Wednesday, February 23, 2011

My pathetic political party

From Hillary Is 44:

To Flee Or Not To Flee? - That Is The Question

Obamaitis is contagious and spreading. Back in 2007 when we first warned about Barack Obama’s record of voting “present” little did we know it was an infectious disease.

By voting “present” instead of “yea” or “nay” Barack Obama fled from responsibility. Barack Obama was physically “present” but absent from the fight.

Wisconsin Obama Dimocrats have taken the Obama germ and fled to states governed by other Obama Dimocrats. Today we learned that Indiana Obama Dimocrats are now “Fleebaggers” too though we are sure they are in luxury quarters not a fleabag hotel.

Tactical retreats have an honorable history. Washington retreated across the Delaware, Allied armies avoided devastation at Dunkirk, and even in political history there are many instances when it was intelligent to live to fight another day. But considering that the Big Fight of the year will be the potential federal government shutdown (think debt ceiling and budgets that need to be passed) Obama Dimocrats in the states are undercutting Obama Dimocrats at the national level. How will national Dimocrats denounce a government shutdown when they are praising a government shutdown at the local level?

The Fleebagging tactics of the past few days are shutdowns or legislative filibusters by another name. We respect shutdowns and filibusters but it was Obama Dimocrats that have vigorously denounced both tactics. From appearances, these legislative gimmicks are all they have left. It didn’t have to be this way. What happened was the voters voted and elections have consequences. Isn’t that what Obama said in 2009? “I won.” “Elections have consequences.” Didn’t Obama say that?

The fact is that elections do have consequences. What Obama Dimocrats are witnessing is the consequences of drinking the poison called Obama. Last year, in an article called “The Obama Death Threat – You Got Me” we quoted from a Weekly Standard articled called “The Clinton Voters Jump Ship“:

“For six months during the 2008 primaries, Obama and Hillary Clinton crisscrossed the country wooing voters. Obama consistently failed to win over important parts of the Democratic base, even after it became clear that he was going to be his party’s nominee. [snip]

Instead, it may be that his general election triumph was the aberration—that his coalition was never as strong as the financial panic of September 2008 made it seem. It would mean that he is now returning to his natural base of support and that the Jacksonians and others who resisted him in the primaries have turned away once again from his charms.

But it also suggests something more, that the Democratic party is now the party of Obama, for good and for ill. While the president is no Jacksonian, his party has many in its ranks. Democratic officeholders should be concerned about their voters fleeing not just from Obama but from their party as well. The president may be in the process of trimming the Democratic base back into something that looks an awful lot like his own primary base.

A few weeks ago Representative Marion Berry, a Jacksonian from Arkansas’s First District, recounted an exchange he had with the president. Asked how he was going to prevent a midterm disaster on the scale of 1994, Obama replied, “Well, the big difference here and in ’94 was you’ve got me.” Which may be precisely the problem.”

As the article noted, those of us who consider ourselves Democrats, not Obama Dimocrats, are “fleeing not just from Obama but from [our] their party as well.” The party ran away from us and we are running away from the party. In 1994 the economy was recovering but the voters did not believe it yet or did not credit Bill Clinton. But by 1996 and even during the off year elections in 1998 (as Republicans prepped to impeach him) Bill Clinton led Democrats to victory.


My thoughts? The Green Party (my party) has blown two years. We should have been calling out the War Hawk actions of Barack, we should have been calling out his corporate giveaways. There were disenchanted Democrats. We could have picked them off.

Instead, we basically fawned over Barack and demonstrated that -- nationally at least -- the Green Party is a joke, a pathetic joke that can't stand up for itself.

They're so pathetic. If you want people to stand with you, you have to stand up. The Green Party should be leading the way. Instead it's acting like it's got a crush on Barack. Pathetic.

