|
Thursday,
October 4, 2012. Chaos and violence continue, Iraq executes 6 more
people, Jalal continues his listening tour, Barack Obama's campaign
accuses Mitt Romney of wanting to go back into Iraq, Congress calls out
the administration's refusal to follow the law (with regard to military
purchases), tensions continue between Turkey and Iraq, and more.
AMY GOODMAN: As Democracy Now! expands the debate, we put that question, "how would you create more jobs," to the Green Party's Dr. Jill Stein.
DR. JILL STEIN: Thank you, and thank you so much for expanding this debate tonight, as you so often do, Amy, here on Democracy Now!
So, first just want to acknowledge the crisis is not getting better. We
still very much still have a crisis in our economy. One out of two
Americans are in poverty or living at a low income and heading towards
poverty. About 25 million people are either jobless or working in jobs
that do not pay living wages. There are millions of people who've lost
their homes, approximately 8 million. There is no end in sight to the
foreclosure crisis. And we have an entire generation of students who are
effectively indentured servants, who are trapped in unforgiving loans
and do not have the jobs to pay them back with unemployment and
underemployment rate of about 50% among our young people.
So,
we very much need new solutions. What we hear, really, from both Barack
Obama and Mitt Romney are essentially a rehash of where we have been
not only for the past four years, but certainly for the eight years
before that. We're hearing more about deregulating business and Wall
Street, as if we didn't have enough problem from that already. We're
hearing more about more tax breaks for the wealthy, and we've seen tax
breaks continue over the past many decades across all sectors of the tax
code to where the wealthy are not paying their fair share now. We're
hearing more about energy, dirty energy.
So,
we are calling for a Green New Deal modeled after the New Deal that
actually got us out of the Great Depression. They created approximately 4
million jobs in as little as two months. So, there is a lot that we can
do if we put our mind to it. We're calling for jobs created at the
level of our communities that are nationally funded and which put
decisions in the hands of the community about which kinds of jobs they
need both in the green economy and meeting their social needs, that
would be focused and controlled locally, but funded at the national
level.
AMY GOODMAN: Justice Party presidential candidate Rocky Anderson, how to create jobs?
ROCKY ANDERSON:
Well, President Obama would like us to ignore what is happening is past
four years. Granted, he came into a tough situation, but we have to
consider that during the last 43 months we have had more than 8%
unemployment. It is the only time in this nation's history that we have
had a president that has presided even over three years of over 8%
unemployment. The fact is, that those 43 months of over 8% unemployment
during President Obama's term is four months more than all of the months
of over 8% unemployment from 1948 until President Obama's inauguration.
He talks about recovery, all the new jobs. The fact is, that in the
downturn, 60% of the jobs lost were mid skill and mid paying jobs, and
only 20% of the new jobs during the so-called recovery are of that
category; the mid skill and mid paying jobs.
Most
of the jobs are low-paying jobs, these new jobs he brags about are in
retail sales and food preparation. So, there are things that have been
proven in our history to work. We could have put in place, and it needs
to be put in immediately, a WPA
Works Progress Administration kind of program where we are investing in
the future by building up our nation's rapidly deteriorating
infrastructure, putting people to work. In the WPA
project they 8.5 million people to work. We could be putting 20 million
to 25 million people to work and making that kind of investment in our
nation's future.
We
need to renegotiate the outrageous free trade agreements and make sure
they are fair trade so that we're not discriminating against those
employers who want to hire the United States workers and also we need to
get a handle on health care costs, because there are a tremendous
competitive disadvantages because of the cost of health care in this
country.
The
same questions received real answers when the invitation list became
more inclusive. Something to remember if you watch the rest of the
debates on the corporate-sponsored, corporate-owned debates on the
corporate networks and the semi-corporate PBS.
What most Americans saw last night was the debate between Barack and Mitt only. As Ava and I noted this morning,
Governor Romney mopped the floor with President Obama -- the latter
coming off petulant and bitchy. As if to prove our point, Barack began
making comments about Big Bird today that were, yes, petulant and
bitchy. The Los Angeles Times takes a reading of reporters and journalists (and Tom Hayden) and we'll note this from it, " Doyle McManus: Bottom line: Romney won. The question now is whether Romney can turn one good night into four good weeks." CNN and ORC International's poll found 67% of those watching the debate said Mitt won. Cindy Sheehan (Cindy Sheehan's Soapbox) offers
this analysis, "Blue Tie went first and went on a long rant on how his
presidency has basically been a failure at this, but of course, blaiming
(with some verity) the Red Tie that went before him. However, give
Blue Tie another four years with failed policies and things will get
better this time, he swears on a stack of holy Federal Reserve Notes.
