Hillary in Africa

Hillary is in Africa. In the above photo, she's giving a radio interview. I really enjoy the photo and I enjoy Hillary being Secretary of State so much better when she's out of the country.

Why?

I don't feel she gets the respect she deserves (and has earned) from the administration.

When she's on the road, out of the country, I feel she's able to cut through the nonsense and just interact. I think she's one of the best faces this country has. Especially when she's not being censored.

There's an effort to make a big deal out of her reply to a question (which an interpreter got wrong) but I think it was the perfect response. It is not her job to tell what her husband thinks. I love Cedric. Have you seen one post by me where I've told you, "This is what Cedric thinks." I'm a grown woman with my own mind. I'll tell you what I think and if you ask me what my husband thinks, I'll wonder why you're asking me that question which seems rather strange.
Cedric has his own site. He can express himself there. So why are you asking me to put me on hold and start talking about him?

I'm sure Hillary's not opposed to talking about Bill Clinton. I'm not opposed to talking about my husband. But if I'm speaking to you and suddenly you're asking me what my husband thinks, I'm getting the impression that what I have to say and what I think doesn't matter a great deal to you.

NBC Nightly News tonight was in frenzy mode. Poor Brian Williams. He probably popped in his chair. Hillary was speaking about the need for free and fair elections and she noted that no system is perfect and how, in 2000, the presidential election came down to one state . . . where the governor of it was the brother of one candidate (yes, that's the Bushes).

Brian Williams was outraged.

How sad. Hillary's comments weren't out there. It was very cut and dry and basic. But people like Brian Williams make their living in trashing and distorting Hillary -- and have made a living doing that for years.


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

Wednesday, August 12, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the Geneva Conventions should be in the news, Iraqi refugees struggle in Syria, the US and around the globe, Danny Fitzsimons' attorneys advocate for moving his trial from Iraq to England, and more.

Today is the 60th anniversary of the Geneva Conventions. Jakob Kellenberger, the president of the International Committee of the Red Cross, marked the occassion with a speech noting the importance then and now of the Geneva Conventions. We'll note this section on International Humanitarian Law which applies to many regions including Iraq:

So what are some of the ongoing challenges to IHL? The first relates to the conduct of hostilities. I referred earlier to the changing nature of armed conflict and the increasingly blurred lines between combatants and civilians. Civilians have progressively become more involved in activities closely related to actual combat. At the same time, combatants do not always clearly distinguish themselves from civilians, neither wearing uniforms nor openly carrying arms. They mingle with the civilian population. Civilians are also used as human shields. To add to the confusion, in some conflicts, traditional military functions have been outsourced to private contractors or other civilians working for State armed forces or for organised armed groups. These trends are, if anything, likely to increase in the years ahead. The result of this, in a nutshell, is that civilians are more likely to be targeted – either mistakenly or arbitrarily. Military personnel are also at increased risk: since they cannot properly identify their adversary, they are vulnerable to attack by individuals who to all appearances are civilians. IHL stipulates that those involved in fighting must make a basic distinction between combatants on the one hand, who may lawfully be attacked, and civilians on the other hand, who are protected against attack unless and for such time as they directly participate in hostilities. The problem is that neither the Geneva Conventions nor their Additional Protocols spell out what precisely constitutes "direct participation in hostilities". To put it bluntly, this lack of clarity has been costing lives. This is simply unjustifiable. In an effort to help remedy this situation, the ICRC worked for six years with a group of more than 50 international legal experts from military, academic, governmental and non-governmental backgrounds. The end result of this long and intense process, published just two months ago, was a substantial guidance document. This document serves to shed light firstly on who is considered a civilian for the purpose of conducting hostilities, what conduct amounts to direct participation in hostilities, and which particular rules and principles govern the loss of civilian protection against direct attack. Without changing existing law, the ICRC's Interpretative Guidance document provides our recommendations on how IHL relating to the notion of direct participation in hostilities should be interpreted in contemporary armed conflict. It constitutes much more than an academic exercise. The aim is that these recommendations will enjoy practical application where it matters, in the midst of armed conflict, and better protect the victims of those conflicts. Direct participation in hostilities is not the only concept relating to the conduct of hostilities that could benefit from further clarification. Differences exist over the interpretation of other key notions such as "military objective", the "principle of proportionality" and "precaution". The debate has been prompted in part by the growing number of military operations conducted in densely populated urban areas, often using heavy or highly explosive weapons, which have devastating humanitarian consequences for civilian populations. The media images of death, injury and destruction -- of terrible suffering -- in such situations of conflict in different parts of the world are surely all too familiar to everyone here today. Another key issue here is the increasingly asymmetric nature of modern armed conflicts. Differences between belligerents, especially in terms of technological and military capacities have become ever more pronounced. Compliance with the rules of IHL may be perceived as beneficial to one side of the conflict only, while detrimental to the other. At worst, a militarily weak party -- faced with a much more powerful opponent -- will contravene fundamental rules of IHL in an attempt to even out the imbalance. If one side repeatedly breaks the rules, there is a risk that the situation quickly deteriorates into a free-for-all. Such a downward spiral would defy the fundamental purpose of IHL -- to alleviate suffering in times of war. We must explore every avenue to prevent this from happening. I would also like to briefly address the humanitarian and legal challenges related to the protection of internally displaced people. In terms of numbers, this is perhaps one of the most daunting humanitarian challenges arising in armed conflicts around the world today, from Colombia to Sri Lanka and from Pakistan to Sudan. This problem not only affects the many millions of IDPs, but also countless host families and resident communities.
Violations of IHL are the most common causes of internal displacement in armed conflict. Preventing violations is therefore, logically, the best means of preventing displacement from occurring in the first place. On the other hand, people are sometimes forcibly prevented from fleeing when they wish to do so. During displacement, IDPs are often exposed to further abuses and have wide-ranging subsistence needs. Even when IDPs want to return to their place of origin, or settle elsewhere, they are often faced with obstacles. Their property may have been destroyed or taken by others, the land might be occupied or unusable after the hostilities, or returnees may fear reprisals if they return. As part of the civilian population, IDPs are protected as civilians in armed conflicts. If parties to conflicts respected the basic rules of IHL, much of the displacement and suffering caused to IDPs could be prevented. Nevertheless, there are some aspects of IHL concerning displacement that could be clarified or improved. These include in particular questions of freedom of movement, the need to preserve family unity, the prohibition of forced return or forced resettlement, and the right to voluntary return.

The Iraq War has created the largest humanitarian crisis. No number fudging necessary, the largest. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees estimates the at risk population residing in Iraq to be 3,140,345. That includes the 2,647,251 Internally Displaced Persons and the 230,000 Stateless Persons (such as the Palestinians trapped on Iraq's border with Syria). Outside of Iraq, the at risk Iraqi population is 4,797,979 which includes the 1,903,519 external refugees. These at risk populations are at risk due to the Iraq War. Syria and Jordan continue to house the largest numbers of Iraqi refugees. The most recent estimates (January 2009 -- and based on registration which a number of refugees avoid for various reasons) places 1,200,000 Iraqi refugees in Syria, 450,000 in Jordan, 150,000 in Gulf States, 58,000 in Iran, 50,000 in Lebanon, 40,000 in Egypt and 7,000 in Turkey.

In all those numbers, it's easy to lose track of the individuals. Philip Jacobson (Huffington Post) reports on Iraqi refugee Ahlam Ahmed Mahmoud's journey. She was featured in Deborah Campbell's 2008 "Exodus: Where will Iraq go next?" (Harper's Magazine) which found her in Syria assisting other Iraqis. Campbell was visiting her in May of 2008 when Mahmoud was rounded up by Syrian police, told she would have to spy for Syira on journalists, refused to do so and locked away in a prison for over five months. After finally being release, Mahmoud arrived in Chicago and Iraqi refugees who had made it to the United States (a very small number -- Western nations have done an appalling job in granting asylum to Iraqi refugees) expected that the "fixer" Mahmoud would again be able to assist them and help them navigate the complicated and confusing system. Mahmoud attempted to beg off but ended up starting Iraqi Mutual Aid Society with Beth Ann Toupin. That's the bare bones of her story, Philip Jacobson sketches it out in detail (and with skill) so make the time to read his article. Last month, Mary Owen (Chicago Tribune) reported that Chicago's Edgewater and Rogers Park house approximately 3,000 Iraqis.

Meanwhile the New York Times continues to INSULTINGLY describe Mudhafer al-Husaini as "a former translator with" the paper. This attitude is why the bulk of stringers the paper had early on, hated, HATED, the paper. It's why most of them moved as quickly as possible to work for other outlets. And at other outlets, they got bylines a lot quicker. But Muhafer al-Husaini got bylines (slowly) at the New York Times and it's a little insulting to readers of the paper and a lot insulting to the work Mudhafer al-Husaini did. In June of 2008, Alissa J. Rubin and Mudhafer al-Husaini wrote "Baghdad Blast Kills Four Americans," January of this year Sam Dagher and Mudhafer al-Husaini wrote "Bomber at Iraqi Shrine Kills 40, Including 16 Iranian Pilgrims," November of last year Katherine Zoepf and Mudhafer al-Husaini make the front page with their "Militants Turn to Small Bombs in Iraq Attacks" -- we can go and on. I know bylines -- even if the paper doesn't. And bylines aren't given out of kindness. Anyone who thinks that doesn't grasp the egos on most reporters. Mudhafer al-Husaini earned his many bylines. He is a journalist. Don't insult him by referring to him as a translator. (Nothing wrong with being a translator. I have many friends who are. But, at the paper, he was a 'media worker' who became a journalist. Give him his earned credit for being a journalist.) Mudhafar al-Husseini was granted asylum in the US and he reports on the last months at the Committee to Protect Journalists:

I now live in Tucson , Arizona , a quiet city and a good place to start over and get a wider view of America . I am one of many Iraqis who have come to Tucson . When I talk to fellow Iraqi immigrants, they are also surprised to find such a quiet city in America , but most say that this city is a good fit for them. There are others who are not satisfied with it, and I think that is because they're jobless, which is the same problem in many parts of the U.S. now.
I was astonished by several things I never imagined about life in America . Life is very serious and practical here, and people don't have much time to talk on the street, in markets, or even in public places. It seems everyone is busy with his or her own business and daily concerns. Sometimes I feel that it's good this way, and other times I hate it because in Baghdad you would never feel alone or neglected. People in Baghdad would stay up late and forget about their long workday by hanging out with friends or going out. The day would go until midnight, or even beyond. Many things have changed since the invasion, and the deterioration of the security situation has kept most Iraqis indoors.
I was also surprised that most Americans know nothing about the reality of the war in Iraq . I sometimes find it hard to explain, because Iraq is a complicated place. I think it's the history, the civilization, and the old sand of that country that makes it harder than others to be understood. These aspects were not considered at all before the war. You have to study Iraqi history well and get to know the culture more before dealing with the people on a long-term basis.

