Wednesday, January 23, 2019

A few more thoughts

  1. I am happy that Kamala Harris, the latest Black neoliberal criminal being pushed by the rulers, is running for president and look forward to the sharpening of the internal class struggle in the Black community.


Thank you to those who e-mailed about "Hey, Ruth Graham, maybe not be such a f**king bitch?" and just a few comments on it from me.

First, thank you to Stan and C.I.  Stan wrote about this on his own site with "Are you a pedophile, Nathan Phillips?" so be sure to check that out if you haven't already.  Stan also listened to me on Sunday and Monday.  Thank you so much, Stan.  C.I.?  This isn't a position, the one I took, that the left was taking.  I'm okay with that.  But I thank C.I. who listened to me explain how angry I was and who encouraged me and supported me on writing what I wrote.  For me, the issue is we do not attack children.  The attack on the 16-year-old really ticked me off.  I was so angry that I really couldn't even write.  But I spoke with C.I. and she listened and encouraged and said, "If you need it, I will stay on the phone with you while you write this."  And I did.  I was so angry.  I'd read each line outloud after I'd typed it.  So thank you to C.I.  Always.

For me, the issue is we don't beat up on kids.

If a kid makes a mistake -- and I don't feel Nick did -- we don't put them on blast.  We don't threaten them.  We don't put their personal information up online and try to destroy their lives.

I am the mother of two children.  Like their parents, they are African-American.  If that was my son or my daughter, I would be enraged.  They were being trashed for a look on their face?

I'm sorry, did my kids hit someone, did they spit on someone, did they curse out someone?

Then what is your obsession with this child?

How pathetic is your own life that the only way it has any meaning is if you are able to publicly attack a 16-year-old?

A few of you worried I was giving up blogging because I didn't blog on Tuesday.  I'm sorry.  I didn't think anyone would even think that.

I wanted to leave that up for two days. 

I might have gone for three but my mother also thought that.  When she called me today, I explained I was just leaving it up.  But I did go into the e-mails immediately to see if anyone else thought that.  To those who wrote in, I'm sorry.  If I ever decide to stop, I'll try to remember to leave a sentence stating that clearly.

Oh, please read Elaine's "Nathan Phillips is a disgusting attention whore ."  Thank you for that, Elaine.  She and C.I. spoke and she e-mailed me saying anytime I wanted to take a stand or position that I was worried about, know that she would always stand by me.  Thank you!!!

Thank you to all of you readers who took the time to weigh in.  Two of you disagree and I respect that and thank you for caring enough to engage with me.  I have replied to all the e-mails but I did want to make a point to note that two do disagree with what I posted.  And that's their right.  We all have the right to offer our opinions. 

Thank you to everyone who wrote in to share.  I valued all the input.

This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Wednesday, January 23, 2019.  Let's look at the Kurds.

This morning, REUTERS reports, "A car bomb killed one soldier and injured at least two in a northern Iraqi town near the oil-rich city of Kirkuk on Wednesday, the military and a security source said. The military said in a statement that a member of the security forces was killed. A security source told Reuters that at least two others were wounded."

Oil-rich Kirkuk is a dsiputed region.  Both the Baghdad-based central government and the Kurdistan Regional Government claim it.  Article 140 of the Iraq Constitution offers the measure to settle the dispute.  But Article 140 has never been implemented -- despite the Constitution stating it must be implemented by the end of 2007.  The Rand Corporation noted that the kick the can approach was creating more problems and that was over 12 years ago.

The war never ends and there are no victors -- though the recently released military report has resulted in non-stop stories noting that Iran is declared the winner.  They've gone on and on about that in the last few days -- once the BUZZFEED 'report' on impeachment exploded Friday night.  Friday morning, we were noting the reality of the report: It makes clear that puppets are put in place, which we knew, but that the debate then goes on about whether or not to keep them in place.  The Bully Boy Bush administration talked repeatedly of whether or not they should remove Nouri from office -- and they installed him and they were in power only during Nouri's first term (2006 to 2010 -- May 2006 to November 2010).

"An American consensus across the political spectrum seems to exist that the 2003 Iraq War was a disaster, with no redeeming results. But what this consensus ignores is Iraq’s Kurds. Where would they be today without the US intervention?"

