Friday, January 9, 2015

Iraqi female nurses

Topic I'm referring you to:


  • Iraqi female nurses struggle for equality



  • Check it out.


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



    Thursday, January 8, 2015.  Chaos and violence continue, that Iraqi military operation to take back Iraq that was geared for February may be put off, US forces are training Iraqi soldiers in taking pride in their country, Iraq is ranked number three on a new listing (a listing no country wants to be on), US Senator Barbara Boxer announces her long overdue retirement, and much more.


    Starting in the US where US Senator Barbara Boxer has (thankfully) announced she will not seek re-election in 2016.  Some are noting that Boxer was elected to the Senate in the 'year of the woman' with 1992 seeing so many women enter into the Senate.

    Boxer got at that in a phone call with the press today where she noted Anita Hill.  The elections were proceeded by Hill-Thomas.  Clarence Thomas was nominated for the Supreme Court (by George HW Bush) and Anita Hill was one of the women he'd harassed.  Anita Hill stepped forward and was targeted and trashed by the likes of David Brock (of Media Matters).  She came forward in the Senate confirmation hearings.  Seeing Anita Hill questioned by one male on the Judiciary Committee after another underscored the gender imbalance and also drove home that so many men on the Committee just didn't 'get it,' just didn't grasp that harassment wasn't 'fun and games' but a very real issue of abuse of power.

    It was thought and hoped that women would make a difference because they 'got it.'

    Sadly, the case can't be made with Barbara that women 'get it.'

    She disgraced herself repeatedly but never as much as she did once Barack Obama became President of the United States.

    A woman who 'got it' would not be insulting Get Equal  for their advocacy efforts to end the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy and allow gay men and lesbians to serve in the military openly.

    At their worst, the men on the Senate Judiciary Committee in 1992 looked like people who didn't care about anything outside of their own limited understanding and weren't about to use their power to expand the rights of others.

    That's exactly how Boxer cam off with regards to LGBT issues when Barack became president.

    Not only did she refuse to press on issues but she condemned those who did press -- she condemned and mocked Get Equal publicly and looked like a lunatic homophobe in the process.

    The last six years were nothing but Boxer destroying her own image.

    And it was never a strong image.

    In a struggle to find something -- anything! -- to point to with pride, today she seized upon her 2002 vote on the impending Iraq War.  AP explains today "Boxer has said she is most proud of the vote that she cast against the war in Iraq."  Evan Halper (Los Angeles Times) notes:

    The senator’s inability to persuade more colleagues to vote against the war in Iraq also continues to weigh on her, she said.
    “Looking back, I wish I had done more to stop it,” she said. “I used to come down [to the Senate chambers] and read the names of the dead.... I couldn’t change things.”


    No, you wouldn't change things.

    It only took one senator to filibuster.  Former Senator Mike Gravel made that point repeatedly in 2006, 2007 and 2008.

    In fact, let's note this from 2006, issued by the Gravel campaign (he was seeking the Democratic Party's 2008 presidential nomination):

    WASHINGTON, June 12 - On the eve of the "Take Back America Conference" in Washington, D.C. former United States Senator Mike Gravel, Democratic candidate for President of the United States, who, in 1971, staged a five month filibuster to end the draft, wrote an article published in "The Wayne Madsen Report.Com" (waynemadsendc@hotmail.com) entitled "HOW TO TAKE BACK AMERICA". The Senator said, "It is fine and right for Democrats and others to criticize, for example, the mismanagement by President Bush of his War on Iraq, but where were the filibusters in the face of obvious distortions and selective presentation of intelligence? Why did the Republican majorities and many of my fellow Democrats accept uncritically the intelligence fed to them while year after year fully funding the War?"
    Senator Gravel in the Spring and Summer of 2002, appeared on several MSNBC shows during the run up to the Invasion of Iraq, where he asserted his opposition to the war while declaring that Iraq possessed no weapons of mass destruction and that the Iraqi Government posed no threat to the United States. The Senator asked, "Where were the opposition to the War in 2002 and who stood up then to publicly oppose the President on national television? Where was the release of vital information during the rush to war on the House or Senate floor? What have our elected representatives done since to stop the war they have acquiesced in ever since?" The Senator continued," Americans may rightly wonder, after this abdication of responsibility, whether either party, or any branch of the existing government has the courage to handle the task of deciding issues of war and peace as well as the critical domestic challenges the nation faces."
    Gravel noted that the same observation applies to the progressive agenda on domestic policy. Given the Administration's Rubik Cube like reform for its indecipherable Medicare Prescription Drug Plan or its tragically ruinous response to the Katrina disaster, the vast price in the form of mounting debt and deficits imposed by Mr. Bush's spend and spend and make wars policy that have also caused the price of gasoline to skyrocket and the choke hold that well funded interests have on policy debates from energy to social security, does anyone think that the kind of necessary fundamental change will pass through the Senate Finance Committee or rouse the Congress to action?
    The Senator concluded, "The only way for Americans to take back America is for Americans to change its nation's politics and government, i.e. for Americans to take back some of its initial law making power they are implicitly granted in the Constitution, in both the Preamble and Article VII. That means a process of National Initiative, under which the people can propose and vote on laws directly at the federal level -– as they do in half the states and most cities and towns today. As the Federalist observed, 'The people can never willfully betray their own interests but they may possibly be betrayed by the representatives of the people.' If our Democracy is to flourish then we must let the people decide."
    Listen to Senator Gravel on the Peter B Collins Show at http:1240talkcity.com/events/ and KSAC 1240 AM 6 p.m. to 9 p.m.