This afternoon Kirk Semple (New York Times) reports on Iraqi refugees in the US and finds in New York what is going on across the country -- Iraqi refugees struggle to find work, depend on assistance to pay bills and worry about the meager government benefits running out (which they do -- they run out very quickly). Uday al-Ghanimi and his wife and their three children live in New York and all but Uday speak of a desire to go back to Iraq. Lumping "special visas" and those granted asylum, Semple is reporting that the US has only taken in 45,000 Iraqi refugees since the start of the illegal war. For context, that's 5,000 less than Lebanon is currently officially housing. That's shameful -- both due to the riches of the United States (yes, even in this economic crisis) and for the US government's responsibility in starting the illegal war.

Not all Iraqi refugees are Christians but they make a large percentage of the refugee population (especially considering their percentage in the overall Iraqi population). AINA reports US House Rep Jan Schakowsky has released an open letter to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on the issue of Iraq's refugees. The [PDF format warning] August 7th letter reads:

I am writing to you today to urge you to develop a comprehensive strategy for the protection of ethno-religious minorities in Iraq. As you are aware, Iraqi minorities continue to face persistent persecution and danger. In particular, I am extremely concerned about the ongoing ethno-religious cleansing of Iraq's Assyrian/Chaldean/Syriac Christian community.
Iraqi Christians have faced relentless persecution, threats, and violence since the commencement of United States operations in Iraq, and the danger has accelerated dramatically since 2004. In fact, 2008 represented one of the most devastating years for Iraqi ethno-religious minorities, especially the Assyrian/Chaldean/Syriac Christians. Because of the ongoing crisis facing minority groups, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom has now formally designated Iraq a 'Country of Particular Concern.'
Despite this ongoing crisis, the United States has consistently failed to develop a comprehensive policy to address this serious situation. However, I believe that we now have an opportunity to encourage widespread recognition of this crisis and work together to find a solution. Any successful diplomatic policy must consider security, development, and governance dimensions, and must recognize the centrality of the Nineveh Plains to the future of these people. It must also include the full implementation of Article 125 of the Iraqi constitution.
I strongly urge you to develop a meaningful policy outlining concrete steps that the U.S. can take towards a sustainable solution. As you begin this process, I would encourage you to meet with representatives of the Assyrian community to discuss the situation.

Please note that Joe Biden, vice president of the United States, has been designated as the point person on Iraq. This designation came about after Barack's unannounced go to on the region proved to be a failure. (That person was not Hillary. Hillary was never the point-person on Iraq.) Nineveh was in the news on Monday with the twin truck bombings attacking the Shabak community. Article 125 of Iraq's Constitution deals with local administration [PDF format warning, click here] and states, "This Constitution shall guarantee the administrative, political, cultural and educational rights of the variou snationalities, such as Turkomen, Chaldeans, Assyrians, and all other constituents, and this shall be regulated by law." Meanwhile Stockholm News notes Sveriges Radio reporting "Christian Iraqi refugees have been sent back to Iraq. This has raised upset reactions both from within Sweden and from foreign human rights experts." In Syria, Susan Irvine (Financial Times of London) reports on Iraqi refugees, "Besma didn't rush to tell me about Iraq and the war, and I was reticent to ask. But over time she told me about the early days of 'shock and awe'. Communications were down, and the area where her mother lived was being heavily bombed. Besma persuaded a neighbor to drive her through Baghdad -- an incredibly dangerous journey -- to check on her. They got as far as the river, but the bridges were blown up. She told me about the first time she looked out of her window and saw Americans 'coming down the street in their big Hummers as if they owned the place'. She told me how her brother was murdered in the sectarian violence that followed. Her mother -- 'thanks be to God' -- was unharmed."

At the end of last month, the UNHCR issued a report entitled "Surviving in the city" focusing on cities in Jordan, Lebanon and Syria and dealing with the needs of "large populations of urban refugees." Among the problems faced, "the majority of Iraqis do not have any immediate prospect of finding a solution to their plight. Most of them consider that current conditions in Iraq prevent them from repatriating, while a significant number state that they have no intention of returning there under any circumstances." From page 49 (report is not PDF format, for any thinking that detail was forgotten):

A Jordanian scholar who was interviewed in the course of this review commented that "the decision to flee from your own country is always easier to make than the decision to return." This observation is certainly supported by the case of the Iraqi refugees, many of whom left their homes at short notice, threatened by escalating violence in their homeland and the very real threat that they would be targeted for attack because of their religious identity, their profession or their relative prosperity.
At the time of their sudden departure, the refugees hoped that the crisis would not persist very long, and that withing a reasonable amount of time they would be able to return to Iraq, reclaim their property and resume their previous life. But as time has passed, those expectations have faded and the refugees are left with few choices with regard to their future.
The majority do not want to repatriate now or in the near future. Only some of the refugees can expect to be admitted to a third country by means of resettlement. And those who remain in their countries of asylum have no opportunity to benefit from the solution of local integration have very limited prospect for self-reliance and are confronted with the prospect of a steady decline in their standard of living. In the words of an elderly refugee man living in the Syrian city of Aleppo "when we left Iraq, we simply didn't know that we would end up like this."

Today the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs released their [PDF format warning] 2nd Quarter report "Humanitarian Funding Update" which shows huge shortfalls for all countries in terms of the monies needed for assistance. For Iraq, the UN was calling for $650 million and has seen $276 million in contributions this year leading to a shortfall of $374 million.

In Iraq today, Chelsea J. Carter (AP) reports 67 US service members have been confirmed as having swine flu and when these cases are combined with Iraqi cases, you have 96 confirmed cases. Please note that the Iraqi tally is probably much higher. The health care system has broken down and the Health Ministry is not eager to count accurately after Nouri and his underlings began blaming US service members for the swine flu outbreak in Iraq. (The same swine flu outbreak that is global.) Also grasp that the World Health Organization's Iraq country Office issued an invitation to bid on H1N1 detection kits -- that's swine flu and swine flu is what it's known as -- July 12th. And when did the bidding process end? July 26th. So there's a shortage currently on swine flu detection kits in Iraq. They're short on swine flu tests but, Ned Parker and Caesar Ahmed (Los Angeles Times) report, they can bet on the horses. No word on whether the OTB allows people to bet on violence but violence continued in Iraq today.

Bombings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing which left three people wounded, a Baaj grenade attack which claimed the life of 1 father, 1 guard, 2 sons who were police officers, 1 "little boy" as well as wounding three more people, a suicide car bombing in Ramadi which claimed the lives of the driver and 1 police officer and left two more police officers and a civilian wounded, and a Kirkuk car bombing which claimed the lives of 3 police officers and left four more wounded. Reuters notes a Mahmudiya roadside bombing which left three people wounded and a Kirkuk roadside bombing which claimed the life of 1 police officer and left five more injured.

Shootings?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports Iraqi police officer Brig Gen Abdulhameed Khalaf Asfoor was shot dead as he returned from a funeral in Mosul. Reuters notes 1 "old man" was shot dead in Mosul and an armed clash in Ramadi in which one police officer was injured and 2 suspects were shot dead.

Corpses?

Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 4 people kidnapped since Monday, two were released by kidnappers, a third was rescued by police and no word on the fourth.

"They gave me a gun" he said
"They gave me a mission
For the power and the glory --
Propaganda -- piss on 'em
There's a war zone inside me --
I can feel things exploding --
I can't even hear the f**king music playing
For the beat of -- the beat of black wings."
[. . .]
"They want you -- they need you --
They train you to kill --
To be a pin on some map --
Some vicarious thrill --
The old hate the young
That's the whole heartless thing
The old pick the wars
We die in 'em
To the beat of -- the beat of black wings"
-- "The Beat of Black Wings," words and music by Joni Mitchell, first appears on her Chalk Mark In A Rainstorm.

Meanwhile Neil Syson (The Sun) reports, "An ex-paratrooper accused of murdering two workmates in Baghdad could face the noose within WEEKS." He's referring to Danny Fitzsimons who served in the British military for eight years and was stationed in Afghanistan and Kosovo as well as Iraq. He is accused of being the shooter in a Sunday Green Zone incident in which 1 British contractor, Paul McGuigan, and 1 Australian contractor, Darren Hoare, died and one Iraqi, Arkhan Madhi, was injured. Eric and Liz Fitzsimons spoke to the BBC (link has video) and noted that they are not asking for Danny to 'walk.' They stated that he has to take responsibility. But they want a fair trial and do not believe that is possible in Iraq. Amnesty International issued the following yesterday:Responding to reports that a British employee of a security company working in Iraq may face a death sentence, Amnesty International UK Media Director Mike Blakemore said: 'It's right that private military and security company employees like Danny Fitzsimons are not placed above the law when they're working in places like Iraq and it's right that the Iraqi authorities are set to investigate this very serious incident. 'However, as with all capital cases, Amnesty would strenuously oppose the application of the death penalty if applied to Mr Fitzsimons in this case.'Iraq has a dreadful record of unfair capital trials and at least 34 people were hanged in the country last year alone. 'The important thing now is that if Danny Fitzsimons is put on trial he is allowed a fair trial process without resort to the cruelty of a death sentence.' Last year 34 criminals were hanged in Iraq. Private security guard Fitzsimons, employed by UK firm ArmorGroup, would be the first Westerner on trial since the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Steven Morris (Guardian) reports Danny's attorneys do not believe that he will receive a fair trail in Iraq with Trevor Linn fearful Danny will be "made an example of". Scotland's The Herald offers background on the two deceased contractors: Paul McGuigan served in the British military before becoming a contractor, his wife is pregnant, Darren Hoare had served in Australia's Air Force before becoming a contractor.