What would it be like for the Iraqi Kurds today without the US led war that began in 2003 and continues to this day?

Probably things would be a lot better.  The US would be giving the Kurds financial support and military aid -- doing that to counter Saddam Hussein.  It's doubtful that the US government would have gotten as in bed with the Turkish government as they did.  They certainly wouldn't have needed the land for the CIA base in southern Turkey so they wouldn't have made as many concessions as they ended up doing to get that base.

Had an attack on the Kurds been carried out by Saddam Hussein, you can be sure that Kurds in the region would have poured into Iraq to defend their own -- and done so quicker than the US could have moved military units in to Iraq to aid the Kurds.

History demonstrates that the US government -- going back to the days of Richard Nixon, at the very least -- promises much to the Kurds but only delivers when they need the Kurds.  They used them to antagonize Iran, for example, under Nixon.  They never stand by the promises to the Kurds, they never truly support them.  They even had them listed as terrorists -- still listed -- as late as Barack Obama's terms as president.

The Kurds have given a great deal over the years, they have received very little.  Based on that, the Kurds would probably be better off today without the US-led war stating back in 2003.

That shouldn't be confusing.  It's an opinion but the question was  asked and, when we respond, we do well to base our call on what has taken place in the past.

It shouldn't be confusing but, for some people, many things are.

I will be paying close attention to Iraq. The Kurds, Sunni, Shia, Jews are all a continued threat to Christians & Christian land. They all want to steal more land & while Shia have been great allies thus far, we'll see if it's all an act there or not. Leave Christians alone

I'm confused by this so-called Angel.  A person can be Sunni, Shia or Kurd and be a Christian -- even in Iraq.  The Shia crackdown on Sunnis who were alcohol vendors -- we do realize that those were Christian Sunnis, right?  And we do realize that when Christians had to flee Baghdad due to violence, they tended to resettle in northern Iraq -- the Kurdish region?  Do we not get that?  Do we not know that there are many Kurds who are Christians?

Angel is creating a world where you are on this side of a line or you are on this other side of a line -- it's not that simple.

Let's go to the simple (WIKIPEDIA) so that the simple-minded might understand:

Kurdish Christians (KurdishKurdên Mesîhî or Kurdên Xirîstiyan[3][4][5]) are Kurds who follow Christianity. Though the majority of Kurds adopted Islam in the Middle Ages, there were Kurdish converts to Christianity even after the spread of Islam. In recent years some Kurds from Muslim backgrounds have converted to Christianity.[6][7]


In the 10th century AD, the Kurdish prince Ibn ad-Dahhak, who possessed the fortress of al-Jafary, abandoned Islam for Orthodox Christianity.[8] In return, the Byzantines gave him land and a fortress. In 927, he and his family were executed during a raid by Thamal, the Arab governor of Tarsus.[9]
In the late 11th and the early 12th century AD, there were Kurdish Christian soldiers in the army of fortress city of Shayzar in present-day Syria.[10]
The Zakarids–Mkhargrdzeli, an Armenian[11][12]–Georgian dynasty of at least partial Kurdish[13][14][15][16][17] origin, ruled parts of northern Armenia in the 13th century AD and tried to reinvigorate intellectual activities by founding new monasteries.[18] At the peak of Kingdom of Georgia the family led the unified Armeno-Georgian army. Two brothers of this family, Zakare and Ivane Mkhargrdzeli led the army to victory in Ani in 1199.
Kurds who converted to Christianity usually turned to the Nestorian Church.[19] In 1884, researchers of the Royal Geographical Society reported about a Kurdish tribe in Sivas which retained certain Christian observances and sometimes identified as Christian.[20]
One of the most prominent Kurdish leaders in Iraqi KurdistanSheikh Ahmed Barzani who was a brother of Mustafa Barzani, announced his conversion to Christianity during his uprising against the Iraqi government in 1931.[21]

Contemporary Kurdish Christians[edit]