    What did Barbara Boxer do?

    She voted "no" in 2002.


    And that was it.

    She did as little as possible.

    And before some idiot rushes to defend her, she even admitted that in August 5, 2009 on The Diane Rehm Show:




    Senator Barbara Boxer: I regret that even after voting "no" on the War on Iraq, I should have been down there every day making my voice louder and stronger.

    Diane Rehm: Why didn't you?



    Senator Barbara Boxer: [Sighs] I thought that I said enough when I voted "no" and I continued to speak but not loudly enough and not clearly enough and you know that's why I like this novel because Ellen's my hero, she does everything right  I don't.



    I regret it too -- that she was too damn lazy to do anything more.

    That even as late as 2009, she was rushing around to promote a bad book she co-wrote while pretending to wish she'd actually done something.

    Here's a thought: Stop wasting your time on bad books and promoting bad books and do something to the end the Iraq War

    That would be the war that continues to this day even though she can't admit that.

    Boxer's only accomplishment -- which some may argue contributed to the current crises in Iraq -- would be getting the US government to stop paying Sahwas.

    In April 2008, with nearly 100,000 Sahwas, each earning at least $300 a day, being paid by the US government, Boxer wondered why the oil rich government of Iraq wasn't paying these Iraqis themselves?

    That question led the US government to insist Nouri pick up the tab.  Which he kind-of, sort-of briefly never really did.

    Otherwise?

    Boxer called Nouri al-Maliki a "thug" throughout his first term.

    As most people know, Nouri's second term was his worst in terms of his abuses.

    But, by then, Barack was president and Barbara no longer called out Nouri.

    I could give her credit for another Iraq issue.  She worked behind the scenes on it -- we were in agreement with her on it -- but she did it behind the scenes and has never sought to note it (I know several reporters know about it -- I have no idea why they didn't note it).  But she did take a stand on an issue related to Iraq and when she did it -- more than any other Democrat standing up -- sent shock waves through the White House because she'd never threatened to go against Barack before.

    Again, if she wants to go public on that, fine.  I'll thank her for it and praise her for it.  But I know about it due to offline events -- including meeting with her on the issue -- so I'll leave it offline unless she wants to public.  But I will state she did do one good thing, one stand up thing, on Iraq in the last six years.


    I've never favored term limits and considered the notion unconstitutional.  However, as you begin to grasp the power of incumbency, it's clear that something needs to be done.  Boxer's not the only one who should be stepping down from the Congress.



    Oh-oh, don't ya know
    Don't wanna see you here no more
    Pack it and move it
    You spell, you read O-U-T out
    Don't be bad
    A mad hatter's beret
    Sometimes you look like you just mad an escape
    Don't be mad
    Or lose your medicaid cool
    Of course cool rhymes with fool
    Don't go be bad 
    Cause you been had
    Don't go away sad, 

    Don't go away mad
    Just go away

    -- "Just Go Away," written by Debbie Harry, first appears on Blondie's Parallel Lines.
     
    From the one who held the power to the victimized,  Open Doors has published their World Watch List.  The Christian organization annually notes the countries where Christians face persecution.  They rank the 50 worst countries for persecution and Iraq makes the top ten:


    1) North Korea
    2) Somalia
    3) Iraq
    4) Syria
    5) Afghanistan
    6) Sudan
    7) Iran
    8) Pakistan
    9) Eritrea
    10) Nigeria


    The organization states of Iraq, "The situation of religious freedom for Christians has seriously deteriorated under the influence of the establishment of the Islamic State in large parts of Iraq. In June 2014, a strict version of Islamic law was implemented in the area the militants of Islamic State hold. Christians were forced to convert, flee or pay a tax for religious minorities. As a result, many Christians fled. Moreover, the broader Iraqi society is turning more Islamic, with increased social control on women wearing a veil and observance of Ramadan. Christians most affected by persecution are converts from Islam. However, in areas held by radical Islamic groups all Christians are under great pressure."