The International Press Institute issued "As Threat of Violence Still Looms Large over the Media in Iraq, another Menace Emerges in Form of Draft Law to 'Protect' Journalists" yesterday:Iraq Still the Most Dangerous Country in the World for ReportersAs U.S. troops continue to hand power over to Iraqi authorities in Iraq, IPI calls on the Iraqi government to protect press freedom in the country. Iraq remains the most dangerous country in the world for journalists – who now face a new threat in the form of a draft law published in Iraq on Friday 31 July, according to news reports. Ostensibly designed to 'safeguard' journalists' rights, the draft law does contain some provisions that should help protect journalists in Iraq. It equates an attack on a reporter to an attack on a government employee, and maintains that journalists cannot be pressured into publishing material that is incompatible with their beliefs, opinions or conscience. However, the draft legislation also contains worrying provisions that could have a negative impact on media freedom. For example, vague wording prohibiting journalists from "compromising the security and stability of the country" may be used to stifle valid criticism. Such words are reminiscent of legislation in place in a host of countries with poor records on media freedom which broadly and unfairly interpret terms like 'compromising security' to snuff out and punish virtually any form of criticism of government and state interests. The draft law also contains a dispiriting message on the protection of sources, which would be guaranteed unless "the law requires the source to be revealed" -- in other words there is no guaranteed protection for sources. The bill also stipulates that freedom of the press can be suspended if a publication threatens citizens or makes "provocative or aggressive statements" -- again, a vaguely worded phrase leaving much room for interpretation. "While we welcome the positive aspects of this draft law, we call on the Iraqi parliament to remove those sections that could hinder media freedom in the country," said Michael Kudlak, IPI Deputy Director. "A free and unfettered press is one of the most vital elements in any fledgling democracy, so Iraqi politicians must ensure that the media is free to work with the minimum restraint."In recent years, Iraq has been one of the most dangerous countries for journalists, with at least 169 journalists killed in the line of duty over the last seven years, according to IPI's figures -- many of them Iraqis murdered in the sectarian violence that has ravaged the country. On Friday 7 August, Iraqi journalists expressed fear at again being targeted, following a fiery sermon by a prominent Shiite cleric, Jalal Eddin Saghir, allegedly inciting violence against a journalist. Eddin Saghar had apparently taken issue with the journalist linking his political party, the Supreme Iraqi Islamic Council, to a July bank robbery in Baghdad.

Edward Cody (Washington Post) reports on yesterday's press conference in Paris where supporters of the residents of Camp Ashraf (under assault since July 28th) declared the US and the United Nations were shirking their responsibilities. Cody quotes French jurist Francois Serres stating, "We must underline that the responsiblity of the United States in this matter, moral as well as leagl, is overwhelming." The US did leave the residents to believe they would be safe (which is what Nouri led the US to believe). Under Geneva, 60th anniversary today, remember, the US and the United Nations have a responsibility to those residents -- both in terms of their safety and in terms of preventing their forced deportation to Iran.

Meanwhile McClatchy's Mike Tharp vows the Iraq War is the last war he will cover and he offers ten lessons he's learned -- we'll note this one, "Lesson No. 3 is that few of those leaders will ever have to pay the price of their folly. The 4,300-plus American dead, 31,000-plus American wounded, hundreds of thousands of dead and maimed Iraqis have paid the cost. But not the McNamaras or the Bundys or the Cheneys or the Wolfowitzes or the Johnsons or Nixons or Bushes. They get medals and money. The ones who made the ultimate sacrifice get lost in the pages of history. Five of their names are carved in granite at Courthouse Park in Merced."

And Ms. magazine notes, "Join Ms. in celebrating Gloria Steinem's 75th birthday.
As Gloria turns 75, Ms. is providing supporters an opportunity to wish her a happy birthday in the magazine. That's right. Ms. will print the names of supporters who want to celebrate with Gloria this extraordinary landmark -- not only of years, but of her amazing achievements for women. To participate, we are asking you to make a special gift of $75 - or $15 - or $150 - or whatever multiple of $75 you can afford, to not only celebrate Gloria's birthday but to keep her legacy of Ms. strong for future generations. Whatever the size of your contribution, we will make sure your name is printed in Ms. wishing Gloria happy birthday." This will be in an entry tomorrow morning in greater length but we can squeeze that snippet into the snapshot right now. Trina did a wonderful job explaining how Congress and the White House are attempting to sell a plan that doesn't exist. Make a point to read her. Bob Somerby tackles Melissa Harris Lacewell today (I feel dirty just saying her name -- Lie Face) and Stan tackled her last night while Betty tried to go over the facts for those who seem immune to them and Marcia and Ruth also offered press critiques. (As did Elaine. We commented this morning but I just don't have it in me to deal with Rod Nordland and the Times nonsense this afternoon.) Finally, from ETAN:

August 12 - Members of the U.S.-based East Timor and Indonesia Action Network (ETAN) will gather in Timor-Leste later this month to commemorate the tenth anniversary of the country's historic vote for independence. "In Dili we will demonstrate our ongoing commitment to the Timorese people," said John M. Miller, ETAN's National Coordinator. "We will join with Timorese and international activists to look back at the East Timorese struggle for independence and to evaluate the new nation's course since those momentous events. We will explore with our Timorese friends how we can best support Timor-Leste in the future." "We will also strongly reaffirm our commitment to justice and accountability for the years of crimes against humanity committed by Indonesia with U.S. government backing," he added. "Our goal is to return home with a deeper understanding of today's Timor and a strengthened commitment and concrete plans for ongoing ties with the people of the still struggling nation," added Pam Sexton a member of ETAN's Executive Committee who has been living in Timor-Leste during the past year. "The anniversary should not serve only as platform for self-congratulatory speeches by the international community and politicians" said Charles Scheiner, an ETAN co-founder. "The United Nations and its members need to clearly understand the impact of their failure to help the Timorese people from Indonesian's invasion in 1975 through 1998. International support since then needs to be made more effective and responsive to Timorese needs," added Scheiner works with La'o Hamutuk, a local organization founded soon after the independence vote to monitor international institutions and foster grassroots participation in decision-making. Contact ETAN to arrange interviews from Timor-Leste. Background Indonesia invaded East Timor in 1975 and illegally occupied the territory until October 1999, with backing from the United States and other powers. On August 30, 1999, the East Timorese people voted overwhelmingly for independence in a UN-organized referendum. Following the vote, Indonesian security forces and their militia laid waste to the territory, capping nearly two and half decades of brutal occupation with the destruction of 75% of the buildings and infrastructure. Timor-Leste's Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation (CAVR) estimates that up to 184,000 Timorese people were killed as a result of the occupation. Timor-Leste became independent in May 2002. ETAN was a major participant in the International Federation for East Timor's Observer Project, one of the largest international observer missions for the vote in 1999. ETAN members also served as observers with church and parliamentary delegations. ETAN was formed in 1991 to advocate for self-determination for the occupied country. The U.S.-based organization continues to advocate for democracy, justice and human rights for Timor-Leste and Indonesia. ETAN recently won the John Rumbiak Human Rights Defenders Award. For more information, see ETAN's web site: http://www.etan.org .


iraq
philip jacobson
the los angeles timesned parker
the new york timeskatherine zoepfmudhafer al-husaini
amnesty internationalneil sysonbbc news
chelsea j. carter
mike tharpmcclatchy newspapers
sahar issa
joni mitchell
gloria steinem
ms.ms. magazine
the washington post

Carly Simon and 'It's not like him'

That's the cover of Carly Simon's This Kind Of Love and Kat reviewed it here. I do love that album; however, Jess is driving my group around (we're all on vacation and staying at C.I.'s) and one of the discs Jess has in the car is Carly Simon's Have You Seen Me Lately? which I honestly didn't know.

I have fallen in love with this CD. I knew "Better Not Tell Her" from the radio ("that I was your lover, better not make her jealous of me . . ."). It's a great song and I love the Spanish guitar. But I just love this entire CD.

My favorite song is probably "It's Not Like Him." In that song, the woman begins to grasp that her partner is acting differently because he's got someone else.

There's a wonderful list of all the things he's doing differently but this is my favorite part of the song:

And the sweet name
He called me in his sleep last night
That's not like him.

I love those lines, yes. But I also love the notes she hits while she sings them. You really have to hear it. (She hits them on "Don't Wrap It Up" as well.) Jess tells me that once I get used to the album, "We Just Got Here" will be my favorite song and he's probably right.

However, currently, I'm forever saying, "One more time!" I say that whenever the song ends making Jess repeat the track. I've learned all the words just from listening to it over and over today and it's really something.

And it's a really masterful song.

You really need to hear the music (written by Carly) but, even without it, I think you can appreciate what she and Jacob Brackman have done with the lyrics:


When Tom came home his hair was combed
He bought snakeskin boots in Rome
That's not like him

His socks are clean, his shirt is pressed
It isn't just the way he's dressed
He smiles out of context and acts so polite
He's staying at his cousin's overnight

The protein shakes, that's not like him
The carrot cakes, that's not like him
The oatbran flakes, that's not like him
And the sweet name he called me in his sleep last night
Oh, that's not like him

He whispers on the telephone
He goes out smelling of cologne
That's not like him

It's just a superficial thing
But he's misplaced his wedding ring
He's become quite a connoisseur of wine
He's quoting Yeats and Gertrude Stein

The Soho pub, that's not like him
The racquet club, that's not like him
Those books on love, that's not like him
And the sweet name he called me in his sleep last night
Oh, that's not like him

I caught a glimpse of Tom today
At a checkout counter, about to pay
He had a girl on his arm
I'm glad he's helping out the poor
It's not like the Tom I knew before
Something so touching it made me cry
But my heart was racing, I don't know why

Those new blue suede shoes, that's not like him
The Ray Ban shades, that's not like him
Those downtown ways, that's not like him
And the sweet name he called me in his sleep last night
Oh, that's not like him

The red suspenders, that's not like him
The berries in the blender, that's not like him
Those twelve step groups, that's not like him
And Guadeloupe, that's not like him
Those books on Zen, that's not like him
The Karate classes, that's not like him
The fishing gear, that's not like him
Not like him
That's not like him

Is that not amazing? I love this song.

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

Tuesday, August 11, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces a death, officials say Iraq's biggest threat to stability is the Kurds, unless officials say Iraq's biggest threat to stability is the PKK, and more.

Today the US Dept of Defense announced a death in Iraq and i.d.ed the fallen, Spc Richard A. Walters Jr. who died in yesterday from "injuries sustained from a non-combat related incident." Currently, the link is not working. If it's still not working when the snapshot goes up, we'll note the passing in tomorrow's snapshot as well. We just said that DoD identified the fallen and that they announced the death. See a problem? MNF is supposed to announce the deaths. DoD is supposed to identify them (after the immediate family has been notified). So what happened? MNF 'forgot' to announce the death. That's the second time in two weeks that they've missed their key function. They're nothing but a press relations crew and one of their duties is to announce deaths. The DoD is only supposed to (later) provide the name. MNF gets away with this because the press has never once protested. The announcement brings to 4331 the number of US service members killed in Iraq since the start of the illegal war.

