|
Thursday,
April 19, 2012. Chaos and violence continue, Iraq is slammed with
violence, former US Ambassador to Iraq Chris Hill mocked the
assassination of JFK (while being paid by US taxpayers), Tareq
al-Hashemi talks to the BBC about future steps in Iraq, Nouri continues
his war with ExxonMobil, and more.
Al Arabiya reports,
"More than 20 bombs hit cities and towns across Iraq on Thursday,
killing at least 36 and wounding more than 100, police and hospital
sources said, raising fears of sectarian strife in a country keen to
show it can now maintain security." Adnkronos International quotes
Baghdad security chief Diya al-Wakil saying of the attacks, "It's an
attempt to cause our efforts to return security to the country to
collapse. It's a way to make the Iraqi people have a bad opinion about
our work." Jane Arraf (Al Jazeera) explains "The blasts were a series of co-ordinated attacks in Baghdad and northern cities but mostly within Shia neighbourhoods." Prensa Latina notes,
"An Interior Ministry's spokesman said the first explosion occurred at
rush hour this morning, when a car bomb exploded in the Shiite
neighborhood of Kazimiyah, in northern Baghdad, killing three and
injuring 11." The Belfast Telegraph adds,
"Extremists launched 12 attacks in the Iraqi capital and in the cities
of Kirkuk, Samarra, Baqouba, Dibis and Taji. Mortars were fired into the
northern cities of Beiji and Saddam Hussein's hometown of Tikrit, but
no injuries were reported there." UPI counts 35 dead and over seventy-three injured while the Voice of Russia counts 36 dead and over one hundred dead. ITV also goes with 36 killed. Salam Faraj (AFP) counts
it out this way, "Twenty-two civilians, eight police, three members of
an anti-Qaeda militia and two soldiers were killed in dozens of attacks,
including 14 separate car bombings." Alsumaria puts the number injured at over 146. As the day ended, AFP noted the death toll -- per security officials -- had risen to 38 with over one-hundred and sixty people wounded.
The
Special Representative of the United Nations Secretary-General (SRSG)
for Iraq, Mr. Martin Kobler, condemned in the strongest terms the series
of bomb attacks that took place today across Iraq and that have
reportedly resulted in dozens of deaths and injuries.
SRSG
Kobler expressed concern at the continuation of violence in the country
and the targeting of security officials and personnel as well as the
indiscriminate attacks on civilians. "These horrendous crimes being
committed against the Iraqi people need to stop for Iraq to achieve the
prosperous and secure future its people duly deserve," SRSG Kobler said.
SRSG
Kobler reiterated the need for all Iraqis to work together to end the
hideous crimes being committed against the Iraqi people to hamper its
success as a democratic, stable and prosperous nation.
SRSG
Kobler extends his condolences to the families of those who were killed
and his wishes for the speedy recovery of those who were injured, and
called on the Iraqi people to remain steadfast in the face of the
attempts to derail Iraq's quest for a better future.
This would be a good place to note the lousy performance of the US State Dept, but we'll pick that up after the day's violence.
The Los Angeles Times explains,
"The attacks drew sharp criticism of the country's security apparatus,
with Maysoon Damalooji, spokeswoman for the Iraqiya political bloc,
saying they reflected planning weakness. Parliament Speaker Usama
Nujaifi demanded that leaders of the security forces bear
responsibility." Peter Cave (Radio Australia News)quotes
Maysoon al-Damaluji stating, "The continuation of bloody explosions,
although it has been already announced that tight security measures have
been taken, reflects the weak security plans and the necessity to
reconsider them. The commander of the armed forces [Nouri al-Maliki] is
responsible for providing security and complete safety for citizens."
Alsumaria reports
that the Kirkuk Provincial Council is calling for all security plans to
be reviewed stating that the plans clearly are not preventing attacks
or providing security. John Glaser (Antiwar.com) offers, "Many criticize Maliki with being preoccupied with his own authority instead of ensuring security in the country." Al Bawaba also stresses
that perception, "These attacks occur amid a highly tense political
climate. Several political parties have accused Prime Minister Nouri
al-Maliki, who is in office since 2006, of seeking to impose a new
dictatorship in Iraq."