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

Wednesday, February 23, 2011. Chaos and violence continue, protest continue, Moqtada's back and wants to stop protests, Iraqi journalists remain under attack and more.
Iraq where the governmental war on the press never ends. Dar Addustor reports on the Iraqi military raid of the Journalistic Freedoms Observatory in Baghdad after midnight this morning with the military seizing things including computers and personal items. Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) quotes JFO's Bashar al-Mandalawy stating, "The only reason behind this is to stop freedom of the press and expression in this country." Wael Grace and Adham Youssef (Al Mada) reports notes that it was the Iraqi military and the police raiding the Journalistic Freedoms Observatory and that they entered by breaking down the main door and that the Baghdad Centre for Media was also raided at the same time. Meanwhile Iraq Freedom Congress' Amjad Ali (via US Labor Against The War) explains another attack on the press in Baghdad today:
At around 2:30 am Baghdad time a group of anti riot police raided the headquarter of Iraq Freedom Congress satellite TV (Sana) in Baghdad and destroyed every single piece of equipment in the office as well as confiscating a number of documents.
These attacks occurred following broadcasting segments of events took place in Tahrir Square in Baghdad by a number of TV Channels via Sana TV who filmed and documented a particular segment in which protesters clashed with the police on the night of February 20th, 2011 and one protestor was killed as a result, as well as the active participation of Sana TV in assisting of organizing the forthcoming demonstrations in Tahrir Square.
This is the Maliki government and its repressive practices; this is the democracy and freedom of expression which Maliki is bragging about. He continues sending his militias to silence his opponents and critics. He is no different than Ben Ali, Mubarak and Gaddafi in acts of torture.
Iraq Freedom Congress assert that it will carry on the fight and will not bow to the pracitices of Maliki and his mercenaries and vow that the demonstrations on February 25th, 2011 will continue the pace no matter how brutal this government practices is.
IFC pledges that it will continue [to] organize and fight with full force in the million people march on February 25, 2011.
Sunday the Journalist Freedoms Observatory called out the assault on the channel Nalia whose Sulaymaniyah office was set on fire after being raided by unknown assailants. Yesterday the Committee to Protect Journalists noted:
Attacks on the press also continue in Iraq. On Sunday, 50 gunmen raided a new, Sulaimaniya-based independent TV station called Nalia Radio and Television, according to Metro Center to Defend Journalists, a local press freddom group. Nalia TV only began broadcasting on February 17, when protests begen in Sulaimaniya. The boradcasting equipment was destroyed by bullets and arson, Metro Center reported. Iran's Press TV reported that two guards and a janitor were injured in the attack.
"They came in military uniforms," Twana Othman, a manager at Nalia TV, told Press TV. "They wore special hats so their faces could not be seen. They knew exactly what to shoot at and what to destroy. Then they poured petrol and burned everything."
Rahman Gharib, a local journalist who reports for Metro Center, told CPJ: "I think the attack on the station was connected to its editorial policy of covering the demonstrations and giving voice to the protesters."
On February 17, Hawlati, an independent Kurdish newspaper, evacuated its offices after threats from the guards of the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) [KRG President Massoud Barzani's political party] building, Tariq Fattah, the director of the newspaper told CPJ. "Our office is close to where the demonstrations were taking place," he said. "The guards of the KDP were shouting at the door fo the paper that we are traitors and that we are stadning behind and leading the demonstrations."
Hisham Rikabi (Al Mada) reports that Nouri's spokesperson Ali al-Dabbagh held a press conference where he declared that Baghdad will ban vehicles on Friday that can broadcast live. There may also be a curfew imposed. In Egypt, the world was watching. In Iraq, the few western reporters that are present include some smug frat boys who think that mocking the Iraqi people is doing their job. Does it seem strange to you that Nouri's attempting to ban video of the protests? Joao Silva, New York Times photographer (recently badly injured in Afghanistan) observed, "The Iraqis have learned the power of photographic images, and they know that if there are no photographs of a bomb, it has far less impact abroad. We still try to go, but usually the police stop us before we get near enough to the scene to photograph it. They will let a reporter go up close, but no cameras. Sometimes you get lucky and manage to get an image. And on the really big explosions, like at the Hamra Hotel in January [2010] and the government ministries last year, they are just too big to keep everyone away. But usually they are very careful not to let cameras near. It's hit and miss, but there is definitely a culture of 'See No Evil'."
And though Silva and Stephen Farrell know that, the paper's Jack Healy and Michael S. Schmidt feel they can disrespect and mock the Iraqi protesters. They can have 'fun' with the "patchwork" of demands. That's real strange considering that both men are US citizens. It was the US government that started the illegal war. Before the start of the Iraq War, the electricity outages weren't a daily feature. There was potable water. There was sanitation. Eight years after the Iraq War started, there is still not potable water, reliable electricity or santiation. I'm not understanding how it's funny -- or for that matter strange -- that the Iraqis are worse off with basic services than before the Iraq War. I'm not understanding how anyone would find it surprising that people would be outraged, in the 21st century, to live in an oil rich country that makes billions while the people don't have potable water. I'm not understanding how they think Egypt is something to compare Iraq too. Egypt wasn't occupied by a foreign power during their recent demonstrations, Iraq is. Egypt had every outlet in the US and every European outlet storm into the country to cover their protests. The Egyptians knew the world was watching, as did their government. By contrast, the Iraqis get less and less coverage every week. And despite this, they've been out in the streets protesting. If Jack Healy and Michael S. Schmidt had wanted to be honest about the protests throughout the country, they couldn't have had so much 'fun' mocking the Iraqis. If they'd bothered to report on Saturday's Baghdad protest involving widows and orphans, maybe they would have understood the issues. Reuters has video of one of the women demonstrating in that protest explaining, "The Iraqi people have been patient since the fall of the regime in 2003 and they want to improve their living conditions but now a single glance at Baghdad and other cities can show the tragedy that we've experienced. It's been eight years and government officials are still unable to ensure that power supplies are back or create job opportunities for the unemployed young people. The infrastructure is completely damaged. At the same time, we always hear reports and news about corruption and about those who steal the resources that belong to the people."
And these protests take place in a country that lived under repression long before the current puppets the occupation installed. In fact, the example the US set in the early 90s would likely give many pause to ever stand up. But Iraqis do stand up and they don't deserve to be mocked for it. For those who've forgotten what happened when Iraqis were encouraged by the US to stand up under then-US President George H.W. Bush, here's a refresher from Lance Selfa (ISR):
General Colin Powell announced what the U.S. had in store for the Iraqi army: "First we're going to cut it off, then we're going to kill it." Poorly paid and equipped Iraqi conscripts, two-thirds of them oppressed Shiites and Kurds, faced bombing 24 hours a day. Thousands of Iraqi troops deserted the battlefield. U.S. and coalition forces mowed down some of them when they tried to surrender. A military video showed in a combat briefing depicted Iraqi soldiers as "ghostly sheep . . . flushed from a pen . . . bewildered and terrified. Some were literally blown to bits by bursts of 30mm exploding cannon. One by one they were cut down by attackers they couldn't see or understand," according to one report. One U.S. officer anticipated another night of action: ". . . there is nothing that can take them out like an Apache [attack helicopter]. It will be a duck hunt." In scenes reminiscent of mass burials at liberated Nazi concentration camps in the 1940s, U.S. forces bulldozed the bodies of thousands of Iraqi soldiers into mass graves.
On February 15 -- a month into the air war -- Saddam's government announced it would accept UN resolutions calling for its withdrawal from Kuwait. The U.S. and its lackey, Britain, dismissed Saddam's surrender. Instead, Bush called for Iraqis to rise up and overthrow Saddam: "[T]here's another way for the bloodshed to stop, and that is for the Iraqi military and the Iraqi people to take matters into their own hands, to force Saddam to step aside." Bush's statement communicated two points: first, that the U.S. wouldn't settle only for Iraqi withdrawal from Kuwait, and second, that the U.S. might back anyone who rose up against Saddam. The first point proved that expelling Iraq from Kuwait was a mere pretext for wider U.S. designs in the war. The second point proved a lie only weeks later, when masses of Kurds and Shiites took "matters into their own hands" and rose up against Saddam.
Saddam had essentially cried "uncle," but the U.S. wanted to mount a ground offensive anyway. In six days, U.S. and coalition ground troops swept across Kuwait and southern Iraq, forcing Iraqi troops into a full-scale retreat. In the last 40 hours of the war, before Bush called a cease-fire on February 28, U.S. and British forces mounted a relentless assault against retreating and defenseless Iraqi soldiers. The road leading from Kuwait to Basra became known as the "Highway of Death." Iraqi soldiers fled Kuwait in every possible vehicle they could get their hands on. Allied tank units cut the Iraqis off. U.S. warplanes bombed, strafed and firebombed the stranded columns for hours without resistance. In a slaughter which a U.S. pilot described as "like shooting fish in a barrel," thousands of Iraqi conscripts were killed on a 50-mile stretch of highway. So many planes filled the skies over southern Iraq that military air traffic controllers maneuvered to prevent mid-air collisions.
The "Highway of Death," and, in fact, the ground war itself, served no military purpose. Saddam had admitted defeat before the ground war began. Attacks on retreating Iraqis merely delayed the war's end. But the U.S. mounted this barbarism for one reason only: to render an example of what would happen to any government which bucked the U.S. For nearly two days, the Pentagon invented the excuse that the Iraqis were staging a "fighting retreat," a fiction which they knew was a lie. "When enemy armies are defeated, they withdraw," said Air Force Chief of Staff Merrill A. McPeak. "It's during this time that the true fruits of victory are achieved from combat, when the enemy is disorganized . . . If we do not exploit victory, the president should get himself some new generals."
The savagery of the U.S. war took some of the luster off Bush's victory. But nothing so revealed the callous disregard for ordinary Iraqis as U.S. complicity in Saddam's suppression of the Kurdish and Shiite uprisings in the weeks following Iraq's defeat. Demobilized soldiers in the southern, predominantly Shiite sections of the country returned to their hometowns and vented their fury on all symbols of Saddam's regime. Kurdish guerrillas launched a coordinated uprising in Iraqi Kurdistan. In the week following the Gulf War cease-fire, ordinary Iraqis stormed the regime's police headquarters, barracks and prisons. Crowds broke into underground dungeons and torture chambers, freeing political prisoners who hadn't seen daylight in decades. Masses of people lynched officials of Saddam's government. For almost two weeks, ordinary Iraqis controlled whole regions of the country and Saddam's government seemed on the verge of collapse.
Then, Saddam got a helping hand from an unlikely source -- the U.S. government. Bush had meant his call for Saddam "to step aside" as a signal of U.S. support for a military coup against him -- not a popular uprising. An uprising from below might set the wrong example for the populaces of the U.S.-allied feudal dictatorships in Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf States. U.S. officials also expressed fears that successful uprisings could lead to a breakup of Iraq and the strengthening of the other Gulf bogeyman, Iran. U.S. military officials refused to meet with emissaries of the rebels. And U.S. forces stood by as Saddam's government, officially violating the terms of the cease-fire agreement, mounted a counterattack. When Saddam's forces dropped firebombs on fleeing rebels near the southern Iraqi city of Kerbala, American planes patrolled high above, surveilling the attack.
In the wake of all the slaughter and destruction, George Bush promised that Desert Storm would usher in a "new world order." But the new order looked quite a bit like the old order.
In Kuwait, U.S. bayonets restored to power the ruling al-Sabah family, a feudal dynasty. Bush had made much about the rights of the Kuwaiti people to determine their own destiny free from Iraqi rule. But in restoring the al-Sabahs to the throne, Bush restored a political system which allowed only 3 percent of Kuwaiti residents any political rights at all. Women still can't vote in Kuwait. As soon as the al-Sabahs returned, they launched a reign of terror against Palestinian "guest workers," whom the al-Sabahs accused of pro-Iraq sentiments. Kuwaiti police rounded up thousands. They summarily executed hundreds of them. Kuwait expelled more than 400,000 Palestinian workers -- many of whom suffered under the Iraqi occupation -- from the country. Human rights organizations denounce Kuwait's disregard for elementary human rights.
By the end of March 1991, Saddam had put down the Shiite/Kurdish rebellion. The immediate result was a humanitarian catastrophe that dwarfs even the horrible situation in Kosovo today. As many as 3 million Kurds fled into Iran and Turkey. When destroying Iraq, the coalition air forces flew one raid a minute. In the first week of the Kurds' torment in makeshift camps in the mountains, those same forces could manage only 10 flights. The total relief for Kurds that Congress approved in April 1991 amounted to about eight hours of spending on the war. When the U.S. announced Operation Provide Comfort, it used the safeguarding of Kurds to establish a military occupation of northern Iraq.