From Friday through Monday, there were reports of 124 deaths and 624 injured from violence. Natalia Antelava (BBC News) analyzes these developments and postulates that instead of death tolls, "Looking at the nature of the attacks might provide better insight. As the US generals prepared for the June withdrawal of their troops from Iraqi cities, US military officials argued that the attacks had become much less organised and sophisticated. However, less than two months after the pull-out, this seems to be changing. The latest bombings resemble the well co-ordinated, well planned strikes of the earlier years of heightened violence." Antelava is correct and the only thing to add to that is that maybe newspaper headlines which read "Afghanistan bombs more deadly" can also be seen as a taunt in Iraq? How do you even measure that? Considering the differing landscapes and everything else and what is that sort of headline anyway, some war mongering reporting's notion of fantasy football? Equally true is that reporters have rarely grasped the ebb and flow of the Iraq attacks. Or maybe they just didn't care to detect a pattern? When's the next big attack coming? Press reports suggest one was just prevented. BBC News reports Kuwait is claiming that they have stopped a plan to attack a US military base in Iraq and arrested 6 of their own citizens who have "confessed to the crimes after they were arrested."

Whether the arrests and confessions are valid, violence didn't stop in Iraq today.
Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad sticky bombing which left four people wounded, a Baghdad car bombing which left nine people wounded, three Baghdad roadside bombings which claimed 3 lives and left ten injured ("police said that this figure was a preliminary") and a Falluja roadside bombing which left four people wounded. Reuters notes 2 Baghdad car bombings which claimed 8 lives and left thirty people injured.

That's today. In the future? Adam Entous (Reuters) reports on the Pentagon briefing by Geoff Morrell today where he stated, "But we are very nervous, continue to be, about the overall Arab-Kurdish tensions. [. . .] We are going to remain vigilant. A certain number of U.S. forces are required in that country . . . in no small measure to try to assist . . . the Arabs and the Kurds solve some of these problems while we are still there." Kat covered the Kurdish issue last night, "AFP reports today that Maj Gen Jamal Taher Bakr, who is the police chief of Kirkuk, says 'It would be better' when asked if US troops should stay until 2012 or 2013. Remember that Kirkuk is disputed. In the country's constitution (ratified in 2005), it says a referendum will be held following a census and that will determine Kirkuk's fate. It's an oil-rich region and the central government wants it and so does the Kurdistan region. This was supposed to have been decided long, long ago. Instead of deciding, the issue has been a can that everyone's played kick the can with. It's not surprising that the issue alarms the police chief or any resident of Kirkuk and I'm not making fun of them or even saying, 'You're wrong!' I am saying that the longer the issue is put off, the worse it gets." Kirkuk is disputed by the Kurdistan Regional Government and the central government in Baghdad, both of which want it to be part of their region. Among those outside players attempting to influence events is the government of Turkey which fears Kurdish power and self-rule due to its own internal issues. Complicating the matter further are the PKK which is a labeled a terrorist organization by the US, England, the European Union, Turkey and many others. These are Kurdish fighters who support Kurdish independence within Turkey. They have set up bases in the mountains of northern Iraq to stage attacks. Jane Arraf (Christian Science Montior) reports that the foreign ministers of Iraq and Turkey -- Hoshyar Zebari and Ahmet Davutoglu -- held a press conference in Baghdad today where they revealed an offer of water for Iraq were it to crack down on the PKK. The water issue is an important one to Iraq. Anthony DiPaloa and Caroline Alexander (Bloomberg News) reported last week that the country was set to "have its worst harvest in a decade this year as an extended drought cuts its water supply, forcing the third-biggest OPEC producer to increase grain imports as oil revenue drops."

Will Nouri attack the PKK? Very likely. July 28th, he launched an attack on the residents of Camp Ashraf. With more on that, this is from Amnesty International:

Thirty-six Iranian residents of Camp Ashraf in Iraq remain at risk of being forcibly returned to Iran where they could face torture or execution. The 36 have been detained since Iraqi security forces stormed the camp, about 60km north of Baghdad, on 28 July. At least eight Camp Ashraf residents were killed and many more injured during the raid. Most of the 36 are reported to have been beaten and tortured. At least seven are said to need urgent medical care. Camp Ashraf is home to about 3,500 members of the People's Mojahedeen Organization of Iran (PMOI), an Iranian opposition group which has been based in Iraq since 1986. Following the raid, the 36 were taken to a police station inside the camp. They were held there for an hour and are reported to have been tortured and beaten before being transferred to a police station in the town of al-Khalis, about 25 km south of Camp Ashraf. According to reports, the detainees were told to sign documents written in Arabic by those detaining them, but refused to do so. They have also sought access to lawyers, so far unsuccessfully. Of the seven reported to need medical treatment, Mehraban Balai sustained a gunshot injury to his leg and a broken arm after being beaten by Iraqi security forces. Habib Ghorab is said to suffer from internal bleeding and Ezat Latifi has serious chest pain. He is thought to have been run over by one of the military vehicles used by Iraqi forces in seizing control of the camp. The PMOI established itself in Iraq in 1986 (during the Iran-Iraq war, 1980-88), at the invitation of the then President Saddam Hussein. In 1988, from its base at Camp Ashraf, the PMOI attempted to invade Iran. The Iranian authorities summarily executed hundreds, if not thousands, of PMOI detainees in an event known in Iran as the "prison massacres". For a number of years it was listed as a "terrorist organization" by several Western governments. Following the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, the PMOI members disarmed and were accorded "protected persons" status under the Fourth Geneva Convention. This lapsed in 2009, when the Iraqi government started to exercise control over Iraq's internal affairs in accordance with the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), a security pact agreed by the governments of Iraq and the USA in November 2008 and which entered into force on 1 January this year. US forces in Iraq provided effective protection for Camp Ashraf until mid-2009, after which they completed their withdrawal to their bases from all Iraqi towns and cities. After they disarmed, the PMOI announced that they had renounced violence. There is no evidence that the PMOI has continued to engage in armed opposition to the Iranian government, though people associated with the PMOI still face human rights violations in Iran. Since mid-2008 the Iraqi government has repeatedly indicated that it wants to close Camp Ashraf, and that residents should leave Iraq or face being forcibly expelled from the country. Amnesty International has urged the authorities not to forcibly return any Camp Ashraf resident or other Iranians to Iran, where they would be at risk of torture and other serious human rights violations. The organization has called upon the Iraqi authorities to investigate all allegations of torture and beatings, and to bring the perpetrators to justice. The organization has also called on the authorities to provide appropriate medical care to the 36 detainees and to release them unless they are to be promptly charged with a recognizable offence and brought to trial according to international standards for fair trial.

Read More
Iraq: Concern for detained Camp Ashraf residents (Public statement, 4 August 2009) Eight reported killed as Iraqi forces attack Iranian residents of Camp Ashraf (News, 29 July 2009)

Iran's Press TV reports today that protestors gathered in Diyalah Province in a 'brave and dangerous' demonstration (that's sarcasm) to support the decision of Nouri al-Maliki to expell the residents of Camp Ashraf. In any country, the most pathetic thing is the lackeys who feel the need to pimp the government line. (As true in Iraq as it is in the US -- whether it comes from Barry O's astroturf friends or Bully Boy Bush's 'freedom rallies'.) Gordon Lubold (Christian Science Monitor) notes the human rights lawyers calling on the US government to protect the residents of Camp Ashraf. The US Committee for Camp Ashraf Residents sent "Documents Show Iraq, U.S. in Breach of Obligations to Protect Camp Ashraf Residents" to the public e-mail account (Betty noted it last night):

In a news briefing today at the National Press Club, international and U.S. lawyers of residents of Camp Ashraf presented documents of crimes against humanity perpetrated by the Iraqi government during the July 28 attack on Camp Ashraf. They also made public the agreements signed between the U.S. government and every resident of the Camp Ashraf for their protection. Camp Ashraf is home to members of the main Iranian opposition group, the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI/MEK). Its residents had signed an agreement with the Multi-National Force-Iraq in 2004, according to which the US agreed to protect them until their final disposition."The official U.S. government response to the events at Ashraf is that all issues concerning the Camp are now matters for the Iraqis to determine, as an exercise of their sovereignty. But that is a red herring: no one contests the sovereignty of the State of Iraq over Ashraf. Sovereignty does not provide an excuse for violating the human rights of the residents. Nor does it justify inaction on the part of the United States," said Steven Schneebaum, Counsel for U.S. families of Ashraf residents.He stressed: "The U.S. was the recipient of binding commitments by the Government of Iraq to treat the Ashraf residents humanely, and we know that has not happened. Moreover, it was the United States with whom each person at Ashraf reached agreement that protection would be provided until final decisions about their disposition have been made. And the United States remains bound also by principles of international humanitarian law and human rights law that make standing by during an armed attack on defenseless civilians unacceptable, and that impose an obligation to intervene to save innocent lives."Francois Serres, Executive Director of the International Committee of Jurists in Defense of Ashraf, which represents 8,500 lawyers and jurists in Europe and North America, added, "This [assault] is a manifest of crime against humanity by the Iraqi forces, attacking, with US-supplied weapons and armored vehicles, unarmed residents of Ashraf. The Iraqi government cannot be trusted in protecting the residents of Ashraf. The U.S. must undertake efforts to protect them until international protection is afforded to the residents." "We will pursue this matter before the International Criminal Court and courts in France and Belgium. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki is fully responsible for these atrocities and he will be held to account," he added. Zahra Amanpour, a human rights activist with the U.S. Committee for Camp Ashraf Residents also spoke at the news briefing. Ms. Amanpour, whose aunt is in Ashraf, said: "Why are the Department of State and the White House stone-walling us, the families of Camp Ashraf residents? Thirty-five people have been on a hunger strike outside the White House for 13 days, and we still don't have any reply by the administration."Claude Salhani (Washington Times) reports on the press conference and notes, "French lawyer Francois Serres said at a news conference in Washington that he would be taking legal action against Mr. al-Maliki in European courts as well as in the International Court of Justice at The Hague. Other lawsuits would be filed in U.S. courts against the U.S."