    And they offer:

    PRAYER POINTS

    • For the thousands of refugees who have fled to northern Iraq or to surrounding countries
    • For Christians who have been left homeless and without jobs
    • That the Islamic State will be turned back and driven out of the Middle East 


    Turning to some of today's violence, Alsumaria notes that a Baghdad suicide bomber took his own life and the life of 1 other person while injuring three more and a Tguetich suicide bomber took his own life and the lives of 3 Iraqi soldiers with one more left injured. Al Jazeera notes, "In western Baghdad, a suicide bomber set off his explosives belt among Shia worshippers who were leaving a mosque there, killing eight worshippers and wounding 16 others."  Also getting attention were bombings in Samarra.  Both Iraqi Spring MC and BBC News count five bombings.  Yang Yi (Xinhua) reports:


    Islamic State (IS) militants launched a major attack on Samarra, a city of Iraq's northern central province of Salahudin, a provincial security source said.
    The attack occurred at dawn when five suicide bombers blew up their explosive-laden trucks near the security checkpoints on a highway and at the western entrance of Samarra, some 120km north of the Iraqi capital of Baghdad, the source told Xinhua on condition of anonymity.


    In violence throughout the country, Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) counts 249 dead and 108 injured.


    But don't worry, Barack has a . . .

    Well . . . he calls it a "plan."


    Loveday Morris (Washington Post) reports on US training efforts with an article which opens, "Years after the U.S. military tried to create a new army in Iraq -- at a cost of over $25 billion -- American trainers have returned to help rebuild the country’s fighting force."

    And the new money will be a waste as well judging by efforts Morris reports -- efforts like, in the words of US Sgt Maj Michael Grinston, "classes on the will to fight."

    That doesn't generally come from classes.

    Historically, it's come from one of two areas.  The first one is a feeling that you are vested in the country, a part of the nation and you want to defend it.  The second is fear.  Governments have rounded up people and forced them to fight via threats (to the individuals themselves and sometimes to their families).

    Can it come from a class?

    Possibly if (a) it's done in formative years and (b) it's done by Iraqis.

    A foreigner is going to instill a will to fight in the Iraqi people?

    Is Barack back in the Choom Gang?

    That might explain why he thinks bombing Iraq from war planes since August counts as a 'plan.'

    Of course, he's insisted everyone just be patient because, come February, the Iraqi military will retake the areas which have fallen to the Islamic State.

    But what was said in October, for example, is no longer in the distant future.

    February is next month.

    Lolita C. Baldor (AP) reports US Gen Martin Dempsey, Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, spoke to reporters today and "he said it's still unclear when the Iraqi troops will be ready to mount an offensive against Islamic State militants that have control of portions of northern and western Iraq."

    Still unclear?

    Months ago, it was supposed to happen in February -- up until that was only 22 days away.

    Then it became "unclear."

    What's clear is that  Shi'ite militias continue to terrorize in Iraq.


    In September 2013, Tim Arango (New York Times) broke the news  that Nouri had brought Shi'ite militias into the armed forces:



    In supporting Asaib al-Haq, Mr. Maliki has apparently made the risky calculation that by backing some Shiite militias, even in secret, he can maintain control over the country’s restive Shiite population and, ultimately, retain power after the next national elections, which are scheduled for next year. Militiamen and residents of Shiite areas say members of Asaib al-Haq are given government badges and weapons and allowed freedom of movement by the security forces.



    In August 2014, Nouri was replaced as prime minister by Haider al-Abadi.

    Yet the militias continue to be part of the Iraqi forces.

    Today, Josh Rogin and Eli Lake (Bloomberg News) report:


    U.S. weapons intended for Iraq’s beleaguered military are winding up in the possession of the country’s Shiite militias, according to U.S. lawmakers and senior officials in the Barack Obama administration. These sources say that the Baghdad government, which was granted $1.2 billion in training and equipment aid in the omnibus spending bill passed last month,  is turning hardware over to Shiite militias that are heavily influenced by Iran and have been guilty of gross human-rights violations. 

    An unnamed "senior administration official" frets over the dilemma.


    It's not a dilemma.

    It's a violation of the Leahy Amendment.

    Per US law, no more weapons can be handed over.  These weapons are being used against Iraqi civilians -- primarily Sunnis.  This violation is supposed to mean arming Iraq comes to a halt.


    The reporters note:


     “I am concerned by reports that U.S. weapons have ended up in the hands of Shi’a militia forces -- all the more so, given their history of committing atrocities with impunity,” Senator Patrick Leahy, the top Democrat on the Senate state and foreign operations subcommittee told us in a statement. Leahy is the author of the law that requires the U.S. government to cut off training and assistance to military units credibly accused of human-rights violations.