("I really mean it this time, Baby"). Then Red Tie talked a lot about
"middle income" people. Both Ties talked a lot about the "Middle
Class." Well, the term "Middle Class" is a ruling class diversion
from the fact that the USA has the widest (and growing wider) income
disparity in the so-called industrial world. That's an inconvenient
fact that the Scoundrels
don't want us to know, now isn't it?"
First,
Obama's personality. In an earlier life, I spent a lot of time studying
the psychoanalytic literature on narcissism. It was all part of a study
of canonical American poetry, where I thought that the imperial
grandiosity of the American imaginary could be illuminated by examining
its underlying narcissism. But all that is by way of saying I'm not
using this term recklessly. I think there's a lot of the narcissist
about Obama. There's something chilly and empty about him. Unlike Bill
Clinton, he doesn't revel in human company. It makes him uncomfortable.
He wants the rich and powerful to love him, but doesn't care about the
masses (unless they're a remote but adoring crowd). Many people seem to
bore him. It shows.
That's a text link, but if you'd like to hear Doug in audio form, he continues to host Behind The News which now broadcasts Thursday at 1:00 p.m. Pacific Time on KPFA ( click here for KPFA archive and here for the LBO archive -- which doesn't have the full show yet but will in a few days). Susan (On the Edge) also notes
Henwood and she shares this opinion of Barack's performance, "In my
view, his performance last night is a reflection of how he deals with
Republicans in Washington. He doesn't really fight when attacked; he
folds like a lawn chair. The reason he does that isn't so much to
appease them than it is he truly is one of them." Joshua Frank and Jeffrey St. Clair (CounterPunch) add,
"It was clear Obama, ill-prepared and perhaps on a sedative himself,
was not expecting much in the way of competition. Typically reserved
and aloof in front of the bright lights and big cameras, Obama was cool
to the point of frigidity. Lost without his teleprompter, Obama
stumbled over his talking points on numerous occasions." At The Confluence, Riverdaughter notes:
… for someone to kick the s[**]t out of Obama.
And last night gave them hope.
That's
what it's all about, isn't it? Those lady voters, and by this, oh best
beloveds, he means the former Clintonistas who were royally screwed by
Obama last time, they're too genteel for all the aggressive behavior
that Mitt displayed last night? Oh, my, I think they might have the
vapors. They're delicate, fragile flowers and unfit for such
improprieties. It's not decent! We shall whip them into a frenzy of
condemnation. We shall use their more civilized nature to reign Romney
in. He won't be allowed to do that next time, nosiree.
Last night's debate was about domestic issues.
Domestic issues include jobs. Domestic issues include national laws.
Was
Jim Lehrer aware that the White House is in violation of the law --
violation of the law and practice that's been in place since 1941? Was
Lehrer aware that the White House has allowed the US military to fill
their orders with Chinese goods?
An issue that some may see as minor was brought up by US House Rep Michael Michaud. I don't see it as minor.
He
reminded everyone of how there was uproar in the summer over the fact
that the American athletes at the Olympics were wearing outfits that
Americans didn't make.
Did you know our army wears uniforms that are not 100% American made?
And that brings us back to yesterday's hearing and we'll pick up with Michaud.
US
House Rep Mike Michaud: When you talk about uniforms made in the USA, I
read an article -- I left you a copy, I know you haven't had a chance
to read it yet -- but I'm not the only person who's upset with what's
happening with our military today. I was reading an article in the Air Force Times [by Jeff Schogol] where it says "Master sgt. says no to Chinese-made boots."
He was issued a pair of Chinese-made boots. He made a stink about it.
He ultimately did get American made boots. He was sent to Afghanistan.