"They gave me a gun" he said
"They gave me a mission
For the power and the glory --
Propaganda -- piss on 'em.
There's a war zone inside me --
I can feel things exploding --
I can't even hear the f**king music playing
For the beat of -- the beat of black wings."
[. . .]
"They went you -- they need you --
They train you to kill --
To be a pin on some map --
Some vicarous thrill --
The old hate the young
That's the whole heartless thing
The old pick the wars
We die in 'em
To the beat of -- the beat of black wings."
-- "The Beat of Black Wings," words and music by Joni Mitchell, first appears on her Chalk Mark In A Rainstorm.

Danny Fitzsimons served in the British military for eight years and was stationed in Afghanistan and Kosovo as well as Iraq. He is in the news for his time in Iraq as a British contractor, or mercenary, accused of being the shooter in a Sunday Green Zone incident in which 1 British contractor, Paul McGuigan, and 1 Australian contractor, Darren Hoare, died and one Iraqi, Arkhan Madhi, was injured. Damien McElroy (Telegraph of London) reports today that Fitzsimons' parents, Eric and Beverly, and stepmother, Liz, state their son, now potentially facing the death penalty in Iraq's 'justice' system, has PTSD: "We are seeking funding in order to get a fair trial for Daniel, who served his country in Afghanistan and Iraq and left the Army suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. This situation is every parent's worst nightmare. We have been unable to speak directly to Daniel and are currently in contract with the Foreign Office, Fair Trials Abroad and our local MP, Jim Dobbin." Eric and Liz Fitzsimons speak to the BBC (link has video):

Liz Fitzsimons: You see, when he came out of the army because the army had always been his life, it was then at a real crossroads in his life and where some people might be able to cope, unfortunately, Daniel didn't cope well because he did enjoy army life. It was all he ever wanted, he loved it. And you come out and you live Middleton, which is where he ended up, and he couldn't find a path that suited him, he couldn't find a job although he tried very hard. And a testament to Daniel is that he joined a gym and kept himself -- Daniel likes routine. Daniel goes to the gym every day almost, I would suggest, every day, goes jogging he's a very clean young man. You know, he's not sort of gone wayward and just gone to the dogs kind of thing. And he met a girl, like you want your children to do, but then he wanted the normal life and he wanted the money that would go with a normal life. How does he do that when he can't find a job? And unfortunately becoming a security --

Eric Fitzsimons: He went back into doing security.

Liz Fitzimons: -- person in Iraq. [. . .] Oh, awful. Awful. The situation in Iraq isn't good, is it? We all know it's not good. But he would be out in convoys I believe their main job is to escort to --

Eric Fitzsimons: Oil [workers? Second word isn't clear.]

Liz Fitzsimons : Yes but they do escort people to jobs. And they do ride shotgun basically. They ride around --

Eric Fitzsimons: He's told us quite a lot of --

Liz Fitzsimons: Yeah.

Eric Fitsimons: -- tales

Liz Fitzsimons: He saw some awful things. The person in the cab next to him was blown up.

Eric Fitzsimons: Yeah.

Liz Fitzsimons: Next to him. At the same he had a bullet in his foot.

Eric Fitzsimons: Bullet in his foot, yeah, he's seen all sorts of IEDs you know, sorts of explosions at the side of the road. Loads and loads of them. And seen lots and lots of his friends killed.

They're asked about whether or not they attempted to talk Danny out of being a mercenary ("mercenary" is the term Eric Fitzsimons uses) and his father notes that they had conversations with him going back many years but he is a grown up who makes his own decisions. They express their sympathies for the families of the two men who were killed. "We're not saying that Daniel doesn't have to face what he's done," Liz Fitzsimons explains. "He does. He does have to face that. And we know he does. But what we want is for it to be fair and unfortunately where he is now, we don't think it will be."

While Danny Fitzsimons' family is unable to speak to him, Oliver August (Times of London) reports his paper has been able to and that Fitzsimons states the incident was self-defense: "I got into a fight with two colleagues and they had me pinned down. I received a real beating. They beat me and that's when I reached for my weapon. I was drunk and it happened very quickly."

The early morning shooting followed the consumption of alcohol. Oliver August teams with Deborah Haynes to note that "private security guards [in Iraq] always carry weapons, even when drinking" and they note the various bars to be found in the Green Zone including the now closed "CIA Bar" and the "FBI Bar." Fitzsimons worked for ArmorGroup and Haynes gives an overview of the company here. August reports that "the investigators told the judge that they have all the evidence they need to proceed with a trial. The Foreign Office is checking options on how to help Mr Fitzsimons but there appears to be little chance that he could be handed over to British officials or stand trial in UK for the alleged murder of a British and an Australian security guard also on contract with ArmorGroup." Martin Chulov (Guardian) was not present in the Iraqi court yesterday but he quotes Maj Gen Abdul-Kareem Khalaf stating Fitzsimons "made admissions." Take it with a grain of salt and remember all the distortions Iraqi government officials made of what the shoe tosser had supposedly stated. Jamie Walker and Sarah Elks (The Australian) note, "Aged in his 20s, the Briton is set to become the first foreign security contractor to face Iraqi justice; he could receive the death penalty if he is found guilty of gunning down Mr Hoare and Mr McGuigan." The New Statesman explains, "Last night British Embassy staff were trying to secure access to Fitzsimons. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office is looking into how it can help but there appears to be little chance that he will stand trial in Britain."

Turning to the US, Camilo Mejia is the author of Road from Ar Ramaid: The Private Rebellion of Staff Sergeant Mejia and he's an Iraq War veteran, a war resister and a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War (the chair until they announce Jose Vaquez as the new chair). Costa Rica Hoy notes, "Camilo Mejia is the first American soldier that served in Iraq who publicly opposed the war. He was imprisoned for refusing to return. At present, he is in the process of appealing his bad conduct discharge." The Center for Constitutional Rights noted the appeal last week and quoted Camilo stating, "Increasingly I found that I could no longer tolerate my complicity in what I considered immoral occupation. I could not go back to an environment where torture and abuse were destroying the lives of the Iraqis and the soldiers who were ordered to engage in such acts. I knew that if I returned I would have been required to do things that violate the Geneva Conventions."

We're going to stay with this topic for a moment. I was hoping IVAW's recent conference, which ended Sunday, would result in Street Trash leaving the organization. Street Trash's name doesn't appear at this site because Street Trash went public and then had a meltdown when we picked up the news of Street Trash being public from another website. Though it was already over the net, Street Trash was in a panic. We had to remove Street Trash's name from the Iraq snapshot!!!!! Trina and I went into every community site and edited out Street Trash's name and asked, "What the ___ is ____'s problem?" At which point, we were no longer interested in Street Trash. I believe it was 13 sites back then, and we had to go into 13 sites to edit out Street Trash's name because Street Trash had gone highly public and was now worried? Now?

Street Trash has spent the last months threatening to quit IVAW. This follows Street Trash's 'resignation' (from a non-elected IVAW board spot). In that 'resignation,' Street Trash trashed Camilo with rumors and just gutter gossip. It was so awful that Street Trash (karma?) had to go and remove the post from Street Trash's website. What Street Trash wrote, however, is still being said online by Street Trash, ST just does it at right wing sites. ST has already (again) attacked Camilo this week.

I'm not in the mood for that piece of garbage. We wrote about some of this nonsense at Third and Ty started getting crazy e-mails from Street Trash -- who is still in the miltiary and, as an IVAW member pointed out to Ty when I suggest he call him, was writing these while 'serving.' In other words, Street Trash now has an office job and apparently spends all day -- on the tax payer's dime -- leaving comments at websites and writing angry e-mails. The article, by the way, was "Who's duping who?" and Street Trash is not named or even referred to in that article. Mainly because we don't promote gutter trash, we take it to the curb. But that didn't stop Street Trash from lecturing Ty in repeated e-mails (all in one day -- seriously, Street Trash does no work for the military, just stays on the computer for eight hours each 'work' day) about journalism. Stupid ass, Street Trash, Ty has a degree in it. No one needs to interview you first before writing a story. Why would we? Because of your vanity? Because you think you're important? You're nothing but trash.

As outlined in the article, a number of trashy people had left the organization (since Street Trash refuses to leave, we obviously couldn't be referring to ST) and they're whispering and sometimes outright saying (Street Trash is saying it at right wing blogs) that IVAW is a Communist menace and a Communist front and blah, blah, blah. The real problem is that Street Trash and ST's cronies love 'em some Barack. They need to go to the vets group that's a front for the Democratic Party. That's the only way they'll be happy (and even then . . .). IVAW is Republicans, is Democrats, is Socialists, is Communists, is libertarians, is non-believes in any political theory or party. It's a diverse group. But say 'diverse' and Street Trash hears "Communist conspiracy!"
This week alone, Street Trash has repeatedly trashed Camilo and you have to wonder why ST doesn't just leave the group -- like ST promised would happen if ST didn't like the election results. (Considering that Jose publicly corrected ST when ST lied about Camilo, you'd assume ST wouldn't be thrilled with Jose's victory.) Beyond the world of the crazies, Camilo not only has every right to appeal, he should have a strong case. Camilo was not a US citizen. He was serving in Iraq and his contract ended. He was stop-lossed. However, only US citizens could be stop-lossed. This was pointed out to his command which chose to ignore it -- chose to ignore federal law. Camilo's discharge needs to be re-evaluated because he never should have been stop-lossed and once the government made clear they weren't going to respect the law, they stepped onto real weak ground.