With that as a backdrop, it's amazing that any Iraqi protests. But they do protest and they are protesting all over the country and building up to what they hope is a huge turnout on Friday. Hoping for. Enter Moqtada.
AFP reports Iraq's own groundhog, Moqtada al-Sadr, has returned to Iraq -- it must be spring. And guess what? He wants to put the brakes on protests. Did Iran dispatch him? Michael S. Schmidt and Yasir Ghazi (New York Times) say that he and Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani issued a call today to ask that protests be delayed. This is a reversal on protests from last week for Moqtada and a reversal from Sunday for al-Sistani. Moqtada has an 'answer.' What is it? Alsumaria TV reports al-Sadr's proposing "a one week referendum in all provinces of Iraq including Kurdistan on February 28." Wow! A Moqtada referendum! Who wouldn't want that!!!! March 7, 2010, Iraq held elections. Ayad Allawi's Iraqiya bloc came out with the most votes but Nouri was determined to hold on to the prime minister post. In April, al-Sadr held his own elections to see who his bloc should vote. From the April 7th snapshot:
Moqtada al-Sadr's bloc won 40 seats in the Parliament. Kadhim Ajrash and Caroline Alexander (Bloomberg News) report that Ibrahim al-Jaafari "won 24 percent of the 428,000 ballots cast in the internal referendum, ahead of al-Sadr's second cousin, Jafar Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr, who obtained 23 percent, Sadrist spokesman Salah al-Ubaidi said today in the southern city of Najaf." Al Jazeera notes that Nouri al-Maliki received 10% of the vote and Ayad Allawi 9%. The US military invaded Iraq in March 2003 (and still hasn't left).
So Moqtada staged a referendum and the people's will would be followed! Except it wasn't. al-Sadr got credit for being a "king maker" for tossing his support behind Nouri al-Maliki. It would be different this go round how? Don't expect everyone to follow Moqtada al-Sadr and with an already weakening hold on his base (due to his most recent lay over in Iraq), it's probably not the best time for him to be tossing around "referendum" and inviting people to think back to last April.
Al Rafidayn reports that today UN Secretary-General's Special Envoy to Iraq, Ad Melkert says that the "differences between the Arabs and the Kurds in northern Iraq" need to be resolved. You think? And how nice of Melkert to suddenly remember that issue . . . just as the region is alive with protests. Sky News reports Halabja is where hundreds of protestors marched today and shots were exchanged with the Mayor insisting the protesters did the shooting. If you were being asked to step down by the protesters, you'd probably work overtime to portray them poorly as well. One police officer died, another was injured. Sky News notes, "But protesters, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of arrest, insisted that no-one at their rally was carrying weapons. They said that police fired into the air and the casualties were caused when the bullets fell downwards." Jack Healy teams with Namo Abdulla for a report on this and it's confusing because he tells us that "thousands of people" "over the past week" have been protesting in the Kurdistan region. But this is the same Healy who took part in mocking the protests and insisting they were small.
Joao Silva's earlier comment about the way the Iraqi government attempts to block images from reaching the public (especially international audiences) is included in the report Human Rights Watch issued yesterday, [PDF format warning] "At a Crossroads: Human Rights in Iraq Eight Years After the US-led Invasion" -- and let's excerpt from the section on journalism:

Murders, assaults, and threats continue against writers for doing their
jobs. Government officials, political party figures, and militias may all be responsible for the violence, intended to silence some and intimidate the rest. New obstacles to the free exchange of information have emerged in the period since 2007: the rising number of libel suits lodged by government officials against journalists, and increasingly restrictive regulations that constrain their professional activity. Legislation intended to create additional protections for journalists has been stalled for more than a year and is unlikely to move forward any time soon.
Iraq is obligated to respect the right to freedom of expression of all persons under international law and Iraq's constitution. However, its national laws and regulations are inconsistent with these obligations. As Human Rights Watch has documented in this report, the Iraqi government can use these laws to revoke or suspend broadcasting licenses and bring charges against individuals.
Two pieces of legislation designed to facilitate the work of journalists are stalled in Iraq's parliament, the Council of Representatives: the Access to Information Law, which ensures the right of journalists to obtain public information, and the Journalists' Protection Law, which aims to protect media workers and compensate them for injuries sustained while working. Local press freedom advocates and journalists expressed concerns that the Journalists' Protection Law should apply broadly and protect all journalists including those working in new media. The law currently defines "journalist" narrowly as someone who works for an established news outlet and is affiliated with the Iraqi Journalists' Syndicate.
[. . .]
Journalists who uncover corruption or criticize senior government officials are at particular risk of abuse.
Two television presenters, famous in Iraq for provocative shows that criticize the government, said they had been beaten by security officials on different occasions over the past two years. Human Rights Watch viewed one video filmed by his cameraman in which Iraqi security officials punched one of the presenters and attempted to drag him into a van during a taping on a busy Baghdad street in 2009.
Since the two presenters are well known, security forces on the streets of Baghdad can easily recognize them. In the fall of 2009, they said police detained the pair for allegedly not properly stopping at a Baghdad checkpoint. One officer slapped the passenger on the head and shouted, "You Ba'athist!" Six or seven police dragged them out of the car, kicking and beating them. The police arrested and took them to a police station. Although the police officially charged them with running a checkpoint, the line of questioning during their interrogation was political. An officer spat on one of the journalists and asked them, "Why do you incite uprisings against the government?" and "Why do you glorify Saddam?" The
police dropped the charges and released the pair after their television station intervened.