And over in Afghanistan, he was given a uniform -- the Army Operation
Enduring Freedom camouflage uniform -- he asked for a pair of required
boots, the tan boots. Well guess what? He was issued a pair of
Chinese-made boots once again. In the article, you will see where the
Master Sgt at the end, and I would like to quote it, what the Master Sgt
said. And I quote, "This is about patriotism. This is about the Berry
Amendment set forth over 60 years ago. This is about American soldiers
wearing our country's uniform made by Americans." And I couldn't agree
more with the Master Sgt. At a time when our nation is divided and the
discourse in Washington, DC is extremely negative, it seems to me that
with the outrage of our athletes wearing Chinese-made uniforms [at the
summer Olympics] that this is one issue that we can all agree on. Even
both candidates who are running for president of the United States are
criticizing one another about not being tough on China and both
campaigns are talking about making sure more things are stamped with
"Made in the USA." Well there's a way we can get tough on China,
increase things Made in the USA and to make sure that our American
soldiers are not treated as second class citizens, that they have the
best. That's what they're fighting for, this country, United States of
America. And I find it extremely concerning because this issue is not an
issue that needs Congress to act. It's not an issue that we need a
regulatory agency to address. It's an issue that's already the law. So
my question to you is: What is the American Legion's position? Do you
believe that our soldiers who are putting their lives on the line each
and every day for us, should they be wearing clothing made in the United
States of America?
James
Koutz: The answer is yes. The American Legion believes that [stops for
applause to die down]. I'm sure the American Legion and the American
people believe that all equipment should be made in the United States of
America. And there you go again, talking about jobs. Put the Americans
to work making boots. That'll provide jobs here at home.
US
House Rep Mike Michaud: Well I want to thank you very much, National
Commander, and just for the record, I know Congressman Duncan Hunter who
is a Republican colleague from California, he and I are writing a
letter, we encourage our colleagues to sign that letter, to the
administration, requiring them to comply with the intent of the law and
it's unfortunate that we have to do that. And hopefully, we'll see some
changes in that regard.
When the
discussion is jobs and when you're speaking to the Commander-in-Chief
of the military and when the military is in violation of the Berry
Amendment and Congress is calling that out, you probably need to bring
that up in the debate. Anna Mulrine (Christian Science Monitor) reports on how veterans and veterans groups feel they were ignored in the debate last night.
After
President Barack Obama stumbled his way to a loss in the first
presidential debate on Wednesday night, Democratic National Committee
communications director Brad Woodhouse took to MSNBC to try to spin
criticism back in the direction of Mitt Romney with what appeared to be a
fabricated claim.
"He wants to go back to war in Iraq," Woodhouse said of Romney during a Thursday morning appearance on MSNBC.
In response, Romney campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul told The Daily Caller that Woodhouse's statement wasn't true.
The Daily Caller
remains a right-wing organ and not a news outlet. It does that, in
part, because it's to busy churning out quick 'posts' to do journalism.
If
I were a reporter covering a false charge that a candidate supposedly
wanted the US military to go back into Iraq, I think it would be
incumbent upon me to mention that the one making the charge (that would
be Barack's campaign) is actually representing the candidate who is
trying to get more US military back into Iraq.
Dar Addustour reports
on the US military that remains in Iraq -- with a headline of how the
Pentagon refuses to withdraw them -- noting that they did not leave
during the supposed full withdrawal of US forces in December 2011 and
that they have instead been working with implementing security and
assistng counter-terrorism forces. The article notes that despite a
lack of Congressional funding for October, the Pentagon has juggled
monies to find enough funds to cover the costs through January 1st. Wael Grace (Al Mada) reports
that the US Embassy inside the Green Zone is cloaked in mystery and
that no one can tell you the number of employees -- civilian or
military. Grace points out that despite the lowering of the US flag
over Baghdad in 2011 and the announcement that, after 9 years, military
operations were ending, the US government, in fact, kept US troops in
Iraq after the supposed withdrawl of December 2011. An Iraqi MP on the
Security and Defense Committee tells Grace that they are sure there is a
much larger number os US troops in the Embassy and that the Iraqi
government does not know how many US forces remain in Iraq. An MP with
Sadr's bloc says that the US military is there for logistic support but
also states that the Iraqi government has no idea of the actual number
of US troops on the ground in Iraq. The article ends reminding that
all US forces were supposed to leave Iraq at the end of 2011 . . . but
didn't. Last week, Tim Arango (New York Times) reported,
"Iraq and the United States are negotiating an agreement that could
result in the return of small units of American soldiers to Iraq on
training missions. At the request of the Iraqi government, according to
General Caslen, a unit of Army Special Operations soldiers was recently
deployed to Iraq to advise on counterterrorism and help with
intelligence."