    The so-called Leahy law applies only to military forces of a foreign government, not non-state actors. But in Leahy’s view, the prohibition should extend to the Shiite militias in Iraq because they are at least partly funded and under the supervision of the Baghdad government. Last year, the Obama administration determined that the Leahy law legally did not apply to the Iraqi tribal militias or Free Syrian Army. Nonetheless, the administration also determined that, as a matter of policy, it would vet these units for human-rights abusers as if they were foreign militaries.



    The law's being broken.  Congress needs to hold hearings on the issue.

    And Haider al-Abadi, 'new' prime minister of Iraq needs to be encouraged to get to work on the political solution -- one he promised to deliver as a condition to being named prime minister -- before things get even worse.
    Instead of encouraging or offering conditions, the White House just hands things over freely apparently.  Paul McLeary (Defense News) notes, "The United States provided the Iraqi armed forces with $300 million in donated military equipment in 2014, and over the next two months will deliver six more Abrams tanks and 50 up-armored Humvees at no cost to the Baghdad government, according to information provided by the US Embassy in Baghdad."
     

    Where's the plan, Barack?  Where's the plan?





    Thursday, January 8, 2015

    'Activist' Fonda

    In today's snapshot, C.I. includes this:






  • Obama's only stop your aircraft for the killing of children, Syria and Iraq, but you know that God sees you ??






  • Yet 'activist' Jane Fonda's post this week is about Ellen taping Portia doing the Jane Fonda Workout.

    Does Jane not get how ridiculous she looks?

    Or how gravely she's disappointing those people who thought she was an activist?

    She's just an elderly woman trying to pretend she's sexual, nearing 80 and embarrassing herself.

    It's appalling that this will be final act, this woman who couldn't shut up about third acts and has been blathering on about them since at least 1984.







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


    Wednesday, January 7, 2015.  Chaos and violence continue, Haider al-Abadi continues to back Nouri al-Maliki's crimes, 32% of Democrats in the US and 51% of Republicans wrongly believe WMDs were discovered in Iraq, the press -- which popularized the belief and continues to so by whom they invite to discuss situations -- feigns shock over the results, and much more.
    Starting with a new survey that has a number of outlets in a tizzy.  Of Fairleigh Dickinson University's Public Mind Poll's Iraq section, the university notes
    Overall, 42 percent of Americans believe that U.S. forces found active weapons of mass destruction program in Iraq. Republicans are more likely to hold this belief than Democrats: fifty-one percent of Republicans think it’s “probably” or “definitely” true that an active program was found after the 2003 invasion, with 14 percent saying that it was definitely true. Still, large portions of other groups think that the WMD program, a major part of the justification for the invasion, was actually found, including 32 percent of Democrats. 
    The findings appear to trouble and confuse RT, The Week, The Hill and more.
    I have questions regarding the sample as well as their margin of error (which honestly looks rounded and not really accurate) but assuming the results are correct, why is it a surprise?
    February 5, 2003, Colin Powell didn't just go before the United Nations and insist that Saddam Hussein had Weapons of Mass Destruction, he lied.  He knowingly lied.  He presented evidence he knew was false.
    So since that time, Collie The Blot Powell has been ridiculed by the media and treated with the disdain that a known liar whose lies resulted in the deaths of millions will be treated, right?
    Wrong.
    Colin Powell is still considered, by the media, to be a respected and trusted person.
    He's far from alone.  As Peter Hart (FAIR -- link is video) noted in June, "It's 2003 all over again, as Iraq 'experts' who promoted the 2003 invasion are back on TV screens offering expert analysis about what to do next."
    Justin Raaimondo (Antiwar.com) addressed the issue in March of 2013 noting:
    Ten years after the invasion of Iraq, the war criminals are still at large. Saddam Hussein is dead and buried, but the cabal that lied us into war is still around – and not only that, they are mocking us from their podiums in the media, justifying and obscuring their crimes. Here is former Bush speechwriter David Frum declaring he was right all along – if only:
    "If we’d found the WMD, it would have been different. If we’d kept better order in Iraq after the overthrow of Saddam, it would have been different. If more Iraqis had welcomed the invasion as we expected, it would have been different. If the case for the war had been argued in a less contrived and predetermined way, it would have been different."
    Ah, "but it wasn’t different," continues Frum: "Those of us who were involved – in whatever way – bear the responsibility." So what have been the consequences suffered by Frum – as opposed to the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who were killed and maimed, their lives and country destroyed? What price has Mr. "Axis of Evil" paid that is in any way comparable to that exacted from the 5,000 Americans killed and tens of thousands horribly wounded? Why none, of course. There he is, on CNN, in the Daily Beast, pontificating in his new role as a "moderate" Republican.
    There is a difference between being wrong and lying.
    Anyone who takes a position has a chance of being wrong.  
    Liars should be banned by the media.  Colin Powell lied.  That's documented and don't believe his little fluffer Lawrence Wilkerson.  Powell was presented with false charges to make to the UN and he pushed back on some but agreed to go with others.  This has been documented repeatedly, you can refer to FAIR or to the Los Angeles Times, for the Times start with Greg Miller's July 15, 2004 report entitled "Flaws Cited in Powell's U.N. Speech on Iraq."
    He lied.
    The mainstream media should have rebuked him long ago instead of courting him and presenting him as an expert.
    As for those wrong?
    No one should be banned from the public discourse for being wrong.  Hopefully, they will at least admit they were wrong but even if they don't we'll all be wrong at some point in our lives -- multiple times (especially me).  
    But those wrong on big issues?  They should be brought on far less by Sunday chat shows and balanced out with voices who were right.
    That's for the mainstream media -- the broadcast networks, CNN, most newspapers, etc.
    For what's supposed to be the left media?
    The periodicals like The Progressive, The Nation, In These Times, Mother Jones, various Pacifica Radio programs, etc?
    They might, in the interest of a wide ranging debate, allow those who were wrong to participate but as guests.  You do not hire these people,  you do not give them a regular platform.
    Mother Jones presents itself as left -- in its latest incarnation, it has become nothing but a partisan organ for the Democratic Party -- and as a voice of truth.
    But when Mother Jones was looking for someone to hire to write bits and pieces for the mag's online site, it didn't go with Cindy Sheehan.  Cindy was a national name and someone who stood for peace and stood against the Iraq War.  Mother Jones didn't pursue her.
    Or take Ann Wright.  The former army colonel was serving in the State Dept when Powell was lying.  And her response?  She resigned from the diplomatic corps.  Her resignation letter ended up all over the internet.
    Mother Jones didn't pursue her to write for them.
    No, when they had a slot open, they went with Kevin Drum who supported and cheerleaded the illegal war.
    When the media -- mainstream or in the case of Mother Jones alleged left wing media -- refuses to hold liars and war mongers accountable, they send the impression that this filth was correct, that those of us who said no to war were wrong.
    The filth should have been ostracized, publicly humiliated.
    Instead, their opinions continue to be treated as important and worthwhile.
    Over a million Iraqis are dead because of these liars and their opinions.
    But there are no consequences.
    And when even Mother Jones is too damn trashy to draw a line, what is America to believe?
    Mother Jones, The Nation, et al refuse to call out War Hawk Barack.  They refuse to call out the continued bombing of Iraq.  They refuse to acknowledge the reality about these bombings -- that they kill and wound civilians.
    Not everyone is so cowardly or craven.