The Kurdish-Speaking Church of Christ (The Kurdzman Church of Christ) was established in Hewlêr (Erbil) by the end of 2000, and has branches in the SilêmanîDuhok governorates. This is the first evangelical Kurdish church in Iraq.[22] Its logo is formed of a yellow sun and a cross rising up behind a mountain range. Kurdzman Church of Christ held its first three-day conference in Ainkawa north of Arbil in 2005 with the participation of 300 new Kurdish converts.[23] According to one Kurdish convert, an estimated 500 Kurdish Muslim youths have converted to Christianity since 2006 throughout Kurdistan.[24] A Kurdish convert from the Iraqi military who claims to have transported weapons of mass destruction also stated that a wave of Kurds converting to Christianity is taking in northern Iraq (Iraqi Kurdistan).[25] Part of the English-language New Testament was first available in the Kurdish language in 1856.[26]

See also[edit]


Christianity is a religion.  It's not an ethnicity.

On the Kuridstan Region, ALJAZEERA offers a video report today.

They note:

The first notable, historical mention of the Kurds is widely thought to be the Sharafnama, or The Book of Honour, by the medieval Kurdish poet Sharaf al-Din Bitlisi in 1597. Written by a Kurd about his own people, Sharafnama arguably put Kurdish culture and history on the map.
A people who saw themselves on a par with Persians and Arabs had announced themselves to the world.
The Kurds originate from the mountain regions of the northern Middle East and currently number between 25 million and 35 million and occupy an area spanning the borders of Turkey, Iraq, Syria, Iran and Armenia. They are the fourth largest ethnic group in the region - outnumbered by both Arabs and North Africans - and have a difficult relationship with other ethnic groups and countries in the region. 

The Kurds have anticipated, negotiated, warred and waited to establish their own permanent state since the First World War and the defeat of the Ottoman Empire. But they have been constantly disappointed, not least when Asia Minor was given to the new state of Turkey in 1923.

Staying with the Kurds for a bit more:

Imagine the man who was responsible to crush in & admits that has helped terrorists & jihadists inside , while the world is still silent, & leaving the Kurds who has given 12,000 martyrs in fighting to be invaded by Turkey

Who's he speaking of?  Brett McGurk.  Old Blue Balls himself.  He always had time to cheat on whomever was his wife at the moment.  He did a for-show stunt as the year wound down and some idiots applauded him.  Because, apparently, the now 'left' thing to do is to praise the Bully Boy Bush minions that managed to hang on in government.

Former US Envoy Brett McGurk Admits Most ISIS Support Came Across Turkey-Syria Border. No Kidding Sherlock! It came into Incirlik NATO airbase in Turkey. Map from October 2015

If you don't get how vile he is, Christiane Amanwhore.

Watch my full interview with , former special presidential envoy for the anti-ISIS coalition:

She used her position at CNN to repeatedly insist that the US go to war with Syria.  This was advocacy journalism -- which CNN is not supposed to engage in.  She's always been a nightmare which is why Nora Dunn played a parody of her in the film THREE KINGS.  That was the real Amanwhore.  She's a War Hawk married to a War Hawk.  And America rejects her.  That's why she's on PBS and CNN.  When she had a job that depended on delivering viewers, ABC's THIS WEEK, she was quickly fired -- she couldn't deliver viewers.  People, when they grab their remotes, didn't want to endure her.

The following community sites -- plus DISSIDENT VOICE -- updated:

  • Monday, January 21, 2019

    Hey, Ruth Graham, maybe not be such a f**king bitch?

    We all know not to expect much from a Debra Messing or an Alyssa Milano.

    Two dumb bitches -- and I'm mad and I'll use that word and if you don't like it, kiss my Black ass, that's how mad I am.  Two dumb bitches who love to pretend they care about people of color -- just as long as they don't have to hire them, right?

    Alyssa was a producer near the end of Charmed.  Not when Debbie Morgan was hired to do a handful of episodes in season three.  Not when Dorian Gregory was hired in season one to play Daryl.

    They were the most prominent characters of color, remember?

    Debbie was gone after season three.  When Alyssa became a producer?  Dorian Gregory was fired.

    He wasn't replaced with anyone of color.

    And, of course, Alyssa had countless boyfriends on CHARMED -- a lot of them blond, none of them African-American.  And there were all those witches and white lighters (emphasis on White) and all these people needing help yet the show was White, White, White.