Last month, Iraq Body Count
reported at least 295 people died from violence in Iraq. And that March
total came about only after Baghdad was under lockdown for a full week
in the days leading up to the Arab League Summit. Already this week, Xinhua has reported 13 dead in Monday's violence alone (nine injured). BBC News (link is text and video) breaks down today's violence as follows: In Baghdad, a series of at least five blasts struck in various Shia neighbourhoodsPolice say two car bombs went off in Kirkuk, 180 miles (290km) north of BaghdadA suicide bomber killed a police officer in Baquba, an army officer saidTwo car bombs targeted security forces in SamarraA parked car exploded killing passers-by in DibisA roadside device exploded in TajiRami
Ruhayem declares, "The targets have been varied. Some of them are
civilian targets such as shops, Iranian pilgrims in Baghdad and also
army and police forces." Richard Spencer (Telegraph of London) observes,
"Five members of the Sahwa, or Awakening Council, a Sunni militia
formed by the American forces before they left the country to combat
Al-Qaeda in their own areas, were killed in a bomb attack on a
checkpoint in Samarra." Deutsche Welle adds, "The blasts unfolded closely, over an hour and a quarter." Xinhua notes there were car bombs, roadside bombs, suicide bombs and shootings. Press TV states,
"Police officials in the provincial capital city of Mosul in Nineveh
said three people sustained injuries in a bomb attack carried out in a
restaurant." ITN quotes
a wounded police officer in Kirkuk stating, "I was trying to stop
traffic to let a police patrol pass. When it passed, a car bomb exploded
and I fell on the ground and police took me to the hospital."
In addition to the above, Alsumaria notes a Baiji refinery came under a mortar attack causing minor damage to the refinery and fence but leaving one worker injured.
While
the UN spoke clearly, the US State Dept continued its role as eternal
disappointment. Spokesperson Mark C. Toner handled the breifing today
and wouldn't have even raised the issue of Iraq if, in the last five, the issue of Iraq and a meeting with Iran May 23rd to discuss nuclear issues, hadn't been raised. Once the issue was raised, the spokesperson suddenly remembered Iraq.
Mark
C. Toner: Oh, absolutely. We are -- first of all, I want to strongly
condemn today's attacks. Targeting of innocent civilians is
unacceptable; it's cowardly. And we obviously offer our condolences to
the victims. But we are -- they just hosted a very successful Arab
League Summit and we have every confidence that they can host this
meeting.
The
State Dept spends more on Iraq than any other country. They claim they
need 6 billion dollars yearly and aren't prepared to say when that
'need' might end but admit to Congress that it will be "years." Yet as
violence sweeps Iraq today, they can't even think to weigh in on the
subject? They have to be asked to remember? And that's in the last three
minutes of a lengthy press conference?
Someone
needs to explain it to the State Dept. First, if you ask the American
people if the State Dept needs $6 billion annually just for Iraq, the
answer back is going to be NO. Not by a plurality but by a strong
majority. Second, if you're spending taxpayer money, taxpayers have a
right to expect updates. Under Barack Obama (US President) and Hillary
Clinton (Secretary of State), the State Department has become as
secretive as the Department of Justice under Bully Boy Bush -- and
that's nothing to be proud of. The secrecy is evident in the continued
attacks on Foreign Service Officer Peter Van Buren. At his blog today,
Van Buren's notes the violence in this post and the US Embassy in Baghdad's silence as well as including a photo that was also up in a post yesterday while everyone was focused on the US official who received a blow job on a Baghdad roof.
The photo is of former US Ambassador to Iraq Chris Hill. It's Halloween
and some woman has dressed as then-Jackie Kennedy which is in poor
taste since she and Chris Hill are a 'couple' (at least for Halloween).
Hill's dressed as? A Secret Service bodyguard of JFK's.