I have no idea why The Daily Caller missed that obvious point. As we wrap up the debate section and move into the Iraq section, a big thank you to Ann who helped track down debate commentaries worth including in this snapshot.
QUESTION: Victoria, Iraq?
MS. NULAND: Yep.
QUESTION:
I was talking to an Iraqi official about the incident of bringing the
Iranian cargo airplane, for instance, and he told me the following: That
they are cooperating – but they have requested from you, time and time
again, for logistical support, equipment, and so on, to be able to do
that, and actually, it has fallen on deaf ears. Could you tell us – and
he said that the Embassy has actually made a case before the
Administration, but nothing has come of it. Could you tell us about the
current status in a situation like this, when the Iraqis ask for aid and
equipment to conduct activities that you request them, and that is not
delivered?
MS.
NULAND: Well first, Said, let me say that, as you know, we're fully
supportive of the Iraqis asking these Iranian flights to come down, be
inspected, et cetera. I can't speak to what you're asserting, which is
that we've been asked for help and we haven't provided it. Let me check
on that. It doesn't sound right to me. Okay?
QUESTION:
Continuing with Iraq: September was probably one of the bloodiest
months of all time. Tell us about the status of your diplomatic
operations in Iraq and the status of the confirmation of Mr. Beecroft.
MS.
NULAND: Mr. Beecroft was confirmed as Ambassador a couple of weeks ago,
so he is – my understanding is he's back in Iraq, fully empowered, with
--
QUESTION: Is he in Iraq?
MS.
NULAND: My understanding is he was taking a couple days off with his
family in California, but then was headed back to Iraq. I think he's
probably arrived there. Ambassador Beecroft, we call him now. Yeah.
QUESTION: You called him that before, too. He was the Ambassador in Jordan.
MS. NULAND: Yes, of course.
That
would have been the perfect opportunity for Nuland to have credited
Senator John Kerry. She's apparently quick to call him out but not
willing to give him credit. (Kerry and the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee making clear they were willing to pull US funds from Iraq
forced Nouri al-Maliki to beging inspecting the planes headed for Iran.)
Tensions continue between the governments of Iraq and Turkey. Hurriyet Daily News notes,
"Iraq's Cabinet has recommended Parliament abrogate treaties permitting
foreign forces in the country as the Turkish government submitted a
motion to extend cross-border operations against members of the outlawed
Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK)." The Tehran Times quotes
Nouri al-Maliki's spokesperson Ali al-Dabbagh stating that the Turkish
warplanes and land efforts by the Turkish military "contradicts the
principles of good neighborly relations." Namik Durukan (Al-Monitor) reminds
that Tuesday "the Iraqi cabinet decided to annul all agreements that
enabled the presence of foreign troops in Iraq. The decision will
directly affect Turkey, which has been maintaining bases in Northern
Iraq since the 1990s." Hurriyet adds:
A
verbal agreement was formed between Turkey and the Iraqi Kurds in
1995-1996, when massive joint military operations were launched by the
Turkish army and Iraqi Kurdish groups against the outlawed Kurdistan
Workers' Party (PKK), to allow Turkish forces to establish a presence in
northern Iraq. On Oct. 2, the Iraqi Cabinet condemned the Turkish
government's motion to extend cross-border operations against militants
in northern Iraq. Iraq's Cabinet suggested that Parliament should
abrogate treaties permitting foreign forces in the country, after the
Turkish government submitted a motion to extend cross-border operations
against the PKK.
|
Meanwhile, Alsumaria reports
that today the Ministry of Justice announced the executions by hanging
of another six people. This brings Iraq's reported total for 2012 to
102. Meanwhile the so-called Ministry of Human Rights insists it is not
the time for Iraq to implement a moratorium on the death penalty
despite international cries for just that. There are serious questions
about Iraq's justice system including the right to a fair trail and the
use of forced 'confessions.' Just the use of forced 'confessions'
should be enough to make people support a moratorium. As Human Rights Watch pointed out at the end of August:
"There
is no doubt that Iraq still has a serious terrorism problem, but it
also has a huge problem with torture and unfair trials," said Joe Stork,
deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. "The lack of
transparency around these convictions and executions, in a country where
confessions that may have been coerced are often the only evidence
against a person, makes it crucial for Iraq to declare an immediate
moratorium on all executions."