    Alyssa didn't do a damn thing for people of color.  She was a producer of the show. 

    So we know not to expect from her or Debra Messing.

    But seeing some of these Barack people (White ones, of course) who were in administration attacking kids?

    But the worst has to be Slate's f**king bitch Ruth Graham.  This is Ruth after having attacked kids in writing and learning, days later, that the video she saw did not tell the full story:

    In a post I wrote on Saturday, I described the boy’s serene, smug facial expression as “both punchable and untouchable.”
    In the days that followed, new accounts and new angles on the confrontation began to emerge. Nathan Phillips, the Omaha elder and Vietnam War veteran seen in the clip, gave interviews in which he said he approached the teenagers—not the other way around—in order to defuse tension between them and some noisy and vulgar street preachers nearby. Longer videos emerged that showed the street preachers—who belong to a fringe religious group called the Black Hebrew Israelitesthat the Southern Poverty Law Center once described as “[o]bsessed with hatred for whites and Jews”—shouting insults at both the boys and the Native group. Meanwhile, no footage has emerged that shows the teens shouting “Build the wall,” as Phillips and other witnesses have said they did. And on Sunday, the teenager, Nick Sandmann, released a statement in which he identified himself and attempted to “correct misinformation and outright lies.” Sandmann said the students were shouting school-spirit chants to drown out the street preachers, and that Phillips seemed to single him out for confrontation. He describes himself as having “diffused the situation by remaining calm.”
    What a mess. The encounter was indisputably more complicated than it first appeared, and the new accounts certainly chip away at the straightforward narrative of a MAGA teen going out of his way to taunt a Native demonstrator. The discrepancies between initial perceptions of what happened and the facts on the ground have kicked off a predictable cycle of hand-wringing over participation in a too-hasty internet pile-on. “If the Covington Catholic incident was a test, it’s one I failed,” Ohio writer Julie Irwin Zimmerman wrote in the Atlantic, vowing to “sit out” the next outrage cycle. “As I watched the longer videos, I began to see the smirking kid in a different light.”
    I still don’t—or at least not completely. Most accounts, including mine, made no claim that Sandmann first approached Phillips. And it’s worth noting that Sandmann’s actions were seen as aggressive by almost everyone who saw that initial video, including those most inclined to be sympathetic to him.

    You stupid, f**king bitch.  You helped create an online pile on and now you try to justify being wrong by citing the pile on?

    If you don't know, Ruth's a White bitch.  And yeah it matters.  It matters because these people who do nothing for those of us of color are always the first to insist that they are better than other White people, they get us, they really get us.

    No, they don't.  That's why we barely registered on eight seasons of Charmed.  It's not about us, it's never about us.  It's always about how great White people like Ruth Graham want the world to see them as.

    They're awful.

    Ruth's a f**king bitch.  And if that young boy was my child, Nick Sandmann was my kid, I'd be teaching her what "punchable" really was.

    You didn't like the look on the kid's face?  Well f**k you, who asked you?

    He's a 17-year-old kid.  When my son or daughter is 17, Ruth better have learned something by then or I'll teach her what "punchable" really is.

    Leave children alone.

    I don't believe that this Nick Sandmann did anything wrong. 

    But before the full video was available?  Even then, shut your damn mouth if you're an adult.  We're talking about a 16 or 17 year old kid.  So shut your damn mouth.

    We get it, Ruthie, you don't have good sex, you're an ugly woman with a huge neck, a chin that's juts out like a can opener, and butt ugly.  No curves, on you.

    If that's harsh, good.  F**k you, bitch.  You went off on a kid.  Not an adult.

    I've gone off on you.  I'm an adult, you're an adult.

    I didn't go off on a kid.

    You owe Nick Sandmann an apology, you owe his family an apology.

    Your desire to see evil -- so that you would look better -- was so great that it didn't matter to you that Nick's a kid.  It didn't matter that you were an adult.

    You should be ashamed of yourself.

    If I were you, I'd be so embarrassed I'd be thinking about suicide.  I'm serious.  If I had done what you did, I would want to kill myself.

    I wouldn't do it, I've got two kids to raise and a husband I love.  But you should be ashamed of yourself and that's true of all the dog pilers.  You should have backed the hell off.  You really should have backed the hell off.  He's a kid.