  • Obama's only stop your aircraft for the killing of children, Syria and Iraq, but you know that God sees you ??









  • On today's violence, Margaret Griffis (Antiwar.com) reports, "At least 577 were killed or found dead. Another 29 were wounded in recent attacks."
    Earlier today, Iraqi Spring MC Tweeted the following:


    : صور بتاريخ اليوم يظهر فيها النائب المعتقل لدى القوات الحكومية،أحمد العلواني، ويظهر فيها نحيل الجسم جراء الحبس.
    17 retweets6 favorites











    In the orange?

    That's one of Nouri al-Maliki's many victims, Ahmed al-Alwani.

    And the world should be shocked.
    First of all, he's clearly lost around 100 pounds during his 12 months and eleven or so days in Iraqi's prison system.  That's appalling.  His health, his appearance rebuke the notion that there's any 'justice' in Iraq's legal system or that it even functions.
    For those who don't know who Ahmed al-Alwani is or how he ended up in prison, we'll drop back to December 28, 2013, this is from "Rabid dog Nouri terrorizes a community :"


    National Iraqi News Agency quotes Iraqiya MP Hamid al-Mutlaq declaring:

    Prime Minister again resorted to use the brutal force and bypass the law and the Constitution in dealing with problems and crises that he himself and his government provoked them. al-Mutlaq, as member of the security and defense parliamentary. The violation of the law and the killing of demonstrators in Fallujah, Hawija and the displacement of the people in Diyala, Baghdad , and Dhi- Qar provinces ,personify a fanatic sectarian rends and irresponsible behavior which peaked today by the arrest of al-Alwani, killing his brother, and the violation of the sanctity of his home. 



     At dawn today, on Nouri al-Maliki's orders, an MP's home was raided with the intent of arresting him.  Nouri is the chief thug and prime minister of Iraq.  Possibly, the real intent was to kill the MP -- that would explain a dawn raid on someone's home.



    That's Ahmed al-Alwani, via All Iraq News, being arrested.

    Alsumaria reports that his home was stormed by Nouri's SWAT forces at dawn and that 5 people (bodyguards and family) were killed (this included his brother) while ten family members (including children) were left injured.

    al-Alwani's a Member of Parliament and he's a Sunni.  Nouri is a Shi'ite.