A journalist tells HRW, "In Basra, security forces act with complete disdian and disrespect for journalists." Another, also in Basra explains that security forces detained them and confiscated their equipment for no reason last year. Nouri's been prime minister since 2006. He can't blame it on those who came before him. And while the US media never wanted to address reality (AFP and BBC did address it), Nouri came to power promising to attack the media. His 'four-point initiative' (apparently now completely forgotten) that was going to curb violence never did that. But US outlets gushed over it. They reduced it to a three-point plan, though. They didn't convey to US audiences that one of the points was curbing the media, restricting freedom of the press. (This was in the fall of 2006. In the summer of 2006, he was touting a seven-objective plan. Before that, in May 2006, Nouri had a 24-point plan. As with most things he's proposed, all went no where.) The four-point initiative included a governmental media oversight body which would monitor reporting for that pesky 'bias' known as truth.
Reuters notes the following violence from Tuesday: a Mosul bombing left four people injured, a Mosul roadside bombing left ten people wounded, two Ramadi roadside bombs left five people injured and a Shirqat roadside bombign injured one police officer; and for today's violence they note that a Mosul roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 Iraqi soldier (two more injured) and that a Baghdad home invasion in which 1 Christian male was stabbed to death. Vatican Radio reports, "The European Union Council on Monday issued a statement denouncing intolerance, discrimination and violence on the basis of religion or belief, which specifically condemned acts of violence against Christians and their places of worship." Religious minorities have been targeted throughout the Iraq War. The latest wave of targeting Iraqi Christians began October 31st with the assault on Our Lady of Salvation Church in Baghdad causing many Iraqi Christians in Baghdad and Mosul to flee to northern Iraq or another country.
The Iraq War hits the 8 year mark next month. That's a long war with a lot of details. Molly Ivins and Lou Dubose noted in Bushwhacked: Life in George W. Bush's America, "The most serious split between ourselves and our allies was over the war in Iraq. As White House chief of staff Andrew Card observed, 'You don't roll out a new product in August,' so it was September 2002 before the administration officially announced it planned to attack a country that had not attacked us or anyone else." Two weeks ago, during a phone conversation with a friend (poli sci professor, leftist), I mentioned Card's statement in passing -- related to the current White House -- and he didn't remember it. I had to jog his mind (we'd discussed it in real time -- I have a memory like an elephant). He's smart, publishes papers and has a lot of things on his mind and had forgotten that moment. Which is why refreshers may be needed. On this week's Law and Disorder, Scott Bonn of Drew University discussed the early stages of the war and the selling of it with Michael Ratner, Michael S. Smith and Heidi Boghosian. As a refresher, it may be of value to someone. And I think the show's almost always worth listening to and one of the top five shows on public radio. But the segment didn't make it for me. If you're claiming you've developed a new "integrated and interdisciplinary theory," you should be able to use that "integrated and interdisciplinary theory." I did not find his book helpful or needed. I thought it was a total waste. If the one of the main points of the book is that the Iraq War is wrong, then what does that say for today?
The book said nothing. It's nothing but grudge f**king masking for scholarship -- and it's not a theory. A theory -- even in poli sci -- is tested and all Bonn has is a hypothesis. (An academic who does not know the difference isn't much of an academic.)
The Iraq War continues. Your grudge f**king didn't do a damn thing. It gave us a synopsis, a "last time on Gossip Girl" -- several seasons old. It offers nothing for today. It is no help at all to ending the Iraq War and Bonn can't even admit that the Iraq War goes on. I don't have time for that crap. He would probably argue (and makes this point in both the book and on the show) that if you don't learn from history, you're doomed to repeat it.
Repeat what?
The Iraq War has not ended. Bonn can't even use that tired bromide correctly. The point of "learn from history" is that if you don't learn, you will be trapped in a repeating cycle for years and years. The Iraq War has not ended. I don't know how else to put it. In the truest sense of that bromide, you're dealing with past events, not current ones, not ongoing ones -- that's what the term "history" in that sentence means.
Michael Ratner gave him a chance to somehow bring it to something beyond Bush bashing. All he could offer was he respects Barack Obama. Well good but don't pretend you wrote a book worth reading about the Iraq War because if you're truly appalled by it, you're not just appalled it started 8 years ago, you're also appalled it continues. I don't have time to obsess over the past. I'm not going to forgive the War Criminals of the previous administration but I'm also not going to pretend that in January 2009 the Iraq War ended.
Look at the Human Rights Watch report issued this week. Those actions described are the result of the puppet government. And Barack fought to keep Nouri al-Maliki prime minister. The hosts also speak with Stephanie Coontz. I'm sure that was much more productive. (I was asked to note the program, I called a friend who records it each week and said, "Play me the Iraq segment." That's all I heard. He also told me that there's a lively discussion of Clarence Thomas at the top of the show.) Bonn was often highly uninformed. (The world does not begin and end with the US. If discussing polling and why something's polled, it's not necessary to go to an outlandish they're-out-to-get-me hypothesis if you know what other countries are pushing for and if there's a global media mogul you're discussing, you need to be aware of the world holdings and not think you're an expert just because you keep mentioning one of the US holdings.) To hear about attitudes towards the Iraq War before and after it started (as well as today) the latest War News Radio features a segment with Richard Sobel that's heavy on facts. Sobel, Peter Furia and Bethany Barrett are the editors of the forthcoming (May 2011) Public Opinion and International Intervention: Lessons from the Iraq War.
It's because the Iraq War hasn't ended that two actions are taking place. This Friday,
Iraq Veterans Against the War have this event:

February 25, 2011 9:30 - 10:30 am
Busboys & Poets, Langston room
14th & V st NW Washington DC
This report back will be to answer questions from media and the peace movement about the recent trip back to Iraq by members of Iraq Veterans Against the War. The war is not over but it is not the same as it was in years past. What is the humanitarian situation in Iraq?
How can we do reparations and reconciliation work?
Speakers are all returning from this delegation and include:
Geoff Millard (IVAW) Hart Viges (IVAW) Haider Al-Saedy (Iraqi Health Now)
Richard Rowely (Big Noise Films)

Also because the Iraq War is not over, next month there will be a march which A.N.S.W.E.R. and March Forward! and others will be taking part in this action:

March 19 is the 8th anniversary of the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Iraq today remains occupied by 50,000 U.S. soldiers and tens of thousands of foreign mercenaries.