    Shame on you.

    This is C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

    Monday, January 21, 2019.  The illegal war hits the 16 year mark in March and the same problems continue to plague Iraq: corruption, inability to resolve the issue of disputed territories, inability to stop attacking protesters, inability to form a Cabinet . . .

    Basra, where protests have been taking place since July over the lack of jobs, the government corruption, the lack of potable water (at least 150,000 people have been hospitalized for drinking the water per Iraqi government figures) and, more recently, the call to release the protesters the government keeps arresting.  Glada Lahn and Nouar Shamout (Chatham House) wade into the issue:

    In spite of the region’s oil wealth and foreign investment, many water treatment plants that should be producing potable water were not built (or upgraded) to deal with the high salt levels. This, together with the poor management of upstream urban sewage, agricultural and industrial effluents that end up in the river, was responsible for this summer’s contamination. There is an ongoing legal investigation into why 13 desalination plants provided by donor countries during the reconstruction have not been working since their completion in 2006.
    But this is also a problem that crosses national boundaries. Al-Basra governorate is wedged between Iran and Kuwait, with its Shatt Al-Arab River leading to out into the Persian Gulf. Turkey, Syria and Iraq contribute through the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers, both of which join to form the Shatt Al-Arab at Al Qurnah. About 71 per cent of the flow comes from the Tigris and the Euphrates, the remainder from the Iranian rivers Karkheh and Karun (opens in new window). Basra city, the economic capital of Iraq, and its suburbs are heavily dependent on Shatt Al-Arab River to meet demands for water. 
    Historically, Basra city was famous for its date palms, fruits and vegetables. But this has changed as, with few agreements and no real governance of transboundary water, downstream flow has declined dramatically. 
    Turkey, Syria, Iran and northern Iraq have over the last 40 years erected 56 large dams, including many for hydroelectric power, along the Tigris and Euphrates basins, and enlarged agricultural (mainly flood) irrigation. The Euphrates River has lost more than 40 per cent of its flow since 1972.
    Meanwhile, population in the region has increased almost eightfold to 130 million over the last century, with rising demand for fresh water. And climate change is increasing evaporation in summer.

    Basra's a very serious issue and has been for months now.  Finally, the prime minister. Adil Abdul Mahdi, decided to visit yesterday.

    Iraqi PM visited oil rich, protest ridden, service & infrastructure poor for the first time since becoming PM on October 2, 2018. wants to become autonomous region like Region of Iraq ().

    How did the visit go?

    Also, the Iraqi PM Adel AbdulMehdi during his visit to city checked a hospital inside the city via cellphone flashlights, as the electricity inside the hospital has been unstable for ages.

    That about says it all.

    Saturday, protesters threw rocks at the police leading AP, ANTIWAR.COM and others to suddenly offer headlines of "violence."  Last week, a protester was shot in the back by police but there were no headlines of "violence."  "Violence," apparently, only takes place when the corrupt police are hit with rocks, not when they fire bullets at protesters.  This was at least the fifth time in the last few weeks that police have fired on protesters.  But, hey, that's not violence.  Throw a few rocks at the police and that's suddenly "violence."  From Saturday:

    What were the protesters protesting on Friday?

    The same things that they have been protesting all along with one addition.

    They had a new call but you won't find that in any US press -- not even the 'independent' press.

    From PARS TODAY:

    Neben dem Ruf nach Beendigung der desolaten Wirtschaftslage in ihrer Stadt forderte die Demonstranten auch die Freilassung aller Demonstranten, die vor einigen Tagen bei Protesten in der Region "Ezzadin Salim" festgenommen worden sind.

    The new demand is a call for the release of the protesters who were arrested earlier this week.

    The same US outlets that ignore that demand ignored the arrest of the protesters earlier this week.  From the January 15th snapshot:

    ALSUMARIA reports Basra Operations Command announced yesterday that they will be releasing protesters . . . shortly.  They insist that this is for the "protection" of the activists.  These protesters were demonstrating yesterday.  And "protection" included, apparently, also shooting one protester in the back.  That's at least the fourth time in recent weeks that Basra Operations Command have used "live ammo" on activists.   The third time was this past Friday.