    More importantly, al-Alwani is a member of Iraqiya -- the political slate that defeated Nouri's State of Law in the March 2010 parliamentary elections.  (The people of Iraq did not vote for Nouri. He has a second term as prime minister only because his buddy Barack demanded The Erbil Agreement be drafted -- going around the Iraqi Constitution, every principle of democracy and the will of the Iraqi people.)

    Nouri's long targeted Iraqiya.

    In December of 2011, he went after Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq -- Sunni and (then) a member of Iraqiya -- and Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi -- Sunni and a member of Iraqiya.

    Saleh played footsie with Nouri and, in May of 2012, Nouri ended his war on Saleh and his failed attempt to have Saleh stripped of immunity by the Parliament.   Nouri had wanted Saleh sued for calling Nouri the new Saddam (and doing so to CNN).  The government is made up of members of Parliament.  Even Nouri is one.  And as a member of Parliament you have certain rights.

    For example, Tareq remains Vice President.  If parliamentary elections are held April 30th and new vice presidents (at least two -- although in 2010, they expanded it to three) are named, Tareq's term will have expired.  But Nouri can't strip anyone of their rights or office.  Parliament can.

    Parliment refused to strip Saleh al-Mutlaq of his office and they've refused all this time to strip Tareq al-Hashemi of his post.


    All Iraq News reports that MP Karim Elewi (Iraqi National Alliance) insists that al-Alwani's immunity doesn't need to be lifted to prosecute him because he's an "assassin" and a "criminal."

    I'm sorry Baby Cum Pants, did you not understand how the law works?  You took an oath to uphold the Iraqi Constitution, Baby Cum Pants, so you might try grasping that it enshrines the principle of innocent until proven guilty.  Not "innocent until arrested."

    All Iraq News also quotes Tariq Harb who says immunity doesn't need to be lifted by Parliament.  He's identified as a "legal expert."

    If I want to know what Nouri's small cock tastes like, I'll go Tariq Harb.

    Anything else?

    Nope.

    He's repeatedly lied for Nouri.

    He's not a legal expert and he's not objective.  We've seen that since 2010.

    Excuse me, those of us who paid attention -- a very small number -- have seen that since 2010.  Tariq Harb, you may remember, agreed, in the midst of Nouri's 8-month political stalemate (when loser Nouri refused to step down from his job) that Nouri was correct and the president (Jalal Talabani) and the vice presidents (Tareq al-Hashemi and Adil Abdul-Mahdi) were no longer in office.

    That would have just left Nouri in office.  And Nouri lost the March 2010 election.

    I was wrong, hold on.

    If I want to know what Nouri's asshole tastes like?

    That's another thing Tariq Harb could probably explain.  So I was wrong to imply that he could only tell us one thing with accuracy.


    We've documented his bias for years now.  He's not unobjective.

    He's also not familiar with the law.  Vengeance is not the law.

    He's such an idiot.  This is what he tells All Iraq News: "Any Parliamentary Member who commits a crime that can be proved can be arrested without need to lift immunity from him according to Article 63 of the Iraqi Constitution which gave the MPs immunity on unproved crimes only."

    [. . .]
    Let's go to the Iraqi Constitution.

    Article 63: 

    First: A law shall regulate the rights and privileges of the speaker of the Council of Representatives, his two deputies, and the members of the Council of Representatives. 

    Second: 

     A. A member of the Council of Representatives shall enjoy immunity for statements made while the Council is in session, and the member may not be prosecuted before the courts for such. 

     B. A Council of Representatives member may not be placed under arrest during the legislative term of the Council of Representatives, unless the member is accused of a felony and the Council of Representatives members consent by an absolute majority to lift his immunity or if he is caught in flagrante delicto in the commission of a felony. 

     C. A Council of Representatives member may not be arrested after the legislative term of the Council of Representatives, unless the member is accused of a felony and with the consent of the speaker of the Council of Representatives to lift his immunity or if he is caught in flagrante delicto in the commission of a felony. 



    (C) does not apply because al-Alwani is a Member of Parliament.  His term has not expired.

    That leaves (A) and (B).  (A) applies to statements so that has nothing to do with al-Alwani.

    That leaves (B).  By the first section Harb is right.

    But learn to read, you stupid idiot, because there are two parts to (B) and they must both be met.



    B. A Council of Representatives member may not be placed under arrest during the legislative term of the Council of Representatives, unless the member is accused of a felony and the Council of Representatives members consent by an absolute majority to lift his immunity or if he is caught in flagrante delicto in the commission of a felony. 


    See that "and" in there.  While al-Alwani is accused of a felony crime (killing), that's not all of (B).  He can only be arrested if the Parliament consents "by an absolute majority."

    Know the damn law.
     
    [. . .]