The war in Afghanistan is raging. The U.S. is invading and bombing Pakistan. The U.S. is financing endless atrocities against the people of Palestine, relentlessly threatening Iran and bringing Korea to the brink of a new war.

While the United States will spend $1 trillion for war, occupation and weapons in 2011, 30 million people in the United States remain unemployed or severely underemployed, and cuts in education, housing and healthcare are imposing a huge toll on the people.

Actions of civil resistance are spreading.

On Dec. 16, 2010, a veterans-led civil resistance at the White House played an important role in bringing the anti-war movement from protest to resistance. Enduring hours of heavy snow, 131 veterans and other anti-war activists lined the White House fence and were arrested. Some of those arrested will be going to trial, which will be scheduled soon in Washington, D.C.

Saturday, March 19, 2011, the anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, will be an international day of action against the war machine.

Protest and resistance actions will take place in cities and towns across the United States. Scores of organizations are coming together. Demonstrations are scheduled for San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington, D.C., and more.


In legal news, a verdict has been rendered in the case of a man who killed his daughter. Dropping back to the November 3, 2009 snapshot:

In the US, Noor Faleh Almaleki has died. The 20-year-old Iraqi woman was intentionally run over October 20th (see the October 21st snapshot) while she and Amal Edan Khalaf were running errands (the latter is the mother of Noor's boyfriend and she was left injured in the assault). Police suspected Noor's father, Faleh Hassan Almaleki, of the assault and stated the probable motive was that he felt Noor had become "too westernized." As noted in the October 30th snapshot, Faleh Hassan Almaleki was finally arrested after going on the lamb -- first to Mexico, then flying to London where British authorities refused him entry and he was sent back to the US and arrested in Atlanta. Karan Olson and CNN note that the judge has set the man's bail at $5 million. Philippe Naughton (Times of London) adds, "Noor died yesterday, having failed to recover consciousness after the attack. The other woman, Amal Khalaf, was also seriously injured but is expected to survive. "


This year the trial finally commenced. Bill Chappel (The Two-Way, NPR) reports, "A Phoenix jury has convicted an Iraqi immigrant of second-degree murder [yesterday] in the death of his daughter in what prosecutors say was an 'honor killing'." Carlin DeGuerin Miller (CBS News) adds, "Almaleki was also convicted of aggravated assault for the injuries suffered by the older woman. Peoria, Ariz. detective Christopher Boughey testified that Faleh Almaleki confessed to him during a lengthy interrogation that he did in fact intend to cause his daughter's death. Prosecutor Laura Reckart played a recording in which Boughey and another detective confronted Almaleki with their suspicions that he ran over Noor Almaleki because she had become too westernized and brought disrespect to the family." Lisa Halverstadt and Michel Kiefer (Arizona Republic -- link has text and video) report that sentencing was supposed to take place this afternoon, "At sentencing, he faces 10 to 22 years in prison for second-degree murder, 5 to 15 years for aggravated assault, and 2 to 8 ¾ years for leaving the scene of the accident. All of those sentences would be stacked on top of each other, meaning Al-Maleki can face 17 to 45 ¾ years in prison." However, I'm told the sentencing is April 15th. We'll cover the sentencing whenever it is and I'm sorry for the confusion.


on No comments:

Tuesday, February 22, 2011

Sexist pig Tom Burghardt



Wordle: Dissident Voice


Click on the illustration to see it larger. I'm not calling C.I. again. (I had no idea how to do a word cloud and called her to talk me through -- which she kindly did.)


I'm sick of these sexist pigs. Burghardt mocks Clinton by calling her "Mrs. Clinton" and "Madame Clinton" over and over.

If you read all of his garbage, you'll see he even calls out Eric Holder (once).

Who doesn't he call out?

Barack Obama.

In fact "Barack" never appears. "The Obama adminsitration" does twice or three times. That's it. He can't call out Barack because he's a cowardly little masturbator who still dreams of that time he saw Mommy bending over, looked up her skirt and saw she wasn't wearing panties. He's been beating off to that for years now and hating women because of it. He needs help. He doesn't need to be published.

The policies in his title and his article go to Barack Obama. But like most idiots, he can't call out Barack. He's a coward.