    The Chatham House report, noted at the top of the snapshot, concludes:

    A recent fact-finding mission to Basra by the Norwegian Refugee Council recommends that donor governments support the development of a framework that supports more equitable water sharing. It is in the interests of those who share the rivers to work on it together as an urgent diplomatic necessity. Cleaning up and enabling ecological regeneration will take a comprehensive effort and integrated action plan involving all the states concerned.

    That is hilarious.  Will they also support resolving the issue of Kirkuk?

    Remember that?  They were going to help there.  Nothing happened.  It's written into the 2005 Constitution, Article 140, that the issue of who controls Kirkuk -- the central government out of Baghdad or the Kurdistan Regional Government -- would be decides by a referendum to be held no later than the end of 2007.

    That referendum never got held.

    Despite the Rand Corporation noting it was a fault-line that had to be addressed.  Despite US forces having to repeatedly mediate over the issue.  It's now 2019 and the issue is still not resolved.

    Last month, the International Crisis Group offered:

    What’s new? Following parliamentary and regional elections this year, Baghdad and Erbil are forming new governments. This presents a fresh opportunity to settle longstanding disputes between them. One of their principal disputes concerns the status of disputed territories, so defined in the Iraqi constitution.
    Why does it matter? In response to a Kurdish independence referendum in 2017, Iraqi forces re-took disputed territories from Kurdish parties’ control. This event shows that the conflict over Kirkuk and its oil fields remains explosive and could reignite without efforts to resolve it.

    What should be done? The UN should revive its stillborn mediation effort of a decade ago and work with regional and international partners to bring the two sides to the table and settle the issues dividing them. In particular, it should work to reach a permanent deal on the disputed territories.

    The International Crisis Group maintains:

      In assuming this task, the incoming UNAMI chief, Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert, should start by testing the political waters, increasing staff dedicated to the issue and developing a strategy for addressing it. In the meantime, the UN should help defuse the fallout between Baghdad and Erbil from the independence referendum, when the federal government and Iran took punitive measures against the Kurdish region by banning international flights and blocking Kirkuk oil from flowing through the Kurdish pipeline to Turkey. The government has reversed some of these measures, but talks on remaining ones are ongoing and the UN can shepherd them to a successful conclusion. Next, UNAMI should start negotiations focusing on “low-hanging fruit”, such as joint security mechanisms in the disputed territories that would prevent ISIS from exploiting security gaps between contending military actors. Ultimately, UNAMI should focus the two sides on the big questions: revenue sharing (not discussed in this report) and the status of the disputed territories.

    The alternative is letting the issue linger and hoping that it does not turn violent again. Yet the Kurdish aspiration to incorporate the disputed territories into the Kurdish region is undiminished, as is Baghdad’s determination not to give them up. Another violent spasm is just a matter of time, as predictable as the swing of a pendulum. Negotiating a political settlement is a sensible move now that the local and international environments are both conducive to a new UN-led initiative.

    It's interesting how the 'answer' is always to hold more talks and then decide what to do.  The 2005 Constitution was agreed to and signed off on.  Article 140 makes clear how the issue is to be resolved.  Apparently, allowing the Iraqi people themselves to settle it is not a move favored by the 'great thinkers' floating on clouds above the actual issue.

    Iraq has had the most inept governance since the US-led invasion.  Puppets are installed  and then kept in power with the hopes that they will deliver US aims.  We reviewed this in Friday's snapshot when we covered the newly released military reports "The U.S. Army in the Iraq War – Volume 1: Invasion – Insurgency – Civil War, 2003-2006" and "The U.S. Army in the Iraq War — Volume 2: Surge and Withdrawal, 2007-2011." From the second volume:

    When it came to Maliki’s commitment to stand up to JAM and mitigate its overtly sectarian agenda, the President voiced similar doubts, finding it ironic that the Iraqi Prime Minister seemed to be the principal “roadblock” to a renewed U.S. effort to stabi- lize the country. “How do we give [Maliki] responsibility without causing a disaster?” Bush asked. When Casey mentioned that Maliki “lacked political will,” the President responded, “One option is to find someone else.” In its discussion the following day, the group revisited the possibility of replacing the Prime Minister. Abizaid observed that he had “yet to see Maliki show backbone on anything” and thus saw danger in basing the “new way forward” on the Iraqi leader’s political will. Bush reiterated his desire for something “dramatic” or “game-changing.” The “new way forward”—whatever form it took—would have to “put us in a position where we can win.” He again suggested that it might be “time to choose somebody else,” but Khalilzad and the secretary of state con- vinced him that positioning Maliki for success was the more prudent course. 