    National Iraqi News Agency reports MP Saleem al-Jubori (Mottahidoon Lilslah Coalition) denounced the arrest and the klling of al-Alwani's brother in the raid.  Iraqiya MP and Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi went to Ramadi in an attempt to sort out what happened and to calm heightened tensions.  NINA also reports:


    Chairman of Anbar Provincial Council, Sabah Karhout, described the arrest of lawmaker Ahmed al-Alwani as a grave mistake.
    In a statement on Saturday, Dec. 28, to NINA Karhout said that the Anbar Provincial Council, condemns the arrest of lawmaker from Anbar province, Ahmed al-Alwani, and killing his brother, as well as a number of his guardsmen and family members, after clashes between the military and Alwani’s guards at dawn Saturday, as a grave mistake because of the way Alwani was arrested.
    Karhout added that Anbar Council held an emergency meeting, and came out with important decisions, including demanding the Prime Minister to immediately release Alwani and make the military force that arrested him accountable for the way it carried out the arrest.


    Those deaths are on Nouri's hands.  There's no excuse for the deaths, there's no excuse for wounding children.  Thug Nouri unleashed his thugs and murder happened.  Safaa Abdel-Hamid and Mohammed Shafiq (Alsumaria) report that Osama al-Nujaifi is calling for an investigation into the arrest itself.



    And this was Falluja's response to the arrest.




    This was huge but many Americans don't even know about it because the media largely ignored it (as they did all of Nouri's crimes) and the White House refused to call it out.
    Ahmed al-Alwani remains in prison.  Illegally arrested but he remains in prison.
    And thug Nouri?  Instead of rotting in a prison, he now preens as one of Iraq's three vice presidents.
    And Haider al-Abadi is such a little bitch that he doesn't even reside in the prime minister's home.  Despite being named prime minister in August, Haider's still not in the home.
    Who occupies the home?  Thug Nouri who refuses to leave.
    New prime minister Haider is suck a weakling, is so ineffective, he can't even get Nouri to move out of the prime minister's residence.
    How pathetic.
    And he can't -- or won't -- fix the problems Nouri created.
    URGENT ACTION
    Iraqi former mp sentenced to death
    A former member of Iraq’s Council of Representatives (Parliament) has been sentenced to death after a trial marred with irregularities. He has a month to appeal.
    Ahmed al-‘Alwani, a prominent member of the secular political party al-Iraqiya bloc, was sentenced to death on 23 November by the Central Criminal Court of Iraq (CCCI) in Baghdad for the killing of two soldiers. He had been charged with “assaulting military assets and killing and injuring security forces for terrorist ends”, under Article 4 of the 2005 Anti-Terrorism Law.
    Since his arrest on 28 December 2013 Ahmed al-‘Alwani has been denied access to his lawyer and family. In court, his former lawyer was not allowed to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses or ask questions as they were deemed “not productive” by the court. The court refused to record his questions in the minutes of the hearing. His former lawyer was intimidated on several occasions until he withdrew from the case. The lawyer was arrested in March before a planned meeting with officials of the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI). He was blindfolded for 12 hours and questioned about his motives for defending Ahmed al-‘Alwani. Amnesty International urged the government in May to stop intimidating him, but he said that the court’s presiding judge later threatened him with arrest if he did not withdraw from the case. Another lawyer then was appointed to represent Ahmed al-‘Alwani.
    Ahmed al-‘Alwani has a month to appeal against the death sentence. Iraq is one of the world’s leading executioners. Since 2005 the vast majority of those executed have been sentenced to death for terrorism-related offences, in most cases after grossly unfair trials.
    Please write immediately in English or Arabic:
    Urging the authorities to commute the death sentence imposed on Ahmed al-‘Alwani;
    Expressing concern that Ahmed al-‘Alwani was sentenced to death after proceedings that fell short of international standards for fair trial;
    Urging the authorities to declare an official moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty, and commute without delay all outstanding death sentences.
    PLEASE SEND APPEALS BEFORE 7 JANUARY 2015 TO:
    President
    (Send appeals to the representative of Iraq in your country, addressed to the president)
    Fuad M’asum
    Convention Centre (Qasr al-Ma’aridh)
    Baghdad
    Iraq
    Salutation: Dear Mr President
    Minister of Human Rights
    Mohamed Mahdi Al-Bayati
    Convention Centre (Qasr al-Ma’aridh)
    Baghdad
    Iraq
    Email: ministeroffice@humanrights.gov.iq
    Salutation: Dear Minister
    And copies to:
    Minster of Justice
    Dr Haidar al-Zamli
    Convention Centre (Qasr al-Ma’aridh)
    Baghdad
    Iraq
    Email: minister_moj@moj.gov.iq
    Also send copies to diplomatic representatives accredited to your country. Please insert local diplomatic addresses below:
    Name Address 1 Address 2 Address 3 Fax Fax number Email Email address Salutation Salutation
    Please check with your section office if sending appeals after the above date.