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


Tuesday, February 22, 2011. Chaos and violence continue, protests continue (and the continued protests, in fact, mock the New York Times' smug little two-some), Kaye Whitley wants you to pay her salary but she doesn't want to work for you, and more.
Today confusion reigns surpreme. Most thought Kaye Whitley, the Pentagon's Director of the Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office, was an employee of the Pentagon whose salary was paid by the tax payer and, therefore, answerable to the public. Turns out Kaye Whit-whit is a star-star. Her concert rider hasn't reached Van Halen proportions yet (presumably, she will not cancel an appearance if brown M&Ms are in the green room) but give her time, give her time.
On today's Tell Me More (NPR), Michele Martin explained that they had contacted the Pentagon and Kaye Whitley had agreed to appear on the show for a discussion Martin was moderating on sexual harassment in the military provided -- pay attention -- that she speak first and only to Michele Martin (no one else appearing could question her or comment to her). That's a bit extreme for a government employee. Especially one whose ass should have been fired when she refused to testify to Congress in July 2008. But provided she could get these conditions, the star-star would appear. Except she wouldn't. Even after agreeing to Whitley's conditions and her stating she would appear, at the last minute Kaye-Kay backed out. Usually when a diva backs out at the last minute, the rumors are pills or booze. Let's hope Kaye's not hitting the hard stuff. Who knows what the reasons were for Kaye's backing out but it's past time that the Pentagon started explaining what world they're living in that they have an employee who thinks she can testify to Congress only when she wants to and whose MAIN JOB is to do media outreach but insists upon star treatement or she won't agree to it.
Michele Martin: I should also say that we called upon the Pentagon's sexual assault prevention response office for a comment and the director of that office, Kaye Whitley, first agreed to appear on the program but although we assured Ms. Whitley, per her request, that she would speak directly to me in a one-on-one conversation, we were subsequently informed that she would not be appearing.
Panayiota Bertzikis was Martin's guest and apparently,, unlike Kaye Whitley, had no special demands. Panayiota's part of the group, fifteen women, 2 men, who are suing former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and current Secretary of Defense Robert Gates over their lack of leadership and response on the issue of sexual assaults and rapes. Susan Burke is the lead attorney for the plantiffs. Penayiota Bertzikis is the executive director of Military Rape Crisis Center. She explained what happened to her.
Penayiota Bertzikis: I enlisted in the Coast Guard in 2005. In 2006, I reported a rape to my commander, Coast Guard Station Burlington, Vermont. And my executive petty officer told me to shut up about the rape and to leave his office. After it was reported to his supervisors, the executive officer, I was forced to continue working with my perpetrator for over a month, living on the same floor as him in military housing and being reprimanded and abused further by pretty much the entire station who knew what was happening. After being transferred to Coast Guard Station Boston, the abuse continued to happen and eventually in May 2007, I was involuntarily discharged from service on the basis of a misdiagnosis.
Michele Martin: What does that mean?
Penayiota Bertzikis: The Coast Guard told me that I was having problems adjusting to being raped and therefore I can no longer serve in the military. They told me I was suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and from there, because of that, I can no longer serve in the Coast Guard.
Michele Martin: Wait a minute. So they're saying you can no longer serve in the Coast Guard because you had Post Traumatic Stress after suffering a rape but they never investigated the rape.
Penayiota Bertzikis: Well it was so-called investigated but they found there was no so-called credible evidence that a rape occurred even though my perpetrator has confessed to what he has done.
Miichele Martin noted some of the claims of improvement Robert Gates has made publicly and Penayiota Bertzikis didn't see those improvements and she specifically pointed to the hotline, "And those 24 hour hotlines that you're supposed to call? I have cases where survivors called those hotlines where you're supposed to call and talk to a victims advocate after an assault and those phones are not being picked up by anyone. The e-mails and phone calls are not answered so I haven't seen any difference since the Dept of Defense have done this Sexual Assault Prevention Office. There hasn't been much difference between now and what happened to me in '06."
Last week, CBS News announced that Lara Logan was attacked and sexually assaulted while on assignment in Egypt. today Michele Martin addressed many issues regarding that topic with ABC's Martha Raddatz, Al Jazeera's Rawya Rageh and Women's Media Foundation's Liza Gross (link has audio and transcript). Nir Rosen, of course, attacked Logan on Twitter after the news broke, explaining how he had no sympathy for her and, like many abusers, insisting she got what she deserved. Sunday, Maureen Dowd (New York Times) weighed in, "He apologized in a whiny way, explaining that he 'resented' Logan because she 'defended American imperial adventures,' and that she got so much attention for the assault because she's white and famous. He explained in Salon that 'Twitter is no place for nuance,' as though there's any nuance in his suggestion that Logan wanted to be sexually assaulted for ratings." Noting Rosen's 'apology,' Phil Bronstein (San Francisco Chronicle) observed, "But that started yet another debate about whether Rosen himself was a scurrilous troll or the victime of anti-free speech forces. I vote the former. An Esquire writer actually claimed both Rosen and Logan were 'attacked by the same thing . . . mob mentality.' That's a big stretch." And today Rosen won the not highly sought after "Dick of the Week" award: "Amazingly though, Rosen was only getting warmed up. It's his apologies that really set the standard. Rosen made several attempts at an "apology" that range from whining and petulant to flippant and dismissive. It becomes very clear very quickly that Rosen feels absolutely no remorse whatsoever for his inappropriate, insulting tweets." You can also refer to "The Damned Don't Apologize (Ava and C.I.)" that Ava and I did for Third.

Around the world, the attacks on women never end. Today Human Rights Watch issued [PDF format warning] "At a Crossroads: Human Rights in Iraq Eight Years After the US-led Invasion." Despite Barack Obama's pretty lies that Iraq is 'progress' and puppy dog tails, Human Rights Watch studied seven cities over last year and found reality is very, very different. Take this from the section on women:


Women and girls also suffered from increasing restrictions on their freedom of mobility and protections under the law. In an attempt to attract support from conservative and religious groups and tribal leaders, the government introduced decrees and legislation negatively impacting women's legal status in the labor code, criminal justice system, and personal status laws. Security forces subjected female political activists and relatives of dissidents to gender-specific abuses, including sexual violence.
The insecurity created by the US-led 2003 occupation of Iraq, followed by sectarian strife that engulfed the country, further eroded women's rights.
In the months following the invasion, Human Rights Watch documented a wave of sexual violence and abductions against women in Baghdad. At the time, women and girls told Human Rights Watch that insecurity and fear of rape and abduction kept them in their homes, out of schools, and away from work. Although assailants kidnapped many men as well, the consequences for women and girls were worse due to concerns of family "honor," which is predicated on the moral standing and behavior of female members of the family. For women and girls, the trauma of an abduction continued well after release -- the shame associated with the event was a lasting stigma because of the presumption that abductors had raped or sexually assaulted the woman or girl during her ordeal, regardless of whether she was actually raped.
After 2003, militias, insurgents, Iraqi security forces, multinational forces, and foreign private military contractors raped and killed women.
[. . .]
Today, armed groups continue to target female political and community leaders and activists.
This threat of violence has had a debilitating impact on the daily lives of women and girls generally and has reduced their participation in public life. It has had profound consequences for women's economic participation, as many female professionals, including doctors, journalists, activists, engineers, politicians, teachers, and civil servants are forced to cease working fearing for their safety.
On November 12, 2009, an assailant shot Safa 'Abd al-Amir, the principal of a girls school in Baghdad, four times. The attack happened shortly after she announced that she was running in the national elections as a Communist Party candidate. After al-Amir left her school in the al-Ghadir district at about 1:30 p.m., a maroon-colored BMW approached her vehicle from behind to the side; an assailant shot her three times in the face and once in the arm. She did not immediately realize what had happened to her since the gunman used a silencer.
Despite her injuries, al-Amir managed to leave her car and walk barefoot for about 20 meters.
When police arrived at the scene, they initially feared she was a suicide bomber because she was drenched in blood. "I couldn't answer the questions because they had shot my mouth -- I just kept pointing to my mouth," al-Amir related.
That's a reflection on many things including the US occupation and the US government's chosen puppet Nouri al-Maliki whom they reinstalled. He's now been prime minister since 2006. But in the 2011 State of the Union address, Barack was lying about "a new government being formed" and how great that was. Would that be Nouri's Cabinet? He can't seem to find women to appoint, can he? Even the minister over women's affairs? A man. But that's progress to Barack. Let's remember, on the shooting of a candidate, that most of the violence targeting candidates before the election benefited Nouri's political slate. Covering the report, IPS notes:
Forced marriages and prostitution and domestic and sexual abuse are frequent occurrences in Iraq, according to the report. In one case HRW investigated, a 14-year-old Baghdadi was kidnapped in 2010, drugged, taken to a residence that held other Arab and Kurdish girls and was forced to "sleep with one or two men daily" -- a story familiar to many victims of forced prostitution in Iraq.
The report found that because "victims of sexual violence and trafficking have well-grounded fears of reprisals, social ostracism, rejection or physical violence from their families, and a lack of confidence that authorities have the will or capacity to provide the support or protection required," many cases go completely unnoticed by the Iraqi government. Even those cases that are referred to authorities are met with investigative reluctance.

According to Human Rights Watch, the 2003 invasion caused a chaos that has exacted an enormous toll on Iraq's citizens as the deterioration of security has resulted in a return to some traditional justice practices and religiously inflected political extremism, which have had a deleterious effect on women's rights, both inside and outside the home. It has been reported that militias promoting misogynist ideologies have targeted women and girls for assassination, and intimidated them to keep them from participating in public life.