Street Trash is screaming Communist menace! We'll come back to it because it's not isolated crazy. But, before we go further, let's talk about something that matter (we're about to talk about people making fools of themselves -- we're taking a musical detour before that) Cass Elliot. Cass, of course, is known for her own strong solo work as well as for her work as a member of one of rock's first super groups: the Mamas and the Papas. Cass is on my thoughts a great deal lately and not just due to a letter I remembered and dug through the journals to re-read. But let's do that sidebar briefly: A woman who claims to be a feminist and claims she never wasn't a feminist and that people have distorted her on that blah blah blah. Reality? The woman was in the US long before she claims and she was trying to be famous even back then which is how she ended up on the daytime talk show with Cass and two other women and, yes, the Greek social climber was perfectly disgusting even then and, yes, Cass observed just how sad (and anti-woman) she was. In addition to being one of the country's finest singers, Cass also did a great deal of TV work. At the end of this month, The Mama Cass Television Program is released for the first time ever on DVD. Her guests on the TV special include Joni Mitchell, John Sebastian and Mary Travers (of Peter, Paul and Mary). Jeffrey Kauffman (DVD Talk) gives the release strong praise noting, "Cass is perfectly at ease (in fact, perhaps a bit too much so -- she fluffs a few lines here and there and isn't really 'formal' in the sense that most television variety show hosts and hostesses were back in the day) and makes a very appealing central figure. . . . I couldn't help but feel a little sad watching this special, and not just because of the weird writing of the skits. Mama Cass was a distinctive, warm hearted performer with a lush voice who left us far, far too early. At least we have her recordings (several of which have been surfacing on Lost), as well as her film and television performances to remind us that, as she states to [Buddy] Hackett at the top of this special, true beauty comes from within." We linked to Joni and, from her website, we'll note this: "For a new boxed set due out this November, Joni would like to invite the community to send in a statement of why they enjoy her music. It can be one sentence or a short paragraph and the best will be chosen for the liner notes for the project. It can be a personal experience with the music or why in general you like it. Joni feels it might be more interesting to hear from the people who truly like the music rather than from a critic or PR person. Submit your liner notes here."

Now back to the crazy. Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer embarrassed themselves and the positions they hold by charging US citizens with being "unAmerican." Search in vain for The Progressive or The Nation calling that b.s. out. There are brave voices, however. Once again, Cindy Sheehan steps up to the plate and notes how dangerous it is and how it recalls the House Committee on Un-American Activities which helped lead the witch hunts:

It, apart from Senator Joseph McCarthy, investigated Bolsheviks and communists and many other "subversive" organizations and people. There is nothing in the Constitution, as far as I know, that prevents one from being a Communist, but people's lives were ruined because of this committee, and the committee even went as far as shaping the movie industry, and of course frightened many people into un-American silence.Today, an op-ed that was "co-written" by Nancy Pelosi (House Speaker) and Steny Hoyer (House Majority Leader), which was more than likely written by an overworked staffer, called anyone who is protesting at the Healthcare Town Hall meetings: "un-American." The person who advised this, should be summarily fired…with all due haste.I don't agree with a single word that is coming out of the right-winger's mouths. Obama is not a socialist and the Democrats are not socialists, they're fascists, and even though I think the Healthcare reforms are a bad idea for other reasons, I support the right of my fellow Americans to speak as loudly as they want and put forth their message any way they can.Even though I know that most of the Town Hall disrupters do not or did not support my right to do so---I have been escorted out of many hearings or meetings---but I support any American's right to expression, as long as it doesn't involve hate speech. Hanging a Congressperson in effigy is not hate speech---it's protected free speech---just like when Bush was hanged in effigy many times by the other side.

The Speaker of the House, whomever is in the position, is on dangerous grounds when she or he calls other US citizens "unAmerican." It's not just offensive, it's also historically dangerous. This is the Cliff Note version (Jim's called it for Third and we're also limited on space in this snapshot). Take what Bob Somerby's covering today (very accurate, very sound). Among other things to grasp from his writing today is that, no, people don't listen to you when you call them names -- when you tar and feather and entire group of people, they're not going to listen to you. But also grasp the rage on Nancy Pelosi's side. Not just the people she's raging against, but the rage within her. What she did is appalling. It's shameful. And it is not playing in the Bay Area, she's in hot water again. It's stupid and it's dangerous. And ObamaCare may or may not pass. If it doesn't pass, you need to grasp the anger in people like Nancy already. And you need to grasp that they're also telling left critics of ObamaCare to stop speaking. You need to grasp how angry they are at those people. Then you need to grasp that a large number of those people aren't Democrats but posed as such. There's nothing wrong with being a Socialist or a Communist. It's leagal in this country and, in many cases, it's a strong ethical position to take. But Street Trash is a Democrat and Street Trash is attacking others as Communists. And what history has never really bothered to get right is that the McCarthy era witch hunt couldn't have happened without Democrats. Dems who were tired of the non-Dems posing as Dems, Dems who didn't like Communists to begin with, and many other groupings. When Nancy voices her rage, you better grasp how dangerous the situation is. Not for the right wing. They're her natural opponent. But when her frustration lets her make such a stupid and harmful comment ("un-American"), you need to grasp where it heads next if she can't control her own temper. One way of stopping it is for people to get honest. Matthew Rothschild finally did, after the election, when he finally fessed up to being a Socialist -- why a grown man felt the need to hide in a political closet is a question to ask. He's far from the only one. Take Robert McChesney. And let's get honest about the word "progressive." It doesn't mean a Democrat and it never did. When you lie (I'm referring to spokespeople and gas bags) you create the climate for your own backlash. Nancy's already made clear she's comfortable judging what is American and what is unAmerican. In the last century, that meant people like Matthew Rothschild, Robert McChesney and others would be targeted. So it's about time they started speaking out along with everyone else on the left. I grasp that some Democrats won't because they're pissed off that non-Democrats hijacked the party in 2008. (And some Dems won't speak out for other reasons including hatred for and fear of Communists and Socialists.) But we warned about this, Ava and I, all through 2008 and started sounding the alarm at the end of 2007. The ground is moving and you either call out Nancy or you accept that the Speaker of the House can judge what is and is not American. And you grasp how quickly her rage turns on the left and you grasp that people like Street Trash have already launched efforts to persecute people based on their political beliefs. This isn't the distant past, this is the beginning of a new period of McCarthyism unless people call out Nancy Pelosi. (It would also help if some would hop out of the political closets. A known face is usually a friendly face and personalizes the issue.) That's jumbled and we'll work it out at Third but the basics are: 1) Nancy Pelosi crossed the line and needs to be called out. 2) Her frustration and rage is going to whip over to the left if allowed to go unchecked. 3) People right now would do well to come out of the political closets because a known and friendly face is hard to demonize. 4) History repeats if you don't learn. 5) What needs to be learned from McCarthyism is that it was bi-partisan and you either stop it immediately or you accept and encourage a witch hunt.



iraq
bbc news
natalia antelava
jane arraf
caroline alexanderbloomberg news
joni mitchell
the times of londonoliver augustdeborah haynesmartin chulov
amnesty international
camilo mejia
iraq veterans against the war
cindy sheehan
cass elliot

Telemarketer Barack

Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Telemarketer in Chief" went up last night.



It was so much fun to watch him draw it. I wish I had artistic talent.

Look at the expression. Barack's got his eyes closed while he's talking to the resident/citizen on the phone. Think about what that says?

When Isaiah finished drawing it and I looked at it, I asked about periods?

It was all one single sentence and . . .

As I was asking, it hit me. This is the scripted pitch. The telemarketers don't give you a chance to speak at that point and they just stream all their words together.

I would hope I'd catch all of that regardless but I have a feeling I caught it because I saw Isaiah draw it.

One interesting thing about his drawing, he acts out the expressions he's considering. He wasn't even aware of that. But he made several faces before he settled on the one he's drawn on Barack.

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

Monday, August 9, 2009. Chaos and violence continue, rumors swirl that Nouri in bed with the Righteous League, details of assassination attempt on Nouri emerge, a plea for Camp Ashraf and more.

Bombings rock Iraq today with mass fatalities in Baghdad and just outside Mosul. Ernesto Londono and Qais Mizher (Washington Post) report that Khazna, outside Mosul, houses a population of approximately 500, at least 35 of which died today, with many being Shabaks. The reporters label them Shi'ites which is what most Shabak's self-identify as; however, the Shabaks have affinities with Kurds as a result of campaigns against them during Saddam Hussein's reign including the Al-Anfal Campaign. The United Nations funded Aswat al-Iraq reported in November last year on the Shabak protest in Ninewa ("hundreds of Shabak people") "calling to incorporate them into the Kurdistan region on the basis that they are Kurds, not Arabs." Shabaks live in over 30 villages in northern Iraq and practice a religion which blends Islam, Christianity and other faiths. Londono and Mizher note comments from Sunni officials (blaming the Kurds for the bombings) which may strike some as rather insulting since the Sunnis have been accused of committing genocide against the Shabaks -- Sunni groups in the region have claimed credit for multiple beheadings of Shabaks and threats aimed at them (leading some Shabaks to become external refugees). Sam Dagher (New York Times) labels this bombing "the most devastating attack" today: "a pair of large flatbed trucks packed with bombs exploded simultaneously shortly after dawn". Richard Spencer (Telegraph of London) states of the bombs, "They left huge craters and levelled 35 homes. More than 130 people were injured, out of a village population of 3,000." Mujahid Mohammed (AFP) quotes nurse and eye witness Falah Ridha stating, "Eleven people in my family were killed when their house collapsed. All of them woke up after the first bomb, but the second bomb was very close to my house, it was like an earthquake. No one else escaped, just me." Jamal al-Badrani, Mohammed Abbas, Muhanad Mohammed, Waleed Ibrahim, Yara Bayoumy and Jon Boyle (Reuters) quote survivor Umm Qasim asking, "What have we done for terrorists to kill innocents in their sleep?" The reporters note she was "covered in blood . . . holding her wounded son. The bodies of four relatives, including her husband and sister, lay nearby." England's ITN adds, "Police say the death toll could rise further because people are buried under the rubble of their own homes." BBC News has a photo essay of the aftermath. UK's Channel 4 News (link has text and video) notes today's violence is "raising fears of a return to sectarian violence."

Jonathan Rugman: The plains beneath the Kurdish mountains are becoming Iraq's most dangerous region. Two truck bombs exploding east of the city of Mosul today, destroying scores of homes. 30 dead and over 150 wounded. This crater destroying an entire Shi'ite village. All this after a similar attack on local Shi'ites killed 37 only last Friday. The pattern emerging here is one of minorities being deliberately targeted in the north of Iraq. A foretaste perhaps of a long feared Kurdish-Arab civil war.

Mark Kattuner (Minority Rights Group International): Well I think through most of Iraq, including from Baghdad, the Americans have withdrawn from patrolling the cities. But in Mosul they're still patrolling in cooperation with the Iraqi army because they realize just how dangerous the situation is. The city is still contested. In particular, the land all around it in the Nineveh Plain is contested between Kurds and Arabs. And therefore everything that's happened in the last month hasn't happened just because the Americans have left. It's happened while they are still there. And it shows that they are incapable of protecting the minority communities on the ground.