    URGENT ACTION
    Iraqi former mp sentenced to death

    ADditional Information

    Ahmed al-‘Alwani was arrested on 28 December 2013 when the security forces exchanged gunfire with his private security guards when they came to arrest his brother, Ali al-‘Alwani.
    Ahmed al-‘Alwani has been a leading public supporter of a protest camp set up in Ramadi by Sunnis protesting in 2013 against what they saw as marginalization by the Shi’a majority government and the targeting of their community. The protest was violently dispersed by the Iraqi security forces shortly after Ahmed al-‘Alwani’s arrest, on the grounds that it had become a nest of al-Qa’ida militants.
    The exchange of gunfire with the security forces, which took place in front of Ahmed al-‘Alwani’s house, in the centre of the city of Ramadi, led to the death of ‘Ali al-‘Alwani and woulnded Ahmed al-‘Alwani’s guards. One security officer was killed and at least four were injured. The dismantling of the camp sparked fights that extended to the city of Falluja early in 2014. The group calling itself Islamic State (IS) took control of Falluja early in January and has since then controlled most of Anbar province.
    The death sentence handed down to Ahmed al-‘Alwani has angered many people, including Sunni leaders of the Albu Alwan tribe, to which the MP belongs, and which is now fighting the IS alongside government forces in Ramadi.  
    But Haider's not going to address that or anything else.
    He's going to make empty statements, video of him and Nouri laughing at the Iraqi people will continue to show up on social media, and Iraqis already realize that there is no change in Iraq despite Nouri finally being forced out.
    In June of last year, US President Barack Obama declared the only solution to the ongoing violence in Iraq was a political solution.  
    In the months since, the White House has repeatedly promised this weapon or that to Haider's government while securing nothing in exchange.
    Maybe if Secretary of State John Kerry didn't mistake himself for the Secretary of Defense Kerry could lead a diplomatic effort to aid in a political solution?
    Instead, Kerry froths at the mouth, excited by the number of bombs US warplanes keep dropping on Iraq. 
    The US State Dept should also be leading on assisting Iraqi refugees.  Instead, they fail there as well.  Not every country fails though.   Steven Chase (Globe and Mail) reports, "Canada will accept another 10,000 Syrian refugees over the next three years and another 3,000 Iraqis in 2015 as Ottawa opens its doors wider for people displaced by a civil war and the Islamic State’s reign of terror in the region."
    In the United States where there was a deadly shooting at the El Paso VA Health Care clinic on Tuesday.  Elahe Izadi, Dan Lamonthe and Eimly Wax-Thibodeaux (Washington Post) report that Dr. Timothy Fjordbak had filed a complaint against Jerry Serrato in 2013 following a grocery store exchange which Fjordbak found threatening.  Serrato, an Iraq War veteran, worked at the VA -- CBS and AP describe him as a former employee.  He is the suspect in the shooting.  After the shooting death of Fjordbak, Serrato took his own life.  A former VA employee (unnamed) tells the Post that Serrato self-reported he suffered from Post-Traumatic Syndrome but the VA denied his claim.  Daniel Borunda (El Paso Times) notes:
    The El Paso Veterans Health Care System had been under scrutiny for long wait times.
    Last month, an inspector general review of the El Paso-Las Cruces health care system verified complaints about long wait times.
    The review found that El Paso's wait times were the sixth-worse in the nation, ranking 123rd among 128 VA health care systems. VA officials had said they have hired more staff and were working to improve service.
    Army records state that Serrato served with the Ohio Army National Guard from 1985 to 1989.
    After a break in service, he enlisted in the U.S. Army in July 2006 with his hometown listed as Corpus Christi. He was infantry with a rank of specialist.
    Records show he was assigned to the 89th Cavalry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 10th Mountain Division in Fort Polk, La. He was deployed to Iraq from March to July 2007.
    Starting in October 2007, he was assigned to the Warrior Transition Unit at Fort Polk until he was medically discharged from the Army in February 2009, records show. He had an honorable discharge.
    Timothy Fjordbak, 63, left a successful private psychology practice after the terrorist attacks in New York City, Washington, D.C., and Pennsylvania on Sept. 11, 2001, to focus on helping returning soldiers, said FBI Special Agent in Charge Douglas Lindquist.
    Fjordbak was a mental and behavioral health psychologist at the VA clinic. He had 33 years experience as a psychologist and was licensed to practice in Florida, Georgia and New Mexico, according to medical records.
    Regina Dennis (Waco Tribune) spoke with spokesperson Deborah Meyer about the Waco Veteran Affairs Medical Center, "Meyer said the hospitals hope to begin having active shooter safety drills, something that was in the works before the El Paso incident but had not yet been approved by VA leaders in the Washington, D.C., central office."

    Blog Archive