forces and militias carrying out, celebrating, torture and beheadings.  In this torture scene, two US weapons against the wall. This video shows two civilians, pleading for their lives, about to be shot dead.  A man with an American supplied weapon walks by, a gunman with what appears to be the insignia of Iraqi Special Forces caught on tape.

US State Dept spokesperson Jen Psaki: Their behavior must be above reproach or they risk being painted with the same brush as ISIL fighters.


Brian Ross:  The Pentagon says it has already cut off money to some Iraqi units because of gross human rights violations.  But Senator Patrick Leahy says the ABC News report shows the government should cut off money to more Iraqi units.

Senator Patrick Leahy: When you look at at the videos and look at the uniforms being worn, do we really want to say the US condones that?

Brian Ross: US officials tonight tell ABC News that America's top military leader Gen Martin Dempsey, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, has repeatedly warned Iraqi leaders about the conduct of the Iraqi military and the militias that fight with them -- especially because the US is sending $1.5 billion to the Iraqi army and almost 3,000 American troops to help train them.


At the link, you'll find not only the video report, but also a text article and a photo essay.  James Gordon Meek, Brian Ross, Rym Momtaz and Alex Hosenball did the previous ABC News report on this topic.

The Jen Psaki moment in the transcript above is from today's State Dept press briefing.

Jen is shown looking down at her notebook and reading a pre-written statement.

She's ridiculous and shameful.  Let's move to that moment at today's briefing:



QUESTION: There’s some really disturbing images coming out of Iraq, which appear to show uniformed Iraqi soldiers committing atrocities – beheadings, torture. Are you – I mean, Iraq has said they’re investigating. Do you have confidence in their investigation, their ability to investigate this alone? Will you, the State Department, do any investigating? That’s the first question.


MS. PSAKI: Sure. Well, these are clearly disturbing and serious allegations, ones that we’ve, unfortunately, spoken about many times before, including from this podium, because we’ve been – there have been a range of reports out there for some time about these types of abuses. So we’re, of course, deeply concerned by the reports. The Iraqi Government, as you mentioned, has indicated that it will investigate to determine the facts behind these claims. We urge it to conduct a transparent, thorough, and timely investigation.
I would also note that Prime Minister Abadi, I think including in his inaugural remarks, spoke about this, has stated that he – not about this specifically, but about efforts to kind of address unregulated militias, which is part of the problem – has stated that he has a zero-tolerance policy of human rights abuses by any security element. U.S. officials from Washington and Baghdad continue to raise our concerns with senior Government of Iraq officials, and we have been doing that for some time.
This behavior is clearly – their behavior must be above reproach or they risk being painted with the same brush as ISIL fighters. And certainly that’s a message that we are making clear. But they’ve indicated they’re investigating. There’s no plans for the United States Government to investigate, no.


QUESTION: Okay. But do they not also risk, then, the U.S. sort of cutting off funding and pulling out of the coalition and sort of stopping their involvement?


MS. PSAKI: Well, we have withheld assistance from certain Iraqi units on the basis of credible information in the past. There’s an entire process of review that happens. And certainly if new information surfaced that warranted that – the Leahy law being put into effect, we would do the same thing.


QUESTION: Right. So unlikely that you would – as a result of these types of crimes, if proven true – I mean, there’s images supporting them at this point. But if proven true, it’s unlikely that you would do some sort of broad pullout of Iraq as a result, just stopping financing to certain brigades?



MS. PSAKI: Well, there are laws in place, that have been in place for time, that we have applied to some Iraqi units. And certainly we would continue to apply those if applicable. Obviously we look at any information that was available, including reports and media reports as well. But I’m not going to prejudge what that would mean in the future.


That's not the law and the State Dept looks like a pack of idiot War Criminals right now.

The US government is not allowed to pick and choose -- per the law -- which parts of a military they give assistance to.  The law is that when incidents like the above take place, the US government has to cut off all military assistance.

That's the law.

I thought Jen was leaving.  I thought she was taking her lying to the White House?

After today, she can't leave soon enough.

There is spin and there is whoring.