"Increasingly, women and girls are victimised in their own homes for a variety of perceived transgressions against family or community honor. Trafficking in women and girls in and out of the country for sexual exploitation is widespread", Human Rights watch said.


The report covers torture, the attacks on journalists, the realities for children and much more. We'll note the report more this week.
Protests have continued in Iraq. It's a non-scientific online poll; however, it has more merit than the 'polling' Quil Lawrence claimed March 8th on NPR's Morning Edition, the day after the election, when he had Nouri al-Maliki's State Of Law winning a landslide. Kissing the ruler's ass means never having to say you're sorry, apparently. (State Of Law didn't win by a landslide, they didn't win at all.) Al Mannarah has asked its reader whether they think Nouri's 'government' will remain in place until the next scheduled election? 54.44% say no, 41.82% say 'yes it will be in place' and 3.64% say that they don't know. Saturday the figures were 52,83% stating no, 3.77% saying they didn't know and 43.40% saying it will remain in place until the next scheduled election.
Maybe Nouri's following that online poll? Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) reports today, "In an apparent bid to deflate a major protest planned for Friday, the head of Baghdad's provincial council on Tuesday promised to fire corrupt and inept officials, while Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki announced that he was personally overseeing the availability of sugar and other items provided to the poor." Along with the demonstrations themselves, Nouri's feeling other pressures as well. Saturday Al Mada reported on MP Jaafar al-Sadr decrying the corruption, cronyism and nepotism at play in Iraqi politics and he expressed the belief that all Iraqis shared a disappointment in the government. Sunday, Al Rafidayn reports, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani declared his support for the protesters and called on the government to be peaceful and not attack the protesters. In his letter he blamed the suffering on fthe Iraqi people on the government's own failures. The change in Nouri that Arraf's reporting on today is in contrast to the lecturing pose he offered over the weekend.
Dar Addustour reported that he declared on Saturday the young people of Iraq need to be aware and prepared to stand up to any attempt to rebel -- portraying protests as a potential threat. He claimed his enemies are for dictatorship and against democracy. No word on whether these enemies he 'sees' are seen in a mirror. Alsumaria TV reported that Jalal Talabani, Iraq's President, made similar warnings while the Speaker of Parliament, Ousama Al Nujafi, publicly called for the government to address the problems of the Iraqi people. If he was serving fear on Saturday, Friday Nouri was trying to happy talk his way out of current problems. Al Rafidayn reports he declared yesterday that 2011 would be a harsh year for the country; however, after that, things were going to change and turn around. Al Rafidayn reports that protests calling for better services (electricity, water, food) are increasingly protests that decry directly Nouri al-Maliki.

Protests continued throughout Iraq Saturday. Al Rafidayn reports that, in Baghdad, widows and orphans hit the streets in protest against living conditions and demanding legislation that would ensure their needs. Activist Omar al-Mashhadani stated that the widows and orphans were the victims of the violence in Iraq since the invasion. Widow Sawsan Ismail is responsible for raising five children. Her husband was kidnapped and killed in 2007. She depends upon humanitarian assistance from NGOs and a stipend from the library -- together they total 265,000 dinars a month (212 US dollars) while her monthly rent for the families' apartment is $300,000 dinars (250 US dollars). She wants someone to ask the government how she is supposed to be able to feed her children? Another woman also raising several children by herself declares, "I ask, God, how a family of four people can live on this?"

Al Mada noted the Saturday protests went in Baghdad and Kut. Political Science professor Abdul Jabbar Ahmed advised that the best way to end the protests is to provide the improved services the protesters are demanding. In Kut, the sit-in that started Thursday disbanded today when the protesters were informed that their demands would be met. Those demands were supposed to include the release of all arrested in the protests. Whether this was more than empty words remains to be seen and it's difficult to picture the governor of the province stepping down (another one of the demands).

Dar Addustour reported that people protested Saturday in Al calling for the country's Constitution to be applied to everyone. Al Rafidayn covered the Sulaymaniyah protest in which fifteen people were injured Saturday when protesters demanded an end to corruption and reform and some demonstraters began hurling stones at the police (who had clashed with protesters Thursday). Mohammed Tawfeeq and Shirko Abdullah (CNN) report, "Witnesses said police used water cannons and fired weapons over the heads of rock-throwing demonstrators in Sulaimaniya, who had taken to the streets to protest the violent response of security forces that killed one demonstrator and injured 57 after they attacked the local offices of ruling Kurdistan Democratic Party." Shwan Mohammed (AFP) adds, "The rally, along with another in the same Kurdish city and others in Baghdad, came after two protests in as many days earlier this week left three people dead and more than 100 wounded." Thursday's protests targeted the KDP headquarters, KRG President Massoud Barzani's political party. Saturday's protests included many signs and banners decrying Barzani. The Sulaimaniya protests continued on Sunday with Shamal Aqrawi (Reuters) reporting that forty-eight people were injured including eleven who were shot.
Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) reported that 1 teenage male died in Sulaimaniya when the pesh merga clashed with protesters. Not identified in the report, the male was 17-year-old Sherko Mohammed. Another CNN report noted that banners named Massoud Barzani (KRG President) and demanded he apologize for the behavior of the guards last week.

Kutaiba Hamid (Al Mada) reported that Monday in Bahgdad, protesters were attack by unknown assailants in civilian clothes and driving cars suspected of belonging to ministries. The assailants used electric batons and knives. Protesters are demanding that the area (Tahir Square) be returned to the protesters. Waleed Abu Tiba states that at one o'clock in the afternoon the assailants emerged from government cars and began beating protesters. Dar Addustour explained 11 protesters have been arrested in Baghdad's Abu Ghraib section and that a traffic ban has been imposed on the area in an effort to stop the demonstrations. In addition, a demostration "in" the University of Kirkuk is noted where students from Business, Economics and Science demanded better conditions at the university and better services. Ammar Karim (AFP) reported, "Iraq scrambled to head off further protests on Monday by cutting politicians' pay and ramping up support for the needy after a teenage demonstrator was killed at a rally in the country's north." Karim notes that the tariffs on imported goods has been delayed as a result of the protests. Though it appears late in the article and is not developed, it's not a minor point. Right now Iraqis are being assured that the politicians hear them, that the prices are too high for food and unemployment is a nightmare and blah, blah, blah. But they want to impose a tariff on all imports and Iraq continues to import the bulk of its food. Which would mean that either Parliament drops the tariff proposal or they get honest with Iraqis that the high cost of food is about to go up. Today, Suha Sheikhly (Al Mada) examines how Iraq has become an importer instead of the exporter it traditionally was in the region. Lebanon's Daily Star points out today, "Prices of food and other goods had started to rise slowly in anticipation of the March 6 implementation of the imports law, which would impose tariffs of up to 100 percent."