Human Rights
Watch opposes the death penalty in all circumstances because it is
unique in its cruelty and finality, and is plagued with arbitrariness,
prejudice, and error.
UN
Special Envoy Martin Kobler: Mr. President, Iraq retains the death
penalty for a large number of crimes. I therefore reiterate the call by
the Secretary-General [Ban Ki-moon] and the High Commissioner of Human
Rights for the government of Iraq to establish a moratorium on all
executions with a view to their abolition. I welcome that the
authorities of the Kurdistan Region continue to implement a moratorium
on carrying out executions which has been in place since 2007.
There's no moratorium on violence, Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) reports,
"A car bomb exploded near an Iraqi army convoy in Baghdad on Thursday
morning , killing at least four people and wounding 11 others, police
said." The Irish Examiner notes the death toll has risen to 5. Trend News Agency offers,
"The attack occurred in the morning when a booby-trapped car went off
near a convoy of sport utility vehicles (SUV) used by an Iraqi private
security firm, in Baghdad's western district of Mansour, the source said
on condition of anonymity." In addition, Alsumaria notes
an armed attack in Tikrit claimed the life of 1 Iraqi soldier, 2
corpses discovered outside Tikrit (shot dead, both were Sahwa and they
were brothers -- aka "Awakening," "Sons of Iraq"), 1 assailant/suspect
shot dead at a checkpoint to the nort of Tikrit, and at least 22
arrested in mass arrests today. Al Mada notes
that Iraqi President Jalal Talabani met with Hamid Majid and others
heading a delegation of the Communist Party yesterday. The discussion
was the ongoing political crisis and stalemate. It was part of
Jalal's listening tour. All Iraq News notes
that the Communist Party issued a statement after the meeting stressing
their support for Talabani and his efforts. The meetings are
ceremonial and can't serve any real purpose. It's not as though the
'stumbling block' isn't known: the Erbil Agreement. Nouri signed the
US-brokered contract. It gave him a second term as prime minister after
the voters decidedly did not. In exchange for the second term, he was
supposed to provide certain things for the blocs. He used the contract
to grab his second term and then refused to honor the contract. That is
what created the current political stalemate. This is known and has
been known for over a year now. There really isn't a need for a
listening tour. Jalal's a joke. Alsumaria has him saying
that political parties need to be flexible. That's nonsense. Nouri
didn't 'win' a second term as prime minister. He wasn't 'flexible.' He
threw a tantrum and, with the White House supporting him, brought Iraq
to an 8-month standstill (Political Stalemate I). And the White House
didn't support the Constitution. The White House didn't support the
Iraq people. The White House didn't support democracy. Nouri wasn't 'flexible.' Now the blocs have to be flexible? I
believe they were 'flexible' when they surrendered to the Erbil
Agreement giving Nouri a second term. No one asked the Iraqi people if
they wanted their votes tossed aside. That was
'flexible' enough. It's time for the Erbil Agreement to be honored.
And since the White House staked the US government's word on that
contract, it is past time for the White House to call for it's
implementation. Lastly on 'flexible,' let's remember that
the White House tried to big-boy Jalal out of the presidency. They
tried to give it to Ayad Allwai. Jalal wasn't 'flexible.' He blew them
off. Maybe Jalal really doesn't have standing to ask others to be
'flexible'? Jalal's not the only one meeting. All Iraq News notes
that Ibrahim al-Jaafari (head of the National Alliance) and Ammar
al-Hakim (head of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq) met today. For
what reasons? Apparently to discuss facial tissues and tissue boxes --
check out the picture, I'm counting five tables (including the one
with the lamp) and each one has a tissue box on it. Did Kleenex sponsor
the meeting? All Iraq News also notes
that al-Hakim held court in his office in the weekly cultural forum
insisting that something must be done about the security situation and
noting that last month saw the deaths of 365 people in Iraq with another
683 injured. This may make Ammar al-Hakim the only political figure in
Iraq to note the death toll from last month. Dar Addustour notes
that the UN Secretary-General's Special Envoy to Iraq Martin Kobler
issued a statement decrying the increased violence and calling on the
government to address the root causes of the instability.
|