That's
not funny. I hate Bill Maher, but if he did it, I wouldn't care. I
wouldn't care about any private citizen. But Hill was the US Ambassador
to Baghdad and he thought it was hilarious to mock the day JFK was
assassinated? What kind of leadership did this asshole provide?
All
the manic depressive kook did was rip apart the diplomtic ground work
Ryan Crocker had established. Hill was afraid of Nouri al-Maliki. Gen
Ray Odierno had to repeatedly calm the fretful Chris Hill down. So not
only was he not up to the job (as we said in real time after he appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee),
he was a total creep. What he did was disgusting and that he did it an
Embassy Halloween function? Chris Hill needs to be loudly condemned. I
knew he was an ass and I knew he was an idiot but I was passed his
personnel file before he was confirmed. Based on that record alone, he
shouldn't have been confirmed.
But
to now find out that the ass thought it was appropriate to mock one of
the worst days in American history? To dress up as a Secret Service
agent who wasn't able to protect Kennedy and some State Dept Woman
(referred to as SDW from this point on) who thought she could dress up
as Jackie Kennedy from the same day? Cause what's funnier than seeing
your husband shot dead before your eyes? What's funnier than have
bullets flying all around you?
Did Jacqueline
Kenney Onassis really deserve that 'joke'? She conducted herself on the
day and the immediate days after in a manner that still sets a standard
for First Ladies. And some employee of the State Dept thinks they can
go to a department party mocking her? Mocking her on what was one of
the scariest and saddest days of her life?
(FYI,
SDW is an idiot for many reasons including her pink ensemble isn't what
Jackie was wearing that day -- Jackie had on a pink skirt, a black top,
a pink jacket and a pink hat, the idiot doesn't even the outfit right.)
And Chris Hill didn't just give it a thumbs up
which would have been bad enough, he actively participated in the sick
'joke' by dressing as a Secret Service agent. (In fairness to the
Secret Service which is under fire right now, it should be noted that
the 'joke' was in poor taste to their efforts that November day as
well.)
That is disgusting. That is offensive and
grasp, please grasp, that Hill was supposed to be a diplomat. He's an
idiot and he owes the American people an apology. That little stunt
wasn't funny and it wasn't cute. Apparently, if he'd remained in
government service, he'd be dressed as a 9-11 victim this year and his
date as the Twin Towers. This was beyond tasteless. Chris Hill needs to
answer for this. And I think Hillary does as well. What did the White
House think when they learned Chris Hill, at a party in Baghdad, thought
it would be funny to lampoon the assassination of JFK?
That is beyond tacky, it's beyond offensive, there's no excuse for it. Chris Hill is trash, 100% trash.
Tacky? Offensive? Nouri al-Maliki.
As
he's pushed his power-grab, he's targeted nearly every classification
in Iraq. In December, he was targeting Deputy Prime Minister Saleh
al-Mutlaq (demanding he be stripped of his post) and Vice President
Tareq al-Hashemi (demanding he be arrested for 'terrorism.' Until
recently, al-Hashemi was in the KRG which provided him with asylum. He
is currently on a diplomatic mission and has visited Qatar, Saudi Arabia
and now Turkey.
From Turkey, he spoke with the BBC (link is text and audio) today and explained,
"The difference is now between me and Maliki. It's the difference
between somebody who is interested in democratic model in the Middle
East and somebody else who's still very much interested in divert the
political process into some sort of autocractic regime. This is the
basic difference, in fact." He also stated that he intends to return to
the KRG and that, whent he political crisis is over, he intends to
return to Baghdad.
Al Sabaah notes
the National Alliance's call for a return to the Erbil Agreement. The
Erbil Agreement ended Political Stalemate I, eight months of gridlock
following the March 2010 elections. The US-brokered agreement managed
that feat by getting all sides to make concessions. The White House
wanted Nouri al-Maliki to have a second term as prime minister so that
was the biggest concessions after Nouri's State of Law came in second
place in the elections. But Nouri agreed to minor concessions to hold
onto the post. This was November 2010. By the end of December, after he
was named prime minister for a second term, he trashed the agreement.