    Puppets.  And that's what they based their 'strategy' on.  They would put a puppet in place and the puppet would deliver.  The puppet never delivered.  Some 'strategy.'

    And the latest puppet?  A complete failure.  Abdil Abdul Mahdi.  Made prime minister in October.  Remember that?  How do you move from prime minister-designate to prime minister?  Per the Constitution, you form a Cabient.  That is your test.  Your only test.  But Mahdi couldn't form a Cabinet in October.  They went ahead and moved him over anyway.


    ’s New Prime Minister Forms Government Five Months After Election - WSJ -Parliament approved 14 of 22 ministers nominated by Prime Minister Adel but several key posts including Interior and Defense are yet to be agreed upon ..

    Guess what?

    All these months later, there is still no Minister of the Interior (over Iraq's security forces) or Minister of Defense (over Iraq's military forces).

    All these months later.

    It gets worse.

    Parliamentary sources reported that the completion of Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdul Mahdi's cabinet will likely be delayed until the next legislative term in the spring due to continued disagreements between the two major blocs in .

    The only test for someone named prime minister designate is to form the Cabinet.  Forming the Cabinet is supposed to demonstrate that you can govern, you can get votes, you can work with others.

    Mahdi has failed.  Repeatedly.  And now he's being given time to wait until spring?

    Remember back in November when he threatened to quit?  He should be confronted with that and asked, "When?"

    He is a failure and the western press looks the other way and treats him with kid gloves.  Why?  Because US government policy for Iraq remains to focus on personalities and not results.  Prop up the person and the person will deliver.  Only it hasn't happened.  Not once.

    Jane Arraf did not the report in a series of Tweet and even that Nouri could be replaced.

    Insights from the US Army's extraordinary new history of the war - 'a war that is not over yet' based on declassified documents: In 2006 run-up to military surge US commanders considered trying to replace PM .

    Of course, she leaves it at "US commanders" -- when they are noted in the second volume but the highest person floating replacing Nouri in that report is Bully Boy Bush who occupied the White House at that time.

    She Tweeted the following as well:

    Analysis says Maliki's sectarianism, authoritarianism later increased as US presence decreased. Post 2011 US withdrawal, 'his actions hollowed out the Iraqi security forces', pushed some Sunnis to rejoin extremists Says Maliki's decisions benefited him more than the Iraqi state.

    Details moment where US commanding general switches from talk of 'winning' to 'succeeding', says Maliki government focus on Shiite dominance drove moderate Sunnis closer to al-Qaeda. It's a history that's widely accepted but now painstakingly, officially documented by the US Army

    And that Tweet goes to the limitation of the report as well as the limitation of our 'press.'

    She's referring to Nouri's second term.  But it was 2008 when the world should have been paying attention.  Is she unaware of The Petraeus and Crocker Show -- where the two paraded in front of Congressional Committees for a week.  It was Senator Barbara Boxer who asked why the US taxpayer was paying the Sons of Iraq?  Why  the US taxpayer and not the Iraqi government?  These were Sunnis (largely Sunnis, David Petraeus said) who had fought against the US but were now being paid to stop attacking the US.  They were becoming a force to patrol and secure.  And Boxer wanted to know when the Iraqi government planned to pick up the slack?

    Supposedly, it was going to happen.  But it didn't.  Not in 2008.  Not in 2009.  Not in 2010.

    That was all Nouri's first term.  It was also in his first term that the world learned he was running torture chambers and secret prisons.  But the point was to look away, let Barack Obama give him a second term (via The Erbil Agreement after Iraqi voters rejected him) and pretend and hope that Nouri would deliver.

    What he ended up delivering was ISIS in Iraq.

    New content at THIRD: