One more reason Michael Moore sucks

So, here are some cheerful statistics for you: According to RAINN, about 60% of rapes aren’t reported. In those cases, there’s about a 51% chance that the 40% of reported rapes will have an arrest made. There’s an 80% chance of prosecution. And, given various factors including conviction and sentencing, there’s only about a 16.3% chance that someone who commits rape will serve time for that rape. Meaning: If we factor in the rapes that go unreported, only 6% of rapists ever serve time. EVER.

Gee, it sounds like making sure that rape accusations are taken seriously, and pursued to the full extent of the law, in all cases, is a pretty important issue, for progressives!

Meanwhile, here are some facts: A man has been accused of rape by two separate women. He fled the country in which he was accused. He is fighting extradition, so that he won’t have to go back to that country and face charges — even though there are spectacularly low rates of conviction for accused rapists, he just doesn’t think that he should have to go through the system, for whatever reason. And you know who’s posting bail for him?

F**king progressives. That’s who. Including one man who has, for some years now, served as one of the most prominent and recognizable faces of the American left, filmmaker/rabble-rouser/all-around champion of the Truth and the Little Guy, Michael Moore. He’s put $20,000 hard, cashy dollars on the line, so that Julian Assange, white male left-wing darling, will be able to get out on bail despite posing a substantial and acknowledged flight risk, and despite the fact that he evidently is working to avoid facing the charges of his accusers.

That's from a post Sady did at Tiger Beatdown. Michael Moore, if you missed it, can't defend the women but can attack them and smear their names.

The whole thing reminds me of Mumia. He was a 'gift' (Michael Moore) to the left then he wrote that book in 2003 or 2004 and what does he do in the book, this big lefty? He writes something like, "Come on, we all know Mumia's guilty."

This was his way of helping? And then when called on it, he tried to weasel his way out of it.

It wasn't a joke and it wasn't funny. Mumia's on death row and for Michael Moore to declare that 'we all know' Mumia murdered someone.

That's what he does, he takes up causes and then tosses the victims onto the wood pile. This happens over and over. I'm so sick of him.

And I'm sick of Terry Gross. Yesterday on Fresh Air, she had on a man and a woman -- and that would be 50 - 50 were it not for the fact that she has only interviewed women 24% (that's probably a generous estimate) of the time.


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

Wednesday, December 15, 2010. Chaos and violence continue, one of the world's Big Six oil conglomerates reportedly was in talks with Tehran, Nouri had to assure the US that he'd pay his GE bill in 2009, Nouri gets his hands on the oil-for-food money, Iraqi Christians remain targeted as do Shi'ite pilgrims, and more.

Ewen MacAskill (Guardian) breaks big news on one of the Big Six of Big Oil. According to a March 23, 2009 US embassy cable released by WikiLeaks, Nouri al-Maliki told US officials that the California-based multi-national Chevron Corporation had been in negotiations with the Iranian government in Tehran. The official is Patricia Butenis. She is currently the US Ambassador to the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka and the Republic of Maldives. When Nouri passed on the information to her, she was the Deputy Chief of Mission at the US Embassy in Baghdad. In the cable, she wrote: "With regards to hydrocarbons, the PM [Nouri] asked for the US position on direct contracts with US firms and on US firms developing cross-border fields on the Iran border. The PM said he is currently in negotiations with Chevron to develop various oilfields to include a cross-border oilfield with Iran (NFI). The PM claimed that Chevron had told him that it had already raised the issue of a cross-border development with Tehran as well. (Note: We have no independent confirmation of this: end note.)" The cable documents that Butenis and Nouri also discussed General Electric -- specifically whether or not GE would be receiving their payments (for electricity -- no dollar amounts are noted) and notes Nouri "said that the contracts would be paid even if it had to come out of their own salaries." The Minneapolis Star-Tribune reports that Nouri, if he moves from prime minister-designate to prime minister, will pull down $360,000 a year -- and that if the power-sharing deal holds, Allawi will make the same. $360,000 is a great deal of money, especially for a 'leader' who hasn't been able to provide either safety or basic services. What services GE's providing and what cost would also be interesting to know. The cable also notes that Nouri doesn't trust the Iraqi police and rejected the notion (presented by the US military) that the Iraqi military should be used for "external threats" and the police should be used for policing. In his post, Nouri controls the Iraqi army which may be why he dismissed the US suggestions. We'll note this section of the cable on the now former US Ambassador to Iraq Chris Hill (no, he didn't last very long, did he?) and Butenis is "CDA": Turning to the CDA, the PM asked about the arrival of Ambassador Hill. The CDA said that Ambassador Hill will have confirmation hearings in the Senate on March 25 and that, hopefully, he would arrive in Iraq sometime in April. The Qhopefully, he would arrive in Iraq sometime in April. The PM asked the CDA if she foresaw any problems. She responded that some Senators had expressed concern with Ambassador Hill's lack of experience in the Middle East and over his negotiations with North Korea. She said that Ambassador Hill had already met with Senators McCain and Graham to address such concerns. She expressed optimism that he would be confirmed by the Senate, noting that he was one of the Department's most accomplished diplomats. The PM said that he had discussed Ambassador Hill with President Obama when they last spoke and that President Obama said that Ambassador Hill "had his complete confidence" and that he is "the right man for the job." The PM told the CDA that "we welcome him to Iraq." Tonight on WBAI, Joy of Resistance airs from nine to ten p.m. (and streams live online) and among the guests will be Jill Filipovic to address the topic of "Swedish and US rape laws and the current wave of misogny that has surfaced in response to rape allegations against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange." (Other guests will be Susan J. Doulgas, Lu Baily and Amanda Marcotte.) On this week's Law and Disorder Radio (aired Monday on WBAI and around the country thoughout the week), hosts Michael Ratner and Michael S. Smith discussed WikiLeaks. Excerpt: Michael Ratner: Michael, there's been zillions of words and articles about WikiLeaks, Julian Assange. And, of course, in this country he's looked at as a pariah despite the fact that every newspaper in the country is covering what he has done and he's obviously made a major contribution toward our understanding of how our government runs but give us a second on your political take on what you think of WikiLeaks. Michael S. Smith: You know why I like him? I like him for the same reason I liked it when the Russian revolutionaries opened the books and all the czars secret diplomacy and they showed how the First World War was an imperialist war and they showed the secret deals between France and England and the Russian czar on how to divide up the Ottoman Empire once they won the first great war of the 20th century, the first great imperial slaughter. They wanted to divide up the Ottoman Empire. And in 1916, they had a treaty called the Sykes-Picot Treaty where they racked up all this rich Ottoman stuff between France and England. Michael Ratner: But even then, Michael, let's just say it wasn't just rich Ottoman stuff, it was oil because what was happening was the ships were turning from coal -- where they need fueling stations all over -- to oil burning. And they recognized that, so when the First World War -- during it, actually -- They were goign to divide up the oil in the Middle East. Michael S. Smith: Oil. You remember when they stupidly called the war against Iraq "Operation Iraqi Liberation"? O-I-L. And they realized they'd made a dumb mistake and they changed it. It's still about oil. Michael Ratner: So let's put it into perspective. You're saying the First World War is really about imperial overreach. The second example we have is, of course, the Pentagon Papers. Michael S. Smith: Same thing. Michael Ratner: Same thing. Again about showing the lies about the war. Supposedly to help the Vietnamese people, whatever b.s., to stop Communism. But of course it was about the US in the Far East and its role in the Far East and what Ellsberg was able to do. Now let's compare it here. What have we seen in these documents to Wiki that makes you also see that really what he has exposed here is imperial overreach? Michael S. Smith: Well he's shown the nature of these governments that the United States installed and props up in both oil-rich Iraq, carbon-rich Afghanistan. And that's what's horrifying people like [US Secretary of State] Hillary Clinton. The secrets are coming out. The nature of these governments. How they talk to each other. WikiLeaks provided a service. They opened the books on America's secret dealings the same way Russian revolutionaries opened the books up in 1917. That's what's driving these people crazy. They're threatening not just to prosecute him for espionage. That's the soft line. The right-wing commentators on Fox News and people like Sarah Palin are calling for his death, they're inciting violence. Michael Ratner: Let's go back here. And I was thinking to myself when you and I were talking earlier, why I like what he's done so much. And I think you put your finger on it. That here the US goes into the Middle East and into Central Asia -- Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran now it's looking like Yemen -- Michael S. Smith: Yemen. Michael Ratner: -- and it's saying, 'We're doing this because we want to stop terrorism' -- and, of course, that's another question about how this makes terrorism grow -- 'but we want to stop terrorism.' And, of course, Bush said for awhile we want to bring democracy to Iraq. And what these cables do is demonstrate that really this is a central corp of the US mission right now: To control the oil resources and other resources of the Middle East. And they show that the US is doing it sometimes overtly -- of course it lies about Iraq and Afghanistan -- but sometimes it's doing it so that the American people don't even know that it's doing it. And that's Yemen, where it said to the Yemenese, 'Claim that you're doing that bombing even though they all have our names on them.' Or it says that the claims by the government publicly that Iran is helping the Taliban when, in fact, the secret cables show that that wasn't the case, that they didn't have any evidence on that. So what you're seeing from these cables is the focus on where US hegemonic empire is concentrated and how they're lying to the American people about what the US is doing there. So the American people can't even object to the wars. They can't even protest because half of them they don't even know about. Michael S. Smith: Well that's exactly right and what I really like about WikiLeaks is that it enables the American people to have information on an equal basis as the secret bureaucrats. That's the basis of democracy. Having a free press, that's the basis of democracy. Characters like Joe Lieberman trying to cut of WikiLeaks at the knees shows just how they despise democracy -- what [Noam] Chomsky said to us when we talked to him last week -- they despise democracy and that's why they despise Julian Assange. Michael Ratner: And I think we do want to say something about the charges of rape and sexual assault going on in Sweden. Charges like that have to, of course, be taken very seriously and have to be investigated. I would hope that everybody's in agreement about that. But in this case, what you also see is a series of questions that make you wonder why it's being treated in a certain way. And, of course, question number one is that he was in Sweden, right, Michael? Michael S. Smith: He was there for six weeks trying to give his side of the story and they woulnd't talk to him. Michael Ratner: So then he leaves Sweden, they know he leaves Sweden, he goes to the United Kingdom. They [Sweden] then begin the issuance of a warrant for him -- a warrant not to pick him up on the actual charge, because he hasn't actually been indicted yet -- Michael S. Smith: That's right. Michael Ratner: -- but just to answer questions. And he was willing to answer those questions by a video monitor, by going to the Swedish embassy. But, no, they want to bring him back to Sweden. And he's going to be facing extradition now to Sweden. Michael S. Smith: You know why I think they want to bring him back to Sweden? It's easier to get him out of Sweden than it is to get him out of England. England has much stronger tradition of guaranteeing liberty and extradition than Sweden has. They want to snatch him and bring him back here and put him in handcuffs and parade him in front of a federal judge and in front of all the major networks. That's what they want to do. As the Michaels demonstrate, you can discuss WikiLeaks -- and even Julian Assange -- without trashing the two women. Some other people need to take note. Last week, we repeatedly touched on this topic. We'll touch on it again because "I know he's ___" whatever really don't know a damn thing. But we know them. We know two things about them, in fact. 1) We know that if they were publishing at the early part of the '00s, they were publishing in Larry Fl**t's trashy Hu**ler magazine. That would be Amy Goodman and a whole host of lefty 'friends.' So are we really surprised that these people who thought it was 'cool' to publish in that smut magazine would be attacking women who may have been raped? No, we're not surprised at all. (FYI, Amy did a little collection plate spiel today which is why we're starting with this. She's smart enough not to go that far on her own show but she went that far and beyond while begging for money live over the airwaves.) 2) We know that this group of people told us Scott Ritter was innocent and just framed by the Bush administration because Ritter was telling the truth about the Iraq War. Pig Ritter, in fact, was brought up by Glenn Greenwald. Now if Pig Ritter were only arrested for being a child predator in April 2001 and June 2001, people could debate the issue and whether or not a man caught explaining (to what he thought was an underage girl) that he wanted to first meet up at McDonalds where she could watch him beat off in the men's room and then they could see where the 'magic' next took them (the dollar menu and men's room at Wendys?) but that's not all, is it? "Scott Ritter was framed by the Bush administration to hush him up! He's innocent!" That was the cry. But Bush left office in January 2009. And Scott Ritter got busted for being a sexual predate a third time: November 2009. Bush was long gone. And what Iraq War secret was Ritter sitting on at that time that made him a victim of targeting? Let's go to Andrew Scott of Ritter's local paper, Pocono Record: Officer Ryan Venneman was posing as 15-year-old "Emily" in an online chat room when he was contacted by someone using the name "Delmarm4fun." This person, later identified as Ritter, told "Emily" he was a 44-year-old male from Albany, N.Y. "Emily" told Ritter she was a 15-year-old girl from the Poconos, at which point Ritter asked for a picture other than the one "Emily" had posted on her account. Ritter then sent her a link to his Web camera and began to masturbate on camera. "Emily" asked Ritter for his cell phone number, which he provided. Ritter again asked "Emily" how old she was. Told she was 15, Ritter said he didn't realize she was 15 and turned off his webcam, saying he didn't want to get in trouble. Ritter told "Emily" he had been fantasizing about having sex with her, to which she replied: "Guess you turned it off ..." Ritter then said: "You want to see it finish," reactivated his webcam and continued masturbating and ejaculated on camera. And to think he was taken off cable TV. Imagine the fun Rachel Maddow could have with footage of that! Glenn-Glenn at Salon December 1st: "I genuinely have no opinion of the validity of those allegations, but what I do know -- as John Cole notes -- is this: as soon as Scott Ritter began telling the truth about Iraqi WMDs, he was publicly smeared with allegations of sexual improprieties. As soon as Eliot Spitzer began posing a real threat to Wall Street criminals, a massive and strange federal investigation was launched over nothing more than routine acts of consensual adult prostitution, ending his career (and the threat he posed to oligarchs)." Here's what we know, Glenn-Glenn, if Scott Ritter were Scott Smith, he'd be looking at a three-strikes-you're-out-policy. Instead, he's traded on his diplomatic work, 'stress,' his wife's 'nerves' (I'm referring to what his attorney pitched in the 2001 arrests) to walk away. Hopefully, he won't this time. As for Eliot, some of us called it out in real time. It was a political hit job. The woman involved accused him of no harm so it was also a private matter in this site's opinion. But we noted it was a hit job and we noted -- loudly -- stop sending us your crap and 'funnies' about the arrest. We didn't link to that garbage. Eliot was taken out. Now he was stupid enough to have sex outside of marriage while holding a public office and making people uncomfortable. Julian may be Eliot. He may be Scott Ritter. If, like Amy Goodman, you'd defended and defended Scott Ritter, maybe you might want to sit this one out because shame still drapes over you like a tacky, knock-off. RTT News reports, "An appeal launched by Swedish prosecutors against a lower court decision to grant bail to WikiLeaks found Julian Assange would be heard at Britain's High Court in London on Thursday, according to court officials." Luke Harding (Guardian) believes Julian will be out on bail tomorrow. That's really it in terms of Julian unless you're a sexist at The Nation magazine who now live blogs "WikiLeaks." Well, not really WikiLeaks. Julian Assange -- he live blogs Julian Assange. The Nation ignored the WikiLeaks Iraq War Logs release in October. But toss in sexual assault and the chance to go to town on two women, and suddenly The Nation is interested in the soap opera around Julian. That they can almost handle 'live blogging' for. Stan Goff (Feral Scholar) has made a point to play fair -- as have many of his readers such as askod who makes the following important points: The wise thing for Wikileaks to do would be to change their spokesperson while the legal process runs its course. The accusations were made in August, if a change of spokesperson had been done in October there would have been nothing to smear it with now. That it appears unable to do so does not speak well for its viability as an organization. No, it does not. Nor does the tabloid coverage and yellow journalism from some defenders do much to help the organization. Julian Assange is not Daniel Ellsberg. Even if Daniel himself says so, it doesn't make true and we should damn well be smart enough to know better. Daniel Ellsberg did a brave thing. Julian Assange is a publisher similiar to the New York Times and the Washington Post (and others) with the Pentagon Papers. It is not the same role, it is not the same risks. If WikiLeaks is a 'journalist' -- one of the many arguments being made -- then it is actually a journalist in the way a book publisher is. It's not reporting, it's not analyzing. That's why it farms those documents out to news outlets. If it's a journalist (I'm fine for calling it a journalist), it's in the role of publisher. Some of the defenders appear to believe if they hurl enough spitballs, something's going to stick to the wall. All it does is confuse the issue. Bradley Manning may be the issue. The US militiary seems to think so. For anyone not up to speed, Monday April 5th, WikiLeaks released US military video of a July 12, 2007 assault in Iraq. 12 people were killed in the assault including two Reuters journalists Namie Noor-Eldeen and Saeed Chmagh. Monday June 7th, the US military announced that they had arrested Bradley Manning and he stood accused of being the leaker of the video. Leila Fadel (Washington Post) reported in August that Manning had been charged -- "two charges under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The first encompasses four counts of violating Army regulations by transferring classified information to his personal computer between November and May and adding unauthorized software to a classified computer system. The second comprises eight counts of violating federal laws governing the handling of classified information." Manning has been convicted in the public square despite the fact that he's been convicted in no state and has made no public statements -- despite any claims otherwise, he has made no public statements. Manning is now at Quantico in Virginia, under military lock and key and still not allowed to speak to the press. As Daniel Ellsberg reminded from the stage in Oakland last September, "We don't know all the facts." But we know, as Ellsberg pointed out, that the US military is attempting to prosecute Bradley. Glenn Greenwald (Salon) sketches out some new details of Bradley's imprisonment: Bradley Manning, the 22-year-old U.S. Army Private accused of leaking classified documents to WikiLeaks, has never been convicted of that crime, nor of any other crime. Despite that, he has been detained at the U.S. Marine brig in Quantico, Virginia for five months -- and for two months before that in a military jail in Kuwait -- under conditions that constitute cruel and inhumane treatment and, by the standards of many nations, even torture. Interviews with several people directly familiar with the conditions of Manning's detention, ultimately including a Quantico brig official (Lt. Brian Villiard) who confirmed much of what they conveyed, establishes that the accused leaker is subjected to detention conditions likely to create long-term psychological injuries. [. . .] The U.S. ought at least to abide by minimal standards of humane treatment in how it detains him. That's true for every prisoner, at all times. But departures from such standards are particularly egregious where, as here, the detainee has merely been accused, but never convicted, of wrongdoing. These inhumane conditions make a mockery of Barack Obama's repeated pledge to end detainee abuse and torture, as prolonged isolation -- exacerbated by these other deprivations -- is at least as damaging, as violative of international legal standards, and almost as reviled around the world, as the waterboard, hypothermia and other Bush-era tactics that caused so much controversy. Alsumaria TV reports that Nouri al-Maliki and Ayad Allawi have "agreed on the necessity to reach joint mechanisms over the formation of new governmental institutions." AP notes that Allawi appears to have withdrawn his threat to leave the power-sharing coalition and observes, "Mr Allawi, a former premier, had held out for months, insisting that he or one of his allies should be the next prime minister since his secular Iraqiya party narrowly won more seats than any other alliance in the March Parliamentary elections." Steven Lee Myers (New York Times) adds that "Allawi indicated on Wednesday that he would join it after all. That appeared to remove the last major obstacle to Mr. Maliki's formation of a new government, something he must do by law before Dec. 25." March 7th, Iraq concluded Parliamentary elections. The Guardian's editorial board noted in August, "These elections were hailed prematurely by Mr Obama as a success, but everything that has happened since has surely doused that optimism in a cold shower of reality." 163 seats are needed to form the executive government (prime minister and council of ministers). When no single slate wins 163 seats (or possibly higher -- 163 is the number today but the Parliament added seats this election and, in four more years, they may add more which could increase the number of seats needed to form the executive government), power-sharing coalitions must be formed with other slates, parties and/or individual candidates. (Eight Parliament seats were awarded, for example, to minority candidates who represent various religious minorities in Iraq.) Ayad Allawi is the head of Iraqiya which won 91 seats in the Parliament making it the biggest seat holder. Second place went to State Of Law which Nouri al-Maliki, the current prime minister, heads. They won 89 seats. Nouri made a big show of lodging complaints and issuing allegations to distract and delay the certification of the initial results while he formed a power-sharing coalition with third place winner Iraqi National Alliance -- this coalition still does not give them 163 seats. November 10th a power sharing deal resulted in the Parliament meeting for the second time and voting in a Speaker. And then Iraqiya felt double crossed on the deal and the bulk of their members stormed out of the Parliament. David Ignatius (Washington Post) explains, "The fragility of the coalition was dramatically obvious Thursday as members of the Iraqiya party, which represents Sunnis, walked out of Parliament, claiming that they were already being double-crossed by Maliki. Iraqi politics is always an exercise in brinkmanship, and the compromises unfortunately remain of the save-your-neck variety, rather than reflecting a deeper accord. " After that, Jalal Talabani was voted President of Iraq. Talabani then named Nouri as the prime minister-delegate. If Nouri can meet the conditions outlined in Article 76 of the Constitution (basically nominate ministers for each council and have Parliament vote to approve each one with a minimum of 163 votes each time and to vote for his council program) within thirty days, he becomes the prime minister. If not, Talabani must name another prime minister-delegate. In 2005, Iraq took four months and seven days to pick a prime minister-delegate. It took eight months and two days to name Nouri as prime minister-delegate. His first go-round, on April 22, 2006, his thirty day limit kicked in. May 20, 2006, he announced his cabinet -- sort of. Sort of because he didn't nominate a Minister of Defense, a Minister of Interior and a Minister of a National Security. This was accomplished, John F. Burns wrote in "For Some, a Last, Best Hope for U.S. Efforts in Iraq" (New York Times), only with "muscular" assistance from the Bush White House. Nouri declared he would be the Interior Ministry temporarily. Temporarily lasted until June 8, 2006. This was when the US was able to strong-arm, when they'd knocked out the other choice for prime minister (Ibrahim al-Jaafari) to install puppet Nouri and when they had over 100,000 troops on the ground in Iraq. Nouri had no competition. That's very different from today. The Constitution is very clear and it is doubtful his opponents -- including within his own alliance -- will look the other way if he can't fill all the posts in 30 days. As Leila Fadel (Washington Post) observes, "With the three top slots resolved, Maliki will now begin to distribute ministries and other top jobs, a process that has the potential to be as divisive as the initial phase of government formation." Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) points out, "Maliki now has 30 days to decide on cabinet posts - some of which will likely go to Iraqiya - and put together a full government. His governing coalition owes part of its existence to followers of hard-line cleric Muqtada al Sadr, leading Sunnis and others to believe that his government will be indebted to Iran." The stalemate ends when the country has a prime minister. It is now nine months, eight days and counting. Thursday November 25th, Nouri was finally 'officially' named prime minister-designate. Leila Fadel (Washington Post) explained, "In 30 days, he is to present his cabinet to parliament or lose the nomination." Steven Lee Myers (New York Times) added, "Even if Mr. Maliki meets the 30-day deadline in late December -- which is not a certainty, given the chronic disregard for legal deadlines in Iraqi politics -- the country will have spent more than nine months under a caretaker government without a functioning legislature. Many of Iraq's most critical needs -- from basic services to investment -- have remained unaddressed throughout the impasse." Jane Arraf (Al Jazeera) offered, "He has an extremely difficult task ahed of him, these next 30 days are going to be a very tough sell for all of these parties that all want something very important in this government. It took a record eight months to actually come up with this coalition, but now what al-Maliki has to do is put all those people in the competing positions that backed him into slots in the government and he has a month to day that from today." Press TV notes, "Allawi will join Maliki's government as the head of newly created National Council for Strategic Policies to oversee security and foreign policy issues. The 20-member body will closely monitor Maliki's major security and foreign policy decisions. The Iraqi parliament must still come to a firm decision on the scope of authority the new council should be granted." Meanwhile Shashank Bengali (McClatchy Newspapers) reports, "Iraq closed another chapter on the Saddam Hussein era Wednesday when the United Nations Security Council lifted most of the sanctions that it had imposed after the late ex-dictator's invasion of Kuwait 20 years ago." Obvious benefit? $700 million from the oil-for-food program is about to be "into Iraq's escrow account". Previously, they couldn't touch the money. File it under "I'll have what Joe's snorting," BBC News reports that US Vice President Joe Biden -- who chaired the meeting -- declared, "Iraq is on the cusp of something remarkable -- a stable, self-reliant nation." Where have we heard that before? In Mosul today, Reuters reports, a female Iraqi Christian college student was kidnapped. The latest wave of attacks on Iraqi Christians began October 31st with the assault on Our Lady of Salvation Church in Baghdad in which at least seventy people were killed and another seventy injured. Since then, Baghdad and Mosul especially have been flashpoints for violence aimed at Iraqi Christians with many fleeing -- and many fleeing to the KRG. Tim Rutten's "Iraq, the Middle East and intolerance toward Christians" (Los Angeles Times) notes: The United States, meanwhile, does nothing — as it did nothing four years ago, when Father Boulos Iskander was kidnapped, beheaded and dismembered; or three years ago, when Father Ragheed Ganni was shot dead at the altar of this church; or two years ago, when Chaldean Catholic Archbishop Paulos Faraj Rahho was kidnapped and murdered; as it has done nothing about all the church bombings and assassinations of lay Christians that have become commonplace over the last seven years. The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom issued the following statement: 12/14/2010: USCIRF Urges Upgrading Security in Iraq for Christians and Other Imperiled Religious Communities For Immediate Release December 14, 2010 WASHINGTON, DC - In advance of the December 15 UN Security Council meeting on Iraq, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) today urged the U.S. government to redouble its efforts, and use the international forum as an opportunity, to address the grave situation facing that country's Christians and other imperiled religious minorities. The Security Council meeting is slated to address the progress in Iraq to date. The recent upsurge in attacks against Christians makes clear, however, that the country's most vulnerable religious minorities remain in peril. The smallest Iraqi religious groups—including ChaldoAssyrian, Syriac, and other Christians; Sabean Mandaeans; and Yazidis—face targeted violence, including murders and attacks on their places of worship and religious leaders, intimidation, and forced displacement; they also experience discrimination, marginalization, and neglect. As a result, these ancient communities' very existence in the country is now threatened. The loss of the diversity and human capital these groups represent would be a terrible blow to Iraq's future as a secure, stable, and pluralistic democracy. This is a particularly important period in Iraq, with a new government being formed and the U.S. military presence drawing down. USCIRF recommends that the U.S. government take the following steps to protect these vulnerable communities: • Provide Protection: In consultation with the Christian and other minority religious communities' political and civic representatives, identify the places throughout Iraq where these targeted minorities worship, congregate, and live, and work with the Iraqi government to assess security needs and develop and implement a comprehensive and effective plan for dedicated Iraqi military protection of these sites and areas; as this process moves forward, periodically inform Congress on progress. • Promote Representative Community Policing: Work with the Iraqi government and the Christians' and other smallest minorities' political and civic representatives to establish, fund, train, and deploy representative local police units to provide additional protection in areas where these communities are concentrated. • Prioritize Development Assistance for Minority Areas: Ensure that U.S. development assistance prioritizes areas where these vulnerable communities are concentrated, including the Nineveh Plains area, and that the use of such funding is determined in consultation with the political and civic leaders of the communities themselves. On December 4, in the wake of the recent spate of attacks, 16 Iraqi Christian parties and organizations issued a compelling joint call for greater protection. USCIRF urges both the U.S. and Iraqi governments to heed this call and work with these leaders, as well as the leaders of the other small endangered groups in Iraq, on implementing these and other measures to protect and assist these communities before it is too late. USCIRF is an independent, bipartisan U.S. federal government commission. USCIRF Commissioners are appointed by the President and the leadership of both political parties in the Senate and the House of Representatives. USCIRF's principal responsibilities are to review the facts and circumstances of violations of religious freedom internationally and to make policy recommendations to the President, the Secretary of State and Congress. To interview a USCIRF Commissioner, contact Tom Carter, Communications Director at tcarter@uscirf.govThis e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , or (202) 523-3257. Today the European Parliament held a briefing on the issue of Chrisians in the Middle East. Yet Barack remains silent -- in a country where identification is often the strongest motivator when it comes to voting. Kirsty Buchanan (UK's Express) reports: THE congregation receives death threats, there are 35 soldiers manning the perimeter fence and the vicar ­travels to work with 12 bodyguards in three armoured vehicles. Welcome to Christian worship, Baghdad-style. In the last year St George's in Iraq's capital has been bombed four times but the "very ugly and very solid" church is still standing. Meanwhile AFP notes that Shi'ites are making a pilgrimage to Karbala for Ashura: "Black flags, representing the sadness of Shiites during Ashura, and pictures of the revered Imams Hussein and Abbas, both of whom are buried in Karbala, were seen throughout the city, while violence targeting pilgrims in Iraq has claimed the lives of 10 people in the past few days." Zawya adds that some pilgrims in Karbala have engaged in anti-corruption chants such as this one aimed at the Public Integrity Commison: "Tell us how many thieves have been presented to the integrity commission. We swear by your name, oh Hussein, that we are not afraid to speak, to express ourselves, to publicly denounce these wolves!" And Jomana Karadsheh (CNN) reports that 10 Shi'ite pilgrims were killed yesterday with many more left injured and that "Attacks targeting Shiite pilgrims have spiked in recent days as hundreds of thousands of worshipers have been making their way to the holy city of Karbala in southern Iraq and other Shiite shrines." Reuters notes today's violence includes a Baghdad roadside bombing which left three people injured, a Baghdad bombing which injured two people, a Baghdad roadside bombing which injured one person, two Kirkuk bombings which claimed 1 life and left two people injured and Tuesday's Baghdad roadside bombing's death toll has risen to 10. iraq the los angeles times tim rutten the express kirsty buchanan the new york times steven lee myers cnn jomana karadsheh zawya afp press tv law and disorder radio wbai michael ratner michael smith mcclatchy newspapers shashank bengali

A holiday miracle

Monday, Terry Gross found a woman -- and she was on because she writes, not because she was the girlfriend of someone. It was a holiday miracle for Fresh Air (NPR).

The attacks on Iraqi Christians are most definitely not a holiday miracle.


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

Tuesday, December 14, 2010. Chaos and violence continue, Iranian pilgrims are targeted in Iraq, Iraqi Christians get some US press, Allawi's got an announcement, a rally against the wars takes place in DC this week, and more. "Can Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki create unity in Iraq?" wondered Marlam Saleh on Middle East Today (Press TV) this weekend where she was joined by Iraqi political analyst Bassem Abu Tabeekh, the National Alliance's Intifad Kanbar and Notre Dame University's Eugene Dabbous. Excerpt: Marlam Saleh: What has allowed for this deadlock to somehow end? We have all three leaders being named but now Mr. Maliki has a lot on his hands. Can we say that the issue of civil war was a major threat before? And do you think now it does still exist? Bassem Abu Tabeekh: Well hello to you, to your TV, your guests and thank you for inviting us today. Actually all this now, the new situation in Iraq. And the elected the speaker man for the Parliament and the prime minister and the minister of Iraq -- the president of Iraq. All this been agreed in Kurdistan which is whole package. Before they went to the Parliament, they agreed who's going to be in which. Now Alawi having been elected to have the strategic council in Iraq now the problem is going to be Alawi can be given order or only advise the government? This is the only situation now. He trying and doing -- He tried to break the agreement which is all the members of all the politicians and the prime minister and the president of Iraq and the chairman all agreed on all the deal in Kurdistan, northern Iraq, that is all accepted Now Allawi try to break it to get more benefit and more advance -- advance for him. Now this civil war, now, there's some politician, they try to raise the voice, tojust give signal to the Iraqis is going to be a problem and give pressure to al-Maliki and others that no civil war will be. We had the situation. America tried to do that but they failed. and another neighboring country, they don't want to beat Iraq back into -- international community tried to make civil war in Iraq. Everybody happy and they don't want to beat Iraq. There is a law in Iraq and with the law -- Marlam Saleh: Allow me -- allow me to get Mr. Intifad Kanbar's take because he is in Baghdad of course. He could give us a general perspective. Mr. Intifad Kanbar, what can you tell us about the talks taking place right now? We've heard Mr. Maliki's bloc. They're saying that they have made concessions in order to let this work. And you heard Mr. Bassem Abu Tabeekh saying that, no, actually Mr. Allawi could be standing in the way of an agreement. What do you think? Intifad Kanbar: Well this is going to be -- we were trying to make it -- a partnership, a national partnership, government which we are hoping and working very hard to include, not excluse everyone in this government including Al Iraqiya. However, some of the demands by some factions within Iraqiya are quite unacceptable by some -- by the Iraqi National Alliance and others; therefore, it's making it more difficult to have full participation of Iraqiya. But I'm cautiously optimistic that Iraqiya will participate on a large scale in the government. I think the question 'What is the fate of Mr. Ayad Allawi?' I think his position will be in question. Specifically on the issue of the formation of the Council of Higher Policies which may contradict the Constitution and may require an amendment in the Constitution which takes two years. All that will be formed in a way that is going to have an advisory role, not an executive role. Something that I'm not sure Mr. Allawi will accept. Marlam Saleh: Yes, now some would say that the Kurdish president is a barrier to the Iraqi Arab identity. What do you think about that? Intifad Kanbar: The -- Iraq in it's majority, the majority of the population in Iraq, yes, is Arab. But Iraq is a mix and we don't believe in the idea of minority. Every number of people in Iraq have equal rights and there's no rights for the majority and rights for the minority. Therefore Iraq is a country that has a combination of Kurds, Armenians, Chaldeanians, Assyrians and all -- Mandaeisms, Yazidians and those people have equal rights in accordance with the Constitution that has been ratified and approved by the Iraqi people. Thererfore, Iraq identy -- Iraq has an Arab side but there is a distinguished Iraqi identity which represents all this moasic of the Iraqi identitiy. Today Alsumaria TV reports that the Iraqi Parliament has yet again delayed a session. They were supposed to deliberate today but they've postponed it until Saturday -- not that they were up for hardest working legislative body or anything before the latest move. The big agenda item being pushed back? The issue of the National Council for Strategic Policies which is supposed to be headed by Ayad Allawi. If it is not an independent body with independent powers, Allawi has stated he will walk out on the government. As noted yesterday, Omar (Iraq The Model) has offered an English translation of the (or a) bill proposing the creation of the NCSP. Lara Jakes (AP) reports Allawi's spokesperson states he will be joining the government being put together. March 7th, Iraq concluded Parliamentary elections. The Guardian's editorial board noted in August, "These elections were hailed prematurely by Mr Obama as a success, but everything that has happened since has surely doused that optimism in a cold shower of reality." 163 seats are needed to form the executive government (prime minister and council of ministers). When no single slate wins 163 seats (or possibly higher -- 163 is the number today but the Parliament added seats this election and, in four more years, they may add more which could increase the number of seats needed to form the executive government), power-sharing coalitions must be formed with other slates, parties and/or individual candidates. (Eight Parliament seats were awarded, for example, to minority candidates who represent various religious minorities in Iraq.) Ayad Allawi is the head of Iraqiya which won 91 seats in the Parliament making it the biggest seat holder. Second place went to State Of Law which Nouri al-Maliki, the current prime minister, heads. They won 89 seats. Nouri made a big show of lodging complaints and issuing allegations to distract and delay the certification of the initial results while he formed a power-sharing coalition with third place winner Iraqi National Alliance -- this coalition still does not give them 163 seats. November 10th a power sharing deal resulted in the Parliament meeting for the second time and voting in a Speaker. And then Iraqiya felt double crossed on the deal and the bulk of their members stormed out of the Parliament. David Ignatius (Washington Post) explains, "The fragility of the coalition was dramatically obvious Thursday as members of the Iraqiya party, which represents Sunnis, walked out of Parliament, claiming that they were already being double-crossed by Maliki. Iraqi politics is always an exercise in brinkmanship, and the compromises unfortunately remain of the save-your-neck variety, rather than reflecting a deeper accord. " After that, Jalal Talabani was voted President of Iraq. Talabani then named Nouri as the prime minister-delegate. If Nouri can meet the conditions outlined in Article 76 of the Constitution (basically nominate ministers for each council and have Parliament vote to approve each one with a minimum of 163 votes each time and to vote for his council program) within thirty days, he becomes the prime minister. If not, Talabani must name another prime minister-delegate. In 2005, Iraq took four months and seven days to pick a prime minister-delegate. It took eight months and two days to name Nouri as prime minister-delegate. His first go-round, on April 22, 2006, his thirty day limit kicked in. May 20, 2006, he announced his cabinet -- sort of. Sort of because he didn't nominate a Minister of Defense, a Minister of Interior and a Minister of a Natioanl Security. This was accomplished, John F. Burns wrote in "For Some, a Last, Best Hope for U.S. Efforts in Iraq" (New York Times), only with "muscular" assistance from the Bush White House. Nouri declared he would be the Interior Ministry temporarily. Temporarily lasted until June 8, 2006. This was when the US was able to strong-arm, when they'd knocked out the other choice for prime minister (Ibrahim al-Jaafari) to install puppet Nouri and when they had over 100,000 troops on the ground in Iraq. Nouri had no competition. That's very different from today. The Constitution is very clear and it is doubtful his opponents -- including within his own alliance -- will look the other way if he can't fill all the posts in 30 days. As Leila Fadel (Washington Post) observes, "With the three top slots resolved, Maliki will now begin to distribute ministries and other top jobs, a process that has the potential to be as divisive as the initial phase of government formation." Jane Arraf (Christian Science Monitor) points out, "Maliki now has 30 days to decide on cabinet posts - some of which will likely go to Iraqiya - and put together a full government. His governing coalition owes part of its existence to followers of hard-line cleric Muqtada al Sadr, leading Sunnis and others to believe that his government will be indebted to Iran." The stalemate ends when the country has a prime minister. It is now nine months, seven days and counting. Thursday November 25th, Nouri was finally 'officially' named prime minister-designate. Leila Fadel (Washington Post) explained, "In 30 days, he is to present his cabinet to parliament or lose the nomination." Steven Lee Myers (New York Times) added, "Even if Mr. Maliki meets the 30-day deadline in late December -- which is not a certainty, given the chronic disregard for legal deadlines in Iraqi politics -- the country will have spent more than nine months under a caretaker government without a functioning legislature. Many of Iraq's most critical needs -- from basic services to investment -- have remained unaddressed throughout the impasse." Jane Arraf (Al Jazeera) offered, "He has an extremely difficult task ahed of him, these next 30 days are going to be a very tough sell for all of these parties that all want something very important in this government. It took a record eight months to actually come up with this coalition, but now what al-Maliki has to do is put all those people in the competing positions that backed him into slots in the government and he has a month to day that from today." As the stalemate continues, David Ignatius (Washington Post) reports: Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, met here Monday with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and urged him to start planning now for a "long-term strategic partnership" in which the United States will continue training the Iraqi military and police, and providing other, unspecified security assistance. Mullen said later that Maliki seems to want such a relationship, "but the direction hasn't been worked out." The biggest story about Iraq may be what hasn't happened. There were widespread fears that when U.S. troops pulled out of Iraqis cities in mid-2009, the country would slip back toward civil war. That didn't happen. The same fears were expressed when the last combat troops departed this summer. It didn't happen then, either. He goes on to offer a balance portrait of Nouri (that is balance when you're describing a thug) but surprisingly, he seems unaware of the rumors that there's a scramble to curry Tehran's favor among numerous Shi'ites. Ahmed Chalabi is only the one with the loosest lips who is supposedly stating that if Nouri fails at the 30-day deadline, Jalal Talabani will be naming him (Chalabi) as the next prime minister-designate. Since Chalabi is also angling for a key post in Nouri's cabinet, it's surprising how many are repeating this rumor. Ibrahim Jafari is also mentioned as someone in contact with Tehran as an alternative to Nouri. Today the White House issued the following: Vice President Biden and National Security Advisor Tom Donilon met today with General Lloyd Austin III, Commanding General of the United States Forces-Iraq (USF-I), to review political and security developments in Iraq. They discussed the progress Iraq has made toward providing for its own security. Tomorrow, the Vice President will chair a United Nations Security Council High-Level Meeting on Iraq, the purpose of which is to recognize and reinforce the tremendous progress that the Republic of Iraq has made and to discuss ways in which Members can continue to support Iraq's government and people. On Friday at the White House, the Vice President will chair his monthly Principals meeting on Iraq. In today's reported violence, Reuters notes a Baghdad roadside bombing which claimed the life of 3 pilgrims with eighteen more injured and a Khalis bombing which injured fourteen pilgrims. This as Jack Healy (New York Times) notes 4 Shi'ites were killed Monday as they were "observing the religious holiday of Ashura." Press TV reports, "Following the recent terrorist attacks against Iranian pilgrims to Iraq, Iran is calling on its nationals to seriously refrain from traveling to the neighboring country unless as part of a registered tour." Yesterday on All Things Considered (NPR, link has text and audio), Kelly McEvers reported on the targeting of Iraqi Christians: Kelly McEvers: In one short week, these two sisters went from middle class to the edge of desperation. Before the attacks, they owned a building in Baghdad, where they rented apartments to other Christians. Their husbands worked government jobs. But then a husband and a son were caught in the church siege. Now, says one of the sisters, who only wanted to give her first name, Ban, she is ready to leave her country for good. Ms. BAN: I hate being an Iraqi because what they do to us. McEVERS: Without any income, the family of nine is living off of savings. We ask how long they have until the money runs out. Ms. BAN: (Speaking foreign language). McEVERS: Two months, three months, Ban says, no more. Ms. BAN: (Speaking foreign language). McEVERS: Swiping her hands together to show there is nothing between them, Ban repeats the same word over and over: finished, finished, finished. The latest wave of attacks on Iraqi Christians began October 31st with the assault on Our Lady of Salvation Church in Baghdad in which at least seventy people were killed and another seventy injured. Since then, Baghdad and Mosul especially have been flashpoints for violence aimed at Iraqi Christians with many fleeing -- and many fleeing to the KRG. On the latest Middle East Today (Press TV), Bassem Abu Tabeekh floated the idea that Saudi Arabia was behind the attack on the Church and insisted one of the attackers was from Saudi Arabia. Marlam Saleh: So you're accusing Saudi Arabia of being behind that? Bassem Abu Tabeekh: Of course, of course At YouTube, the New York Times' Stephen Farrell files a video report on the latest wave of attacks on Iraqi Christians. Stephen Farrell: Two of Iraq's ancient Christian communities, one in Baghdad praying for mercy, the other in Nineveh, giving up on it. Here in the Chaldean Ministry of the Virgin Mary in Qosh, dozens of Iraqi Christians have sough sanctuary in its cloisters after fleeing their homes in nearby Mosul because of death threats. Intissar Daoud: I came because of the circumstances. We left because of the situation in Mosul. There are many dangers. Stephen Farrell: Iraqis of all religions have been killed in large numbers since the 2003 invasion unleashed sectarian violence but particularly vulnerable are the small minorities such as Christians. Also Yezidis -- an ancient monothestic faith -- and Sabean Mandeans who revere John The Baptisist. Iraq's Jewish population is all but gone now, reduced to single figures in Baghdad and fragments of Hebrew at sites around Iraq reputed to be the tombs of Old Testament prophets. Of the crisis, C.M. Sennott (Global Posts) observes: So the starting point to understanding the lessons of the recent Iraqi Christians exodus is to not allow the religious extremists -- neither Muslim nor Christian nor any other faith -- to exploit the attacks and present them out of context as a "clash of civilizations," that self-fulfilling prophecy coined by the late Harvard University historian, Samuel Huntington. A glimpse of the writing on the wall can be seen along the black alleys in the Iraqi Christian neighborhoods of Baghdad and Mosul. That's where a militant fringe has for years been scribbling anti-Christian hatred in the form of graffiti. A particularlly ominous anti-Christian bit of graffiti, which I first saw spray-painted on walls at least 12 years ago in Egypt when Islamic fundamentalists were targeting Coptic Christians, has reportedly resurfaced in Iraq in recent months. The translation from the Arabic slogan is this: "First the Saturday people, then the Sunday people." The phrase is an overt threat intended to say that Muslims, who worship on Friday, have already pushed many Jews, who worship on Saturday, out of the Middle east and that now they will do the same to Christians. Catholic News Agency reports Nouri has a new 'plan,' "concrete walls up to 10 feet high"! Yes, wall off the areas, the way he's walled off Baghdad. And that didn't stop the violence. The editorial board of the Watertown Daily Times weighs in: The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom in May faulted the government's failure to protect Christians and other minorities. "The violence, forced displacement, discrimination, marginalization and neglect suffered by members of these groups threaten these ancient communities' very existence in Iraq," the commission said. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has called for tolerance of Christians and other minority faiths. His government, though, needs to do more to ensure the protection of religious minorities. The United States has devoted much to help Iraq build a better country. Religious persecution is a step backward. UPI notes, "President of the European Parliament Jerzy Buzek said it was time for the Iraqi government to make sure Christians in Iraq enjoy the same protection and status as Shiites and Sunnis" and quotes him stating, "The European Parliament is very concerned about these developments and is a strong defender of human rights, including freedom of religion." The US military reports of Adm Mike Mullen (Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) and Nouri al-Maliki's meeting yesterday that the two discussed Iraq and the US military after December 2011: "No substantive discussions have taken place about what a relationship would look like because Iraqi politicians have been haggling since the country's March 6 elections to form the new government. Maliki now is in the midst of forming the government and has promised that it will include all groups in the country. Mullen said he fully expects the Iraqis to have the new government in place by the Dec. 25 constitutional deadline." Meanwhile The Perspective notes, "The anti-war movement in the United States is lying dormant. With Bush's exit from office, opposition to Obama's wars has largely diminished. The public de-escalation of the Iraqi War and the Obama administration's rebranding (to the more romantic name 'Operation New Dawn'), has left progressives with the misconception that the war is over. The acceptance of this partial withdrawal has allowed an army of private contractors to take control of Iraq's security." This Thursday, December 16th, a rally against the wars will take place in DC. and will feature Peace Mom Cindy Sheehan, Chris Hedges and David Swanson among others: Rally at Lafayette Park, Washington, D.C., at 10 am March to the White House for civil resistance action Details of the action Wednesday night Thursday morning Ride board Media/Press War resister John Heuer (War Is A Crime) explains his reasons for attending: Today, my two sons, both of military age, are facing the prospect of "service" in their generation's wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and who knows where next. The toll, just in Iraq, should be sufficient to inform citizens: Thousands of US Servicemen and women killed; tens of thousands wounded and maimed; hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed; millions displaced from their homes. This horrific toll is the fruit of what we now know to be intentional lies about WMD's and Iraqi links to 9/11 from members of the Bush/Cheney administration and their sycophants in the media. In his excellent new book "War Is a Lie," David Swanson unravels the myths about "good" wars, "just" wars and "necessary" wars. The hope that President Obama would be better than "Bush Lite" (stop bragging about torturing detainees) has dissipated like the morning mist. Obama has demonstrated that he is more the servant to the military machinery than its master. From WWI to WWII to Viet Nam to Afghanistan and Iraq, to . . . Iran? This war madness will not end until it makes planet earth unlivable, or until we put an end to the madness. Mareesa Nicosia (Saratogian) reports that Linda LeTendre and Pete Looker are planning to be there and quotes Linda LeTendre explaining, "I'm frankly appalled by these wars. We're wasting an incredible amount of human lives . . . and it's an incredible waste of our national resources." Meanwhile the US Justice Dept is targeting activists. Friday, September 24th FBI raids took place on at least seven homes of peace activists -- the FBI admits to raiding seven homes -- and the FBI raided the offices of Anti-War Committee. Just as that news was breaking, the National Lawyers Guild issued a new report, Heidi Boghosian's [PDF format warning] "The Policing of Political Speech: Constraints on Mass Dissent in the US." Heidi and Michael S. Smith and Michael Ratner covered the topic on WBAI's Law and Disorder Radio including during a conversation with Margaret Ratner-Kunstler which you can hear at the program's site by going into the archives and the program has also transcribed their discussion with Margaret and you can read it here. Nicole Colson (US Socialist Worker) spoke with Michael Ratner about the raids and you can also refer to that. Earlier Matthew Rothschild (The Progressive) reporteds that when the FBI rifled through Joe Iosbaker and Stephanie Weiner's home September 24th, they went through Joe and Stephanie's "son's T-shirt drawer" to divide the son's t-shirts into two piles: "controversial" and those that weren't. The FBI had to pause from the serious and dangerous duty to deliberate over whether the "Hell Boy" t-shirt qualified as "controversial" or not? Rothschild notes the Committee to Stop FBI Repression. Jeremy Gantz (In These Times) reports that over 20 FBI agents rifled through Joe and Stephanie's home: Ten hours after their arrival, as television news crews filmed and activist supporters stood on the sidewalk, the agents drove away with nearly 30 boxes of material, including t-shirts and a photograph of Malcolm X. By that time, Iosbaker and Weiner had been served subpoenas to appear before a grand jury investigating "material support" for "foreign terrorist organiza- tions." And they knew theirs wasn't the only home invaded that day. More than 70 FBI agents had raided seven residences in Chicago and Minneapolis and questioned activists in Michigan, California and North Carolina, serving subpoenas to 11 people. A few days later, the Justice Department subpoenaed members of the Minnesota Anti-War Committee (AWC), whose office was also raided on September 24, raising the number to 14. On the Law and Disorder Radio broadcast that began airing November 22nd, hosts Heidi Boghosian, Michael Ratner (click here for an ISR interview with Michael) and Michael S. Smith noted what to do when questioned by government agents. Michael S. Smith: Heidi, congratulations, I'm holding in my hand this beautiful red and white and yellow pamphlet "You Have The Right To Remain Silent." Congratulations on getting this out. This National Lawyers Guild pamphlet is going to come in very handy. Heidi Boghosian: Thanks, Michael, it's actually a Know Your Rights guide for law enforcement encounters and we designed it specifically so that it could fit in the rear pocket of someone's jeans or pants. It has basic know-your-rights information: what to do if the FBI comes to your door, what if you're not a citizen, I think there's something about rights at airports, if you're under 18. It's free of charge [to download] at www.nlg.org/ and if you want to get bulk amounts we will send you fifty free of charge and then we just ask for shipping & handling for orders above that. Michael Ratner: It's interesting that it fits into your pocket because you know, Michael and I and you -- well you're not as old as us -- but when we used to give advice to people at demonstrations, we used to tell them to sew their pockets up so you couldn't plant -- the cops couldn't plant -- marijuana in their pockets. So you'd go to demonstrations with all your pockets sewn up. But at least -- Maybe they don't do that as much. You can carry this little book with you instead of writing the whole thing on your arm. Heidi Boghosian: I'm speechless. Michael S. Smith: She's speechless. Heidi Boghosian: That's fascinating. Michael Ratner: And about pockets, that's also interesting, my daughter once had to an assignment about clothes for boys or girls when she was a little girl. And, of course, what you notice is that girl's clothes have no pockets. Heidi Boghosian: I know. I hate that. Michael Ratner: It's terrible. Heidi Boghosian: I only buy things with pockets. Michael Ratner: And it's a weird sexual discrimination. Boys are supposed to carry all these things but girls -- Heidi Boghosian: I know they have to have a pocket book. Michael Ratner: But back to the pocketing Guild pamphlet called? Heidi Boghosian: You Have The Right To Remain Silent. Michael Ratner: Now Michael's going to say something about the substance of it. Michael S. Smith: If you receive a subpeona call the NLG national office hotline at 888-NLG-ECOL I'll repeat 888-654-3265. Michael Ratner: Or if the FBI starts to question you, don't answer even the first question. Just say "I don't want to speak to the FBI" or refer them to your lawyer. [laughing] And that's H-e-i-d -- No, no. But in any case, you should refer them to your lawyer or just say you're not talking to the FBI. And it's such a short little pamphlet, it's perfect for taking to demos, it doesn't have our basic position about the FBI which is: Once you start talking to the FBI or Homeland Security or any of these so-called law enforcement or police intelligence there's the potato chip example. Once you start eating potato chips, you can't stop. It's the same for talking. Heidi's waiving her arms. Heidi Boghosian: Michael, that's a great point. And, in fact, we do have a section called "Standing Up For Free Speech." I just want to quote one sentence or two. "Informed resistance to these tactics and steadfast defense of your and others' rights can bring positive results. Each person who takes a courageous stand makes future resistance to government oppression easier for all." So just to remind listeners, if you'd like a copy or multiple copies, it's called "You Have The Right To Remain Silent: A Know Your Rights Guide For Law Enforcement Encounters" and it's available through the National Lawyers Guild, www.nlg.org/. And lastly, the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee issued the following: SENATE PASSES LEGISLATION TO REFORM POST-9/11 GI BILL WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, the U.S. Senate passed the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Improvements Act of 2010 (S. 3447), a bill sponsored by Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee Chairman Daniel K. Akaka (D-Hawaii) to improve educational assistance for those who served in the Armed Forces after September 11, 2001. "Today the Senate reaffirmed our commitment to assisting veterans pursuing education, for the benefit of the young men and women in the armed servicesand as an investment in the future of our nation," said Senator Akaka, a World War II veteran who attended college on the original GI Bill. As passed by the Senate, this bill would, among other things: •Provide for a streamlined, less complex, and more equitable program for veterans who have served on active duty since September 11, 2001; •Expand opportunities for training and education by paying benefits for on-job and vocational training; and · Make service members eligible for an annual book allowance. Chairman Akaka was a principal cosponsor of the legislation that established the new GI Bill program in 2008. Based on VA's year-long experience with the program, Chairman Akaka and members of the committee worked with the Department of Veterans Affairs and numerous veterans service organizations to craft the improvements contained in this bill. This bill now moves to the House of Representatives for consideration. The committee report for S.3447 can be found here. For more information on the GI Bill, please visit http://www.gibill.va.gov. iraq iraq the model alsumaria tv the washington post david ignatius npr all things considered kelly mcevers the new york times steven lee myers catholic news agency the watertown daily times jack healy press tv law and disorder radio wbai michael ratner heidi boghosian michael smith matthew rothschild