Many protesters, especially college age Iraqis, are gearing up for this Friday when they hope to hold the biggest protest Iraq has yet seen. They're not the only ones preparing. Dar Addustour reports that an emergency security meeting decided the Green Zone on Friday will be protected at all entrances with many armored vehicles and riot police and that police and the Iraqi military will take part in the protest. Some will carry banners decrying corruption and calling for much needed services. Nasiriyah notes Dhi Qar has been placed on high alert due to a supposed rumor of a terrorist threat and, commenting on the article, Sabri sees the high alert as an attempt to scare Iraqis and prevent them from protesting. Less than 24 hours ago, the New York Times' silver-tarnished boys were mocking the protesters, down grading what they'd accomplished, distorting what they were doing (and it probably sailed over the heads of many since the paper's not been interested in Iraq for some time and has really avoided the issues. We covered Jack Healy and Michael S. Schmidt's nonsense already this morning and, as always, when Operation Happy Talkers think they're going to grab their boogie boards and ride the latest wave, reality -- like a mighty tidal waves -- tends to knock them off their boards and leave them floating in the surf. The tidal wave today was Sulaimaniyah. Spit out the salt water, boys, before you choke on it. Shwan Mohammed (AFP) reports that the city saw 4,000 protesters and that they're saying the protests will continue until they see "real change." Namo Abdulla (Reuters) declares Sulaimaniyah to now be a military zone as a result of the response to the protesters but that demonstraters carried signs stating, "This is the country of hungry people. They are not afraid of tanks." Among their demands -- besides basic services and ending corruption -- has been the release of protesters who have been arrested. Abdulla notes that some of the arrested were let go today.
Al Rafidayn notes there was a physical clash between a State of Law and a National Alliance after the vote (and you can check out the picture even if you can't read Arabic).
Alsumaria TV provides news of an altercation which took place Monday, "Iraq's Parliament session on Monday was subject to verbal altercations. The session was suspended for half an hour after Speaker Ousama Al Nujaifi intensely argued with members of Kurdish opposition change movement as they were banned to read their statement about Sulaimaniah incidents. Two members of Al Iraqiya List squabbled as well over the investigation committee report on closing Al Baghdadiya TV offices." Meanwhile, Al Rafidayn reported yesterday that Speaker of Parliament Osama Nujaifi has announced that forty billion dollars is missing from the Development Fund for Iraq and that the Parliament has formed two committees to investigate the disappearance.
The violence continues in Iraq beyond the Parliament. Yesterday, Fang Yang (Xinhua) reported a Samarra suicide car bombing caused deaths an injuries "when a suicide bomber rammed his explosive-laden car into a military base belonging to a quick reaction police force". Michael S. Schmidt and Omar al-Jawoshy (New York Times) quoted eye witness police officer Mohammed Hillan Athab stating, "I was standing at the front of the compound where the bar was located and suddenly a white pickup truck filled with empty chicken cages got closer to us. First, we thought, he is a farmer and lost his way. But then he drover faster, and one he got close he detonated the car." Reuters added, "On Feb 10 a suicide car bomber attacked a group of pilgrims near the town of Dujail as they headed to Samarra for the commemoration, killing eight and wounding 30." Mohammed Tawfeeq (CNN) counted 12 dead and twenty injured in today's attack.
Iraq has had non-stop bombings for weeks resulting in massive deaths and massive numbers of wounded. This has gone on without a Minister of National Security, without a Minister of Defense, without a Minister of Interior. How can that be? Didn't they have an election? Yes, they did back in March of last year. Didn't Nouri assemble a Cabinet? No, he didn't. Not a full one. But the US government pressed the Kurds to back up the claim that despite the fact that Nouri gave himself three positions in the Cabinet (those three) and despite the fact that he left 10 other positions empty, Nouri had formed a Cabinet, had done so in 30 days and could move from prime minister-designate to Prime Minister. That allowed Nouri to become prime minister even though the Constitution mandated that a new prime minister-designate be appointed.
Dar Addustour reports that it will be late this month or early next month -- a year after the elections -- before the security posts are filled. And at least one name being tossed around is pretty frightening. Iraq's National Coalition is a series of Shi'ite political parties that banded together. Al Rafidayn reports they have called on Nouri al-Maliki to name Ahmed Chalibi Minister of the Interior.
National Coalition member Abbas Amiri reveals that the choice was decided upon, where else, at the home of Ibrahim al-Jaafari. Chalabi is infamous for many things. Most recently, he helped Nouri out via the Justice and Accountability Commission. Chalabi and Ali al-Lami went around targeting Nouri's opponents as Baathists and refusing to allow them to run for office. Of course, his history is much longer than that. From the Institute for Policy Studies' page on Chalabi:

Ahmad Chalabi is a controversial Iraqi political figure who first rose to prominence in the year's before the U.S. led invasion of Iraq because of his U.S.-backed exile group, the Iraqi National Congress (INC), which played an important role pushing the ouster of Saddam Hussein, including by passing allegedly false intelligence about Iraq's weapons programs. Long a favorite of many neoconservative figures—including, most notably, Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle—Chalabi fell out of official favor (if not that of the neocons) in 2004 when he was accused of spying for Iran. In early 2010, Chalabi again made headlines as a result of his continuing ties to Iran and his efforts to sideline Sunni politicians in Iraq (Chalabi is Shiite).

In late February 2010, the Washington Post reported that Chalabi was behind the disqualification of several hundred candidates during the run up to Iraqi elections in March 2010 because of having alleged ties to the Baath Party. The disqualifications were announced by Chalabi's Justice and Accountability Commission, which according to critics targeted "candidates from Sunni-led and mixed secular coalitions. … Many of those ousted were rivals of Chalabi's bloc. A court impaneled to review the cases carried out a cursory review behind closed doors. Candidates were allowed to submit written appeals but were never told the specific nature of the allegations against them."[1]

According to the Post, the disqualifications not only threatened to widen the sectarian divide in the country, they also were upsetting Iraq's neighbors, who worried about the increasing influence of Iran. An unnamed U.S. military official said, "They will try to get rid of pro-U.S. generals, but more importantly, they are stacking the deck with pro-Iranian officers, which will damage U.S. long-term interests in the long run. This is why many neighboring Arab countries aren't so happy about us modernizing the Iraqi military with some of the latest equipment."[2]


Apparently, Ahmed's getting paid off for all the work he did -- work he did, according to US military officials, on behalf of the Iranian government. If anyone thought the purges were bad in the lead up to the March 7th election, take a moment to wonder what he'd do as Minister of the Interior.

In other alarming news, Ayas Hossam Acommok (Al Mada) reports a concert hall in Baghdad which was being used by a family to celebrate a small child's birth was raided by the Baghdad police on the orders of the Baghdad Provincial Council. Supposedly the hall wasn't supposed to be opened, not even for private parties. Regardless of whether that's true or not, when you've got demonstrations all over Iraq, including in Baghdad, is really a good thing to alienate the people by sending the police in to bust a child's birthday party?

Reuters notes two Baghdad roadside bombings today left five people injured. And though the national press didn't seem overly concerned, last week 2 US service members died in Iraq: Airman 1st Class Corey C. Owens and Shawn Evans died in Iraq.
on 1 comment:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)