AGI states the population is "mainly . . . Shia Muslims" with Shabaks a secondary population and they state the target most likely was a mosque. The village was not only area rocked by bombings. Ann Barker (Australian Network News) notes, "In Baghdad two car bombs targeting labourers killed 16 people and wounded 81 in another Shi'ite area in the city's southwest." Sam Dagher (New York Times) notes two of the Baghdad bombings "struck lines of workers who had gathered to look for jobs as day laborers, one in the Amil district, the other in Shurta al-Rabiaa, both of which are mainly Shiite areas." with the first blast claiming 7 lives and leaving forty-six injured and the second blast claiming 9 lives and leaving thrity-five injured. Eye withness Jabir Abid tells Laith Hammoudi and Adam Ashton (McClatchy Newspapers), "A big ball of fire went up in the air, and there was a very big bang. Suddenly, I couldn't see anything because a black cloud of smoke covered everything." Sahar Issa (McClatchy Newspapers) notes that in addition to those two Baghdad car bombings, Baghdad was rocked by seven roadside bombings resulting 2 deaths and nineteen people injured, while a Baghdad sticky bombing on a mini bus resulted in 1 death (the driver) and three injuries, a third Baghdad car bombing claimed 2 lives and wounded eighteen and a Tikrit bombing claimed the lives of 2 "little brothers" while 2 police officers were shot dead in Mosul. Reuters adds a Mosul home invasion resulted in the death of 1 woman and a man being wounded.

Today's violence follows weekend reports of 8 deaths and seventeen injured in violence and, as noted already, Friday's Mosul bombing which claimed at least 38 lives and left two-hundred and seventy-six people injured while other reported violence on Friday resulted in 15 deaths and 58. Adding all of the deaths reported on Friday and since together results in 124 dead and 624 injured. Interestingly, today's fatalities is approximately the same number as Friday's and the wounded toll on both days is also similar. BBC News reports, "The BBC's Natalia Antelava in Baghdad says the Iraqi government is keen to show its troops are fully in control and capable of doing their job without the help of US forces." Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) refers to Nouri speaking to "a gathering of Iraqi security commanders" today and repeating his b.s. about the "coming election" (scheduled for January); however, I've got two reporters telling me on the phones that Nouri was speaking live on Iraqi state television, hence to the Iraqi people and not just to security commander. Arraf does a good job of describing the Shabak's (better than I did above) and she also notes that the Sunni Arab governor is blaming the pesh merga for the attacks if only in a 'they failed' kind of way which, naturally, leads him to just happen to suggest/insist that the Iraqi military should control the area. This is a disputed region and, again, the Shabaks have publicly demonstrated to be part of the Kurdistan Region. Apparently the Shabaks aren't people, they are a political football (or cannon fodder) to be used to win territory. While some attempt to use the violence to secure land, Ali Sheikholeslami (Bloomberg News) notes that there has been "no immediate statement of responsibility for the blasts". Minority Rights Group International issues a statement on the violence which quotes Mark Lattimer (noted earlier in the snapshot) stating, "The bombings of minority communities near Mosul and Kirkuk are more than just an expression of religious hatred. They are a deliberate attempt to grab control over contested territory in northern Iraq by puhsing out the minorities who live there." CNN reports that Iraq's Interior Ministry, via their spokesperson, is going with the blanket culprit: al Qaeda in Iraq.

Yesterday an Australian contractor (Darren Hoare) and a British contractor (Paul McGuigan) were shot dead in the Green Zone and, in the incident, an unidentified Iraq was injured with British contractor Danny Fitzsimons arrested in the shootings. The two deaths and the wounded Iraqi are included in the earlier count of deaths and injuries in the last four days, FYI. Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) speaks with a spokesperson for Iraq's Internation Ministry, Abdul-Karim Khalaf, who "said Fitzsimons got into a dispute with colleagues as they were drinking. 'They got into an argument and he started shooting his colleagues,' Khalaf said." The Minneapolis Star-Tribune features a news round up which quotes an Iraqi military spoksesperson, Qassim al-Moussawi, insisting the incident "started as a squabble. The subject is facing a premeditated murder charge." Oliver August (Times of London) reports that British contractor "fled the scene with a pistol, was held after a shootout and handed to Iraqi police." (He was held by US troops who turned him over to the Iraqi police.) August speaks with an unnamed witnesses who sketches out the contractors all drinking and getting into a skirmish which turned increasing violent. At some point, August says 4:00 a.m., the not so surprising feature to a drunken, aggressive squabble among armed people took place: Fitzsimons pulled out a gun and waived it around. Iraqis have mentioned execution. Jay Price (Raleigh News & Observer) adds, "According to AP, the gunman could be the first Westerner tried for murder under Iraqi law since an agreement that took effect Jan. 1 between the U.S. and Iraq ending the immunity Western contractors had enjoyed since not long after the war began in 2003." August files a report where he focuses just on the drinking and the skirmish and contains more details from eye witnesses with Fitzsimons allegedly waiving the pistol and others attempting to disarm him when, apparently, the shooting began. August adds, "Consular officials from the British Embassy have visited Mr Fitzsimmons, as well as a second British national, believed to be another ArmorGroup employee, who was being held there but not considered a suspect and has now been released." Deborah Haynes (Times of London) offers a commentary which includes, "It is also a huge embarrassment for Britain at a time when Gordon Brown is still waiting for the Iraqi parliament to ratify a new security agreement between the two countries -- somethign that should have happened by the end of May but is unlikely to take place until autumn at the earliest. The arrest comes at a time when the Foreign and Commonwealth Office is trying to secure the release of three remaining British hostages in Iraq, two of whom are thought to be dead." We'll drop back to the August 6th snapshot for background on the British hostages:

Jason Swindlehurst, Jason Creswell, Alec Maclachlan, Alan McMenemy and Peter Moore, all British citizens, were kidnapped in Baghdad May 29, 2007. Jason Swindlehurst and Jason Creswell were dead when their bodies were turned over to the British authorities after the two leaders of the group bragging about having done the kidnappings were released from US custody. (The same group, and why the brothers had been imprisoned originally by the US, bragged about their actions in assaulting a US base and killing 5 American soldiers.) The British government considers Alec and Alan to be dead (the families remain hopeful) and it is thought (by the British government) that Peter Moore is alive. The group taking credit for the kidnappings and for the deaths of 5 US soldiers is alternately called the Righteous League or the League of Righteous by the press. The press? They got press this week, see Monday's snapshot, because Nouri met with them to bring them back into the government. As noted in the Tuesday snapshot, the press spin that the group has given up violence is false. Their spokesperson says they will not attack Iraqis but that they will continue to go after US service members.

Now, for the 5 US soldiers killed by the Righteous League (they've claimed credit for the assualt) we'll drop back to the June 9th snapshot:

This morning the New York Times' Alissa J. Rubin and Michael Gordon offered "U.S. Frees Suspect in Killing of 5 G.I.'s." Martin Chulov (Guardian) covered the same story, Kim Gamel (AP) reported on it, BBC offered "Kidnap hope after Shia's handover" and Deborah Haynes contributed "Hope for British hostages in Iraq after release of Shia militant" (Times of London). The basics of the story are this. 5 British citizens have been hostages since May 29, 2007. The US military had in their custody Laith al-Khazali. He is a member of Asa'ib al-Haq. He is also accused of murdering five US troops. The US military released him and allegedly did so because his organization was not going to release any of the five British hostages until he was released. This is a big story and the US military is attempting to state this is just diplomacy, has nothing to do with the British hostages and, besides, they just released him to Iraq. Sami al-askari told the New York Times, "This is a very sensitive topic because you know the position that the Iraqi government, the U.S. and British governments, and all the governments do not accept the idea of exchanging hostages for prisoners. So we put it in another format, and we told them that if they want to participate in the political process they cannot do so while they are holding hostages. And we mentioned to the American side that they cannot join the political process and release their hostages while their leaders are behind bars or imprisoned." In other words, a prisoner was traded for hostages and they attempted to not only make the trade but to lie to people about it. At the US State Dept, the tired and bored reporters were unable to even broach the subject. Poor declawed tabbies. Pentagon reporters did press the issue and got the standard line from the department's spokesperson, Bryan Whitman, that the US handed the prisoner to Iraq, the US didn't hand him over to any organization -- terrorist or otherwise. What Iraq did, Whitman wanted the press to know, was what Iraq did. A complete lie that really insults the intelligence of the American people. CNN reminds the five US soldiers killed "were: Capt. Brian S. Freeman, 31, of Temecula, California; 1st Lt. Jacob N. Fritz, 25, of Verdon, Nebraska; Spc. Johnathan B. Chism, 22, of Gonzales, Louisiana; Pfc. Shawn P. Falter, 25, of Cortland, New York; and Pfc. Johnathon M. Millican, 20, of Trafford, Alabama." Those are the five from January 2007 that al-Khazali and his brother Qais al-Khazali are supposed to be responsible for the deaths of. Qassim Abdul-Zahra and Robert H. Reid (AP) states that Jonathan B. Chism's father Danny Chism is outraged over the release and has declared, "They freed them? The American military did? Somebody needs to answer for it."

So we should all be on the same page: The League of Righteous has claimed credit for the deaths of 5 US soldiers and credit for kidnapping 5 British citizens, at least 2 of whom are known to be dead. In addition, British outlets noted last month that the Iraqi government appeared to be involved in the kidnappings (see the July 31st snapshot if you're late on this story). Gareth Porter (Asia Times) is reporting that recent developments demonstrate how Nouri al-Maliki, puppet of the occupation and US-installed thug, has long been working with the League of Righteous:

The history of the new agreement confirms what was evident from existing information: the League of the Righteous was actually the underground wing of the Mahdi Army all along, and the Sadrist insurgents were secretly working closely with the Maliki regime against the Americans and the British - even as it was at war with armed elements within the regime. The contradictory nature of the relationship between Maliki and the Sadrists reflects the tensions between pro-Sadrist elements within the regime - including Maliki's Da'wa Party - and the anti-Sadrist elements led by the Supreme Council of Islamic Revolution in Iraq. The relationship between Maliki and the US was also marked by contradictions. Even though he was ostensibly cooperating with the US against the Sadrists in 2007 and 2008, the Maliki regime was also cooperating secretly with the Sadrist forces against the Americans. And Maliki - with the encouragement of Iran -- was working on a strategy for achieving the complete withdrawal of US forces from Iraq through diplomatic means, which he did not reveal to the Americans until summer 2008.