This is Political Stalemate II and the current crisis. National Alliance
MP Hassan Sinead notes they remain committed to the Erbil Agreement,
they have not rejected it and the agreement is an example of solidarity
for Iraq so it is the responsibility of the political blocs, the
Parliament, the executive branch and the judicial branch to implement
the agreement. Kitabat notes
Moqtada al-Sadr's call for his followers to direct their questions
about the political impasse towards Nouri. As noted yesterday, these
events may indicate some motion in the impasse. Dar Addustour notes
that the National Alliance has postponed a scheduled meeting; however,
one component of the National Alliance, the Islamic Supreme Council of
Iraq, has announced that they aren't opposed to someone from the
Sadrist bloc being nominated for prime minister (that refers to
Moqtada). An MP from State of Law and one from Sadr's bloc are both
quoted insisting that there's no move to hold a vote to withdraw
confidence in the current government. With BBC today, Vice President
Tareq al-Hashemi declared of his meeting in Istanbul with KRG President
Massoud Barzan:
I'm
scheduled to meet Mr. Barzani this afternoon. We had an agreement on
various steps and this step is going to be escalated depending on the
reaction of Maliki. If Maliki responded positively we will be very much
happy to sit down and negotiate in a courageous way. If he declined to
attend then definitely we have to go into other options. And the other
option could be a vote for confidence. This has already been agreed
principally to. This could be a political opportunity to sort out our
political differences.
Elsewhere, Salah Nasrawi (Al-Ahram) concludes
of the current crisis, "What happens next is largely al-Maliki's
choice. He could respond to the pressure for change by sharing power
with others, or he could go his own way. His record in government and
rhetoric suggest that he will lean towards the second course." Rebwar Karim Wali (Rudaw) offers this reflection on the political crisis:
Iraq
is in deep crisis and it is nothing new. It is not that Iraq has
started moving toward dictatorship and totalitarianism just now. No! And
in fact the Americans and Kurds have contributed to the creation of the
dictator. The constitution of the "New Iraq" does not stipulate a just
power sharing among the country's various components. That is the main
reason as to why the situation has ended up where it is now.
The
Kurds thought they were able to devolve the powers through the Erbil
agreement of 2010, but that agreement only gave legitimacy to the
current system. Iraq's constitution was violated the day Ayad Allawi's
Iraqiya bloc won the elections and was not allowed to form the
government. Instead, it was Maliki's bloc that formed the government.
Both then and now, the Kurds were part of creating a new dictator in
Iraq.
Daniel Fineren (Reuters) reports
that, at this point, ExxonMobil is not on Iraq's "list of 47
pre-qualified bidders for the next round of Iraq energy exploration
rights." For any wondering, Total is among the 47. In the press release,
the Ministry of Oil notes: The
Petroleum Contracts and Licensing Directorate (PCLD) at the Ministry of
Oil announced Thursday (20/4/2012) that Iraq's Fourth Petroleum
Licensing Round will take place as scheduled on May 30-31, 2012. The
Final Tender Protocol and the final model Exploration, Development and
Production Service Contract (EDPSC) were sent Thursday to all
prequalified companies. The final list of prequalified companies
includes a total of 47 entities, split between operators and
non-operators."We are
happy to announce that the next bid round is on schedule. The Final
Tender Protocol and the definitive model Contract have been issued to
all prequalified companies" said Abdul Mahdy Al-Ameedi, director general
of the PCLD.Iraq is
offering 12 large exploration blocks of an average size of 6,500 square
kilometers for bidding. Winning companies, or consortia of companies,
will carry out exploration, appraisal, development and production
activities within the 12 Contract Areas.The
aim of the fourth round is primarily to expand Iraq's natural gas
production capacity to satisfy the power generation sector and create
gas-based industries, as well as increase the country's oil reserves."We
are looking forward to welcoming all participating companies in
Baghdad. The fourth licensing round will be conducted in a transparent
and public manner and according to the same procedures as the first
three rounds," Al-Ameedi said. Since
launching the first licensing round in 2008, Iraq has awarded 14
service contracts for the development of discovered oil and gas fields
in three licensing rounds in addition to the Ahdeb contract. It also
signed a major joint venture with a consortium of Royal Dutch Shell and
Mitsubishi to capture and monetize associated natural gas produced in
southern Iraq.The press release continues with a list of the 47 companies. AP speaks
with Sabah al-Saidi ("Deputy head of the Oil Ministry's Licensing and
Petroleum Contracts Department") who states, "Exxon has been removed
from the list of qualified companies because it refused to abandon the
deals with the Kurdish region as requested by the Ministry of Oil."