We've been rather kind to Jen here.  Marie Harf, not so much.  But Jen's largely gotten a pass because she's usually been professional not whorish.

When she stands in front of the press and lies through her teeth about the law -- to cover for War Crimes -- she's nothing but a cheap whore.

She has no shame and she clearly has no ethics.

The Leahy Amendment does not say: If the government the US is sending military aid to has human rights abuses (War Crimes), the US government must ensure that the 'good' elements of the military receive money and weapons.

The law says when these human rights abuses take place, the aid is to be immediately cut.

The State Dept is a disgrace today.

John Kerry's confused himself with Secretary of Defense throughout his tenure as Secretary of State.

It is shameful.

And it should be criminal for a spokesperson to lie about what the law says.

What the trashy liar doesn't tell the press briefing is that the US government is refusing to investigate because such an investigation -- if the charges bore out (and they will) -- would mean -- Leahy Amendment or not -- the US drop all aid immediately or be guilty of supporting the War Crimes, of funding the War Crimes.

This goes beyond the Leahy Amendment and goes to charters and treaties the US government has signed.

Jen Psaki lied.

She disgraced herself.

She disgraced the State Dept (which I'm sure Kerry is happy about because he's become such a liar himself).

She betrayed democracy and open government with the effort to lie and deceive the American people.

Spin is one thing.  We've let her spin in the past and rolled our eyes over it.

This was deceit, this was trickery.

Some are pointing out that the Pentagon had held off funds.

That's even worse.

The Pentagon came to the conclusion that certain funds shouldn't go to certain parts of the Iraqi forces because of human rights abuses (War Crimes).

Those decisions -- which, again, are not legal, legal is all or nothing -- should have been conveyed to the American people.

It's the American people who are footing the bill.

It is the American people the administration is supposed to serve -- Serve.

And they lied.

The Pentagon lied.

It lied by not informing the American people.

This isn't 'national security.'

This shouldn't be 'classified.'

It is the willful disregard of the American people, of democracy and of informed consent that has been the hallmark of Barack Obama's tenure as President of the United States.

He has made a mockery of transparency and of his own claim, prior to becoming president, that his administration would be open.

And Barack himself should have told the American people the news that the Pentagon had learned that certain elements in the Iraqi forces were committing human rights abuses (War Crimes).

Maybe he'll again insist that he didn't know until the press just reported it.

Last week we noted, starting with the March 5th snapshot, Iraqi forces surrounding an 11-year-old boy.  This is video.  It's not in dispute.  The child is sitting in the middle of the street as he is bullied and threatened by Iraqi forces and then they execute this child.

These things are not in dispute.

I long ago noted being sickened by the video where Iraqi forces burned a man alive.

It's over a year later.

Mountains of documented cases of these abuses.

CodeStink.

They set themselves up as our saviors on the left.

The nothing but attention getting problem makers.

At yesterday's hearing, one was evicted after screaming about "killing people."

The tired point being made was that any war is going to result in killing -- and that will include populations -- civilians -- caught up in the war.

Yes, CodeStink, we all know that.  We all get that.

The Iraq War's been going on since 2003.

Over a million Iraqi civilians have died of violence during just the early part of the war.

After the CodeStinker was flushed from the hearing, John Kerry went to town.

Because they'd set him up perfectly.

He preened and grinned, he really did, as he tried to act stern and angry and insisted that if CodeStink was so concerned about killings, they should ask the families of the American journalists who were killed and they should consider the Jordanian pilot who was burned alive.  That was it.  Of all the victims of the Islamic State, that was it for Kerry.  Didn't care about the aid workers, for example.

If CodeStink had been doing their job, they would have joined me in calling out the abuses of the Iraqi forces.

But for over a year they've ignored.

Maybe they don't care, maybe they're too stupid.

I think they're too lazy to do the work required and that's why, whenever they talk the Iraq War, they don't have a single thing to say that they weren't already saying before Barack became president.  Six years of the war, the most recent six, are erased or ignored by CodeStink.

So a CodeStinker gave Kerry the moment he wanted where he couldn't pretend he was so moral and upstanding.  (I know John.  I like him outside of his office.  But I'd never accuse of being upstanding or ethical in his work as Secretary of State.)

Now if the CodeStinker had done any work required, the shout would have been, "Why are we funding this war and these forces when they are killing Iraqi civilians!"

And Kerry would have responded.

And since ABC News hadn't broken the story yet and since Kerry repeatedly lied throughout the hearing, he would have lied on this.

And CodeStink could have had credit, in the hours that passed, for setting Kerry up to get caught in a lie.

Instead they're just useless.

Yesterday's snapshot covered the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Cedric's "John Kerry has a hissy" and Wally's "THIS JUST IN! AND THE HUFFY BIKE HE RODE IN ON!" humor joint-post covered it, Wally covered it also in "Is there a bigger bitch than John Kerry (Wally)," Kat covered it with "I honestly feel sorry for Barack Obama," Ann covered it with "How afraid of us is the US government?" -- this is about the police presence at the hearing and that was appalling -- and Ava covered it with "John Kerry's become a bully and a bore (Ava)."

Let me start with Ava's real quick.  At Antiwar.com, Lucy Steigerwald has a new column tonight entitled "Loving America Means Letting It Go to War" and I thought, "Well good.  Someone else is picking up on the points of the hearing that bothered Ava."  No.  Lucy can't be bothered with the hearing so she does a 'greatest hits.'  She plays the jukebox and there's nothing breathing or alive in her dead prose.  As Ava points out, John Kerry ridiculously attempted to blackmail the Committee.  They had to vote for the AUMF, he insisted, or the terrorists win.  And if Congress votes for it and it barely passes?  The terrorists still win.

Kerry invoked 9/11 and everything else in an attempt to shame Congress into voting for war.

Someone needs to inform Lucy.  Her headline was topical.  Her tired column was not.

I really don't get these people -- and I've called them out for years -- at least since 2006 -- who think they can dust off their past remarks about Iraq and 'repurpose' those remarks into a 'new' column on Iraq.

And it's offensive and it's damaging.

John Kerry lied repeatedly to the Committee.

Never more so than when he rewrote history regarding al Qaeda in Mesopotamia.

And he gets away with it because of lazy whores on the left.

They're not new to my side.

They've been lazy since at least 2006.

And by their constant whoring to blame everything on Bully Boy Bush, they allow a John Kerry to invoke 9/11 before a Senate Committee to argue for further war on Iraq and to claim a link between Iraq and 9/11.

You need to get your heads out of your asses and start grasping -- and talking and writing about -- what happened from 2010 to 2014.  If you can't do that, please,  find another topic because the world cannot afford your lies and stupidity.

You have created an environment in which John Kerry can falsely link 9/11 to Iraq.

You created that by ignoring reality because you're lazy and also because your life's goal is not to help Iraqis but instead to provide cover for Barack Obama.

You're whores.

You're disgusting.

The Iraqi protesters -- not that any of you ever acknowledged it -- called on Barack for help.

And he ignored them.



For example, in March of 2013, activists in Samarra put their message on display.





"Obama, If you Cannot Hear Us Can you Not See Us?"

The following month, Sunnis would be slaughtered at a protest elsewhere.

April 23, 2013 massacre of a sit-in in Hawija which resulted from  Nouri's federal forces storming in.  Alsumaria noted Kirkuk's Department of Health (Hawija is in Kirkuk)  announced 50 activists have died and 110 were injured in the assault.   AFP reported the death toll eventually (as some wounded died) rose to 53 dead.   UNICEF noted that the dead included 8 children (twelve more were injured).

And Barack, the White House and the State Dept could offer nothing but 'we call for both sides to be careful.'

Nouri's forces slaughtered 8 children.

The BRussells Tribunal carried the account of survivor Thamer Hussein Mousa who lost his son Mohammed Thamer, who saw his son killed by Nouri's forces.  What did he say?

"I hold Obama responsible for this act because he is the one who gave them these weapons. The weapons and aircrafts they used and fired upon us were American weapons. I also hold the United States of America responsible for this criminal act, above all, Obama."

So you're tired bulls**t about what Bully Boy Bush did in 2003 is worthless and cowardly.

That's if you're Noam Chomsky, CodeStink, whomever you are.

You have ignored War Crimes in Iraq and provided Barack Obama the cover to ignore them as well.

You cheap little whores -- and, yes, that's you Noam, you endorsed Barack don't pretend you didn't now -- insisted that, if he became president, you would hold his feet to the fire.

You never did.

And Iraq suffered because of you.

You're as guilty as Barack Obama.

You're as guilty as Bully Boy Bush.

You're craven, whorish and shameful.

So stop telling us about 2003 because that was a lifetime for Iraq -- it is a very young population.

Under Barack, things have been as bad and arguably worse.

Iraqis went to the polls in 2010 wanting change.  They voted for Iraqiya.  Nouri's State of Law came in second.  Nouri lost.

But Barack refused to allow the Iraqi people to choose their own leader.  He refused to respect democracy.

When Nouri al-Maliki wouldn't step down, Barack didn't demand it.  Instead, he has US officials negotiate a contract (The Erbil Agreement) which gave Nouri a second term.

This is what set everything in motion for the crises today.

We documented in real time.  We've documented it since.

If you can't be honest, just don't speak.

Find another thing to pretend you care about.

Your lies are hurting Iraqis and have hurt Iraqis.

Back to Ann.

So we, the American people, now have to put up with a non-stop police presence at a Congressional hearing.

Thank you, CodeStink.

You're worthless attention getters whose behavior has become self-parody.

And now, thanks to you, we have to have armed police standing in the aisles of a Congressional hearing.

I mean, if you ever accomplished anything with your little stunts, I'd be fine with your actions.

But you're a disgrace.

And it was probably your behavior with Condi Rice that will be cited as the excuse for what's now going to be the new policy at Congressional hearings.

For those who missed, CodeStink's ridiculous Diane -- we won't promote her by giving her full name, we used to promote her book and other things she asked for but that ended after the stunt she pulled -- she wanted to call out Condi.

Okay.

Fine.

Even fine to disrupt the hearing to do so.

But here's where Diane crossed the line.

With red paint on her hands -- to symbolize blood -- she stood right in front of Condi -- in the middle of a hearing -- shoving her hands at Condi's face.

I'm not a fan of Condi Rice.  I've never even bothered to learn the spelling of her first name.

I think she was part of a criminal administration.

So I really didn't appreciate Diane making me feel sorry for Condi.

Or Diane making me note how Condi responded to this 2007 outrageous act with grace.


Standing up in a hearing and unfurling a banner is one thing.

Heckling or shouting is one thing.

I can support those actions regardless of whether or not I agree with the message being shouted or on a banner or whatever.

But when you act in a way that makes you look nuts and your actions involve thrusting your hands at someone in a hearing?

If Diane had been tasered (or is it tazed?), I wouldn't have objected.

Her actions were outrageous and Condi -- or security -- could have made the logical conclusion that this crazy woman was a threat.

(They could have done the same with Medea I-Need-Attention Benjamin who refused to leave and made police drag her -- across people sitting at the hearing -- she's not a woman of peace, she's an idiot and a nut case.  You are asked to leave, leave.)

Because of that nutty behavior and so much more, we're apparently -- now that the Republicans are in charge of the Senate -- going to have to endure armed police standing on each aisle throughout a hearing, staring down those gathered to exercise their right to attend a Congressional hearing..

It's intimidating and it needs to stop.

I'm calling out the Republican leadership for doing this.

I'm also calling out CodeStink whose actions have resulted in the Republican response.

CodeStink has outlived its purpose.




Jason Ditz (Antiwar.com) notes the Pentagon is denying reports that US bombings killed 22 Iraqi soldiers in Anbar, "Denials from US officials are common, and not always credible. It is hard to imagine, likewise, that the US launched only a single airstrike in the whole Anbar Province in an entire day."  Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) counts 214 dead across Iraq from violence (read her report and not just the headline before you e-mail me that the number is 208).














iraq
abc news
james gordon meek
Brian Ross
rym momtaz
alex hosenball
david muir
abc world news
antiwar.com
margaret griffis
jason ditz