What Gareth Porter is reporting is something news outlets in England and the US should be digging into because, if true, it's a huge slap in the face to both countries. Meanwhile in non-surprising (but non-reported) news, Rahmat al-Salaam (Ashraq Alawsat) reports thug Nouri was targeted by "a member of his own security protection team


Meanwhile NPR's Deborah Amos recently returned to Iraq and shares her observations which include this on Baghdad: "The blast walls -- tall, gray barriers that surround most neighborhoods -- make the city unrecognizable. I had read about these ugly concrete ravines, but it is still shocking to see the magnitude of the divisions in Baghdad. How long will it take to dismantle walls that saved lives but divided the population? Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has pledged to remove Baghdad's concrete maze over the next 40 days, which means the city would be transformed by the end of the holy month of Ramadan. Can he move that much concrete in 40 days? Is this a reckless campaign pledge when civilians are still a target for random bombs?" Amos also notes the Sunni-Shi'ite divide has not vanished and fears remain of more 'ethnice violence' (genocide). FYI, Sam Dagher (New York Times) reported that "most" of the walls will be removed in 40 days -- not all.



July 28th there was a bank heist resulting in the death of at least 8 guards and, it turned out, the robbers were guards for Iraq's Shi'ite vice president. What's taken place since have been efforts to appease thug v.p. Adel Abdul-Mahdi. The Iraqi police has had to negotiate the story with Adel and that includes frequently lying in print that it was the 'tremendous' help of Adel which allowed the bank robbers to be caught. (An improvement over Adel's original demand which was the press lie that only one of his guards were involved in the robbery.) Iraqi journalist Ahmad Abdul Hussein published an article entitled "8000 blankets" in Al Sabah which dealt with allegations about the robbery and deal with bribery during the January provincial elections and that the lawsuit could have been to raise cash to influence the elections scheduled for January 2010 -- a lawsuit is now filed against the paper. Alsumaria reports a demonstration is scheduled this Friday in Baghdad "in defense of press freedom which was most damaged by the aftereffects of Rafidain's Bank heist in Al Karrada. The protest is due on Friday at 10:30 in the morning in Al Mutannabi Street carried out by the Journalistic Freedoms Observatory in cooperation with other parties to respond to Jalal Eddin Saghir, a leader in Supreme Iraqi Islamic Council who called in his Friday sermon to sue Al Sabah Newspaper on account of the "8000 blankets" article." Ammar Karim (AFP) reports that Al Sabah editorialized on the matter yesterday with a call for people such as Grand Ayatollah Ali Husseini to step in and defuse the remarks of Jalal Eddin Saghir, a member of the v.p.'s political party: "The language that Saghir used was full of insults and incitements against Al-Sabah newspaper, its editors and one of its reporters. This is not how Islamic discourse should be."

David Morgan and Jackie Frank (Reuters) note Camp Ashraf: "Human rights lawyers from the International Committee of Jurists in Defense of Ashraf advocacy group accused Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki of ignoring Baghdad's assurances to Washington that camp residents would be treated humanely." They're asking that the US take control of Camp Ashraf to protect the residents who have been under assault from Nouri's security forces.

Meanwhile three Kurdistan provinces held elections last month. The final, official count for the Kurdistan regional elections have been released. From the KRG:Electoral Commission announces final results of Kurdistan Region elections Erbil, Kurdistan -- Iraq (KRG.org) -- The Independent High Electoral Commission of Iraq (IHEC) released the final results of the Kurdistan Region presidential and parliamentary elections yesterday - 7 August 2009. A total of 1,819,652 individuals, about 80 per cent of eligible voters, participated in the election. The results are as follows. Presidential election: Masoud Barzani, 1266397 votes – 69.6% (winner) Kamal Mirawdly, 460323 votes – 25.3% Hallo Ibrahim Ahmed, 63377 votes – 3.5% Ahmed Muhammad Nabi, 18890 votes – 1% Husain Garmiyan 10665, votes – 0.6% Parliamentary election: Kurdistan List, 1076370 votes, 59 parliamentary seats Change List, 445024 votes, 25 parliamentary seats Reform and Services List, 240842 votes, 13 parliamentary seats Islamic Movement, 27147 votes, 2 parliamentary seats Freedom and Social Justice, 15028 votes, 1 parliamentary seat Parliamentary Seats reserved for minority groups: Turkoman Democratic Movement, 18464 votes, 3 parliamentary seats Turkoman Reform List, 7077 votes, 1 parliamentary seat Turkoman Erbil List, 3906 votes, 1 parliamentary seat Chaldean Assyrian Syriac Council, 10595 votes, 3 parliamentary seats Al-Rafidain List, 5690 votes, 2 parliamentary seats Aram Shahin Dawood Bakoyian, 4198 votes, 1 parliamentary seat

Saturday Nancy Dickeman wrote the New York Times about their article on Col Timothy Reese's memo recommending all US forces leave Iraq by the end of 2010 ("Declare Victory and Depart Iraq, U.S. Adviser Says," by Michael Gordon) and she observes, "We are not merely guests overstaying a welcome, but are invaders and occupiers. It is time to act upon the inescapable truth that Iraq -- its people, desert, rivers, cities, farms and oil beneath the sand -- are not ours to cliam or control. It takes our going home to give Iraq back to the Iraqis." The New Jersey Star-Ledger editorializes "Iraq War: Declare victory and leave:"

Reese offers a realistic perspective of where we find ourselves now: "Our operations are in support of an Iraqi government that no longer relishes our help while at the same time our operations generate the extremist opposition to us as various groups jockey for power in post-occupation Iraq.The U.S. military, he says, is now the subject of attacks meant not to drive us out of Iraq but as "messages sent by various groups as part of the political struggle for power in Iraq." In Reese's sober assessment, there's no point in staying in Iraq just to get stuck in the middle of yet another struggle for power. The removal of combat troops could begin immediately and be completed by this time next summer, he suggests. That move might actually improve our standing with the Iraqi government and, perhaps more important, save us "blood and treasure," he writes. Back in 2003, we seemed to have an infinite amount of both, but that has also changed in the intervening six years. Reese's report has no status as policy and the senior American commander in Iraq, Gen. Ray Odierno, has rejected it. The counter-argument centers largely on our role in preventing a resumption of the various feuds among the Shi'a, Sunni and Kurds that could erupt in our absence. But those feuds might still erupt in future years. And in any case, preventing those feuds was not among the goals of the original invasion. Those goals, or at least those stated for public consumption, were removing Saddam Hussein and creating an opportunity for free elections. Done. And done. As for babysitting the Iraqis for the foreseeable future, that was not a goal. The sooner they are left to their own devices, the better for America.

That's not a left view for withdrawal, but it's an argument for withdrawal and it's one that Ava and I noted two Sundays ago and pointed out that this is the time when withdrawal for Iraq is truly not a left issue. It has a broad base of support that goes beyond the left and beyond people from the right and center who are embarrassed that they supported the illegal war. If there was a functioning peace movement in this country that would be built upon because this a tremendous moment but it's not even being noted, it's not even being addressed. Col Timothy Reese's memo is reaching beyond the left -- actually the left outlets have largely ignored it. Which is a point that Tim McGirk (Time magazine) also notices:

That question isn't being asked only by liberal anti-war opinion-makers. It has also been raised by a growing number of senior officials in Washington and U.S. commanders in Iraq. An internal memo drafted by Col. Timothy Reese, an adviser to the Iraqi senior military command, and leaked to the New York Times last month, doesn't mince words. He writes that it is time "for the U.S. to declare victory and bring our combat forces home."
The gist of the colonel's argument is that there is nothing significant that a continued U.S. military presence can do to improve either the delivery of "essential services" to Iraqis, or the ability and inclination of Maliki's sloppy and quarrelsome Shi'ite-dominated government to reconcile with the Sunnis and Kurds.
In fact, there are a growing number of warning signs that the Iraqi government is no longer under the sway of their American forces that brought it into being. Reese notes a "sudden coolness" being displayed by Iraqi commanders towards their American counterparts after June 30, the date on which the Status of Forces Agreement concluded between Baghdad and Washington last December required that U.S. combat forces withdraw from Iraq's towns and cities. Following that date, suspects detained by U.S. soldiers were freed by Iraqis. And the Iraqi government openly disdained the recent offer by Vice-President Joe Biden, during a visit to Baghdad, to help mediate in its conflicts with Kurds and Sunnis. Top military adviser Reese likened the relationship between Iraqi and U.S. soldiers to "a father teaching his kid to ride a bike without training wheels, " explaining: "Our hand on the back of the (Iraqis') seat is holding them back and causing resentment. We need to let go before we both tumble to the ground."

One of the few genuine voices against the Iraq War (as opposed to the faux 'anti-warriors') is Chris Hedges and (link goes to Dandelion Salad) he notes that nothing has changed under Barack, the US "killas as brutally and indiscriminately in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan as it did under George W. Bush." He notes a great deal more than that and we'll include him in an entry tomorrow morning; however, the point of noting that is the Barack supporters were fooled the same way Bush supporters were. I belive they call that "common ground." A peace movement dedicated to ending the unpopular and illegal war could really accomplish something now. If it existed.

Finally Chris Johnson and Lou Chibbarro Jr. (Washington Blade) report on a fundraiser for Iraq's LGBT community which became the staging area for a number of allegations:A fundraising event to benefit an LGBT community center in Lebanon last week took a surprise turn when stunned audience members were shown graphic photographs of beheaded corpses and images purportedly depicting U.S. soldiers preparing to execute gay Iraqis.Two gay Iraqi refugees, who declined to use their real names, delivered a presentation at the Human Rights Campaign headquarters July 24 in which they detailed alleged abuses of fellow gay Iraqis while calling on their audience to donate funds to Helem, a Lebanon-based center that works to address the plight of LGBT people in the Middle East.One of the Iraqis, who goes by the name "Hussam," showed the audience of about 80 people gruesome images, including shots allegedly of a beheaded man who was gay and another of the victim's twin brother grieving over the severed head.While asserting that anti-gay violence in Iraq is often committed by Iraqis, Hussam also said U.S. service members were involved in anti-gay hostility. For example, he said service members displayed signs in front of their barracks with the words "F**k Off F**s."But the reaction from the audience turned from anger to shock when Hussam said U.S. service members had detained Iraqi civilians perceived to be gay and executed them.

iraq
the washington posternesto londono
qais mizherthe new york timessam dagher
jane arraf
mcclatchy newspapersadam ashtonlaith hammoudi
sahar issa
the times of londonoliver augustdeborah haynes
the new york timesrod nordlandjay price
npr
deborah amosjonathan rugman
gareth porter
the washington bladechris johnsonlou chibbarro jr.
chris hedges