Dropping back to yesterday's snapshot: Reuters reports,
"Exxon Mobil has told Baghdad it will not break ground on its oil
blocs in the semi-autonomous Kurdish north until the centeral government
approves the contracts, Iraq's top energy official said on Wednesday."
The official is Deputy Prime Minister for Energy Hussain al-Shahristani.
That alone makes the claim questionable -- remember, April 3rd,
he was in the news for insisting the Kurds were secretly selling oil to
Iran. He's not seen as someone impartial or particularly honest.And
apparently for good reason, he's not seen as someone impartial or
particularly honest. So we're pleased with ExxonMobil one day for
allegedly promising it won't "break ground" with regards to that
contract and the next day we're punishing it? Iraq better figure
out where they stand on ExxonMobil real quick because this isn't about
ExxonMobil, this is about how Iraq looks on the world stage. Contracts
were signed months ago. Are they valid or not? If they're not valid,
then they don't exist. If they don't exist, then why is ExxonMobil being
punished? The punishment phase would indicate that the contracts
are valid (the KRG certainly considers them valid). It's petty and
indicates the Baghdad-based government has no eral power so they just
lash out. Iraq needs to diversify its economy and it needs to do
so quickly. It also keeps insisting it needs international investment.
If that's true, they need to stop alienating businesses and looking so
ridiculous. A contract's legal or it's not. Clearly for all the bluster,
Baghdad can't cancel the contract ExxonMobil signed with the KRG. So
they think they'll pick a fight. ExxonMobil's not going to be hurt by
any of this. They're a multi-national corporation that managed to
survive the Exxon Valdez disaster. Whether Nouri will survive is a
political question. But everything he's currently doing on the world
stage -- from the power grab to the nonsense on the ExxonMobil
contracts, is bad for Iraq and creates the wrong image for the country.
In the US, Senator Patty Murray chairs the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee. Her office notes:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Thursday, April 19, 2012
Contact: Murray Press Office
(202) 224-2834
Senator Murray's Statement on VA Hiring Announcement
(Washington,
D.C.) -- Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray, Chairman of the Senate
Veterans' Affairs Committee, made the following statement after the VA
announced that it would be moving to hire 1,600 mental health care
professionals. The announcement comes just days before the findings of a
major VA Inspector General report that Senator Murray requested on long
wait times for VA mental health care are expected to be announced.
VA's action is welcome news to Senator Murray who has held multiple
hearings over the past year on overcoming barriers to VA mental health
care. Murray will hold a third hearing on this subject in order to hear
the Inspector General's findings on Wednesday, April 25th.
"I
am pleased that the VA has taken this desperately needed step toward
providing timely access to mental health care. Too often we have seen
staff vacancies, scheduling delays, and red tape leave those veterans
who have been brave enough to seek help in the first place left with
nowhere to turn. With suicide rates that continue to be high and an
influx of new veterans into the system these barriers to mental health
care are completely unacceptable. I look forward to fighting for the
resources needed to meet this staffing request as it is clearly a cost
of the decade of war that has taken such a toll on our veterans and
their families."
###
Communications Director
U.S. Senator Patty Murray
202-224-2834 - press office
202--224-0228 - direct
| 
No comments:
Post a Comment