Talk Of The Nation sexist, sexist, sexist

For at least the first six months of this year, I've decided, I'll be tracking NPR's Talk of the Nation (it was between it and Tell Me More and I honestly tossed a coin to decide finally). On Monday's show, Social Security was covered in a debate between Robert Kuttner and Robert Samuelson. Apparently, only men can debate Social Security and they must be named "Robert." Then Jennifer George was brought on to discuss money . . . in terms of a big flop on Broadway (her family's early 70s play and, the segment suggest, the trouble plagued production of the current Spiderman play). Then it was time for the weather and despite the fact that "weather girls" abound on local news, to discuss the 'politics' of snow, the guests were two men (Quincy, MA mayor Thomas Koch and Mick Mercer) and only one woman (Joan Vennochi). Then it was time to talk TV, specifically Oprah.

And?

Don't give me some man talking Oprah, just f**k off already. I'm not that stupid. Oprah's primary audience is women (and it's White women) and that audience is who buys her magazines and, presumably, who will subscribe to her cable network.

So we ended up with 5 men and 2 women -- an obvious bias which became only more so when you saw what each was brought on to discuss.


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

Tuesday, January 4, 2010. Chaos and violence continue, is Peter Maas doing Psyops on the American public from the pages of The New Yorker, the real costs of war, the ongoing violence, and more. Opening with this bit of perspective from from Richard Cohen's "A stranger's wars" in today's Washington Post: Little wars tend to metastasize. They are nourished by chaos. Government employees in Nevada direct drones to kill insurgents in Afghanistan. The repercussions can be felt years later. We kill coldly, for reasons of policy - omitting, for reasons of taste, that line from Mafia movies: Nothing personal. But revenge comes back hot and furious. It's personal, and we no longer remember why. The Great Afghanistan Reassessment has come and gone and, outside of certain circles, no one much paid attention. In this respect, the United States has become like Rome or the British Empire, able to fight nonessential wars with a professional military in places like Iraq. Ultimately, this will drain us financially and, in a sense, spiritually as well. "War is too important to be left to the generals," the wise saying goes. Too horrible, too. War was a radio topic today, specifically one form of warfare. US drone attacks took place in a variety of countries including Iraq under Bully Boy Bush but, as Anthony Fest (New KPFA Morning Show) noted today, they have increased under Barack Obama. Peace Mom Cindy Sheehan and CODEPINK's Toby Blome took part in a discussion with today's hosts Anthony Fest and Adrienne Lauby (the program is now one hour, has a rotating set of hosts and airs from 8:00 am to 9:00 am PST -- those who start listening five to eight minutes late miss out on Aileen Alfandary's daily snit fit passed off as news -- see Ruth's entry from last night). Excerpt: Anthony Fest: Let's start with you, Toby. Now remote controlled, pilotless war planes are a relatively new weapon but bombers and tanks and artillery have been killing people for decades. Is there something especially insidious about drones? Toby Blome: Well there's many things that are insidious and distrubing to us. One is that the drones which are actually designed to drop missiles, which is a percentage of the total drones, are controlled from thousands of miles away. Often times, as far away as the desert of Nevada. And the pilot -- they call them "pilots," but they never leave the ground. They're behind computer terminals and the distance between the people being killed and the people doing the killing is very disturbing to many of us. Anthony Fest: And, Cindy, do you have anything to add? Cindy Sheehan: Well, of course, because we're against drones doesn't mean that we're for hand-to-hand combat or dropping bombs from airplanes. But the thing is also about, especially the drone bombings in Pakistan, is that, many times, they're being controlled by the CIA which is also collaborating many times with the government or the military of Pakistan which is leading to the total destabilization of that country that is a nuclear power and, you know, it's about the-the total division between what is happening in reality when somebody sits in a bunker thousands of miles away, it dehumanizes that person. And I've heard from -- [about] the person who is dropping the bombs, controlling the drones, dropping the bombs -- I've heard from chaplain's on Air Force Bases that the pilots are having some really, you know, they're having difficulty with dropping bombs on people during the day and going at home at night and trying to lead a normal life. So also we can attach drone bombings specifically to Obama because this is January 4th and there's already been four drone attacks in Pakistan. There was a 118 last year. In five years of the program during the Bush administration, there were a total of 52. So this is something that we can highlight that is increasingly worse than under the Bush administration. And they're being used to as these proxy weaopns in a war against Pakistan that hasn't been declared yet. So we have extreme difficulty with this type of warfare. Anthony Fest: And, Toby, when did CODEPINK begin this campaign against drone warfare? Toby Blome: Well we got involved -- We kind of followed in the footsteps of Kathy Kelly and the Voices for the Creative Nonviolence. She and some others in Nevada organized one of the first protests at Creech Air Force Base. Creech Air Force Base is an hour north of Las Vegas and that was in 2009 -- April -- when 14 peace activists were arrested by crossing into the base on Creech and we followed in July [2009] to bring some more resistance to drone warfare. And we've now had four trips down to Creech Air Force Base from the Bay Area. We're now beginning protests at Beale Air Force Base where they control the global hoc -- one of the key reconnaissance drones. That it's controlled from the United States. Adrienne Lauby: So I think one of the reasons people started to use drones, the military, is the idea that then it's safe for the operator. And, of course, it reminds me of video games. So don't you see these operators -- I guess my assumption is the operator's sitting there playing a video game and pretty divorced from the actual consequences. Now, Cindy, I'd like to know more what it's really like for them? Cindy Sheehan: For the people who are operating it? Adrienne Lauby: That's right. Cindy Sheehan: You know, like I said, the only reports I have are really from some chaplains who are saying that the people are being conflicted about it. But the thing is we know from war, from the beginning of time, that the men and women who have been asked to pay the highest prices, whether killing other people, being injured, they're the ones who come back with -- also wounded mentally and emotionally. So the people who are sitting in the bunker thousands of miles away controlling them aren't free from any kind of effects. But I get this all the time. People will e-mail me and say, "Cindy, you know maybe if they had been using drones in Iraq on April 4, 2004 in Baghdad, your son might be alive." Well you know that's true but as as much as I love my son and miss him, and am so, you know, angry about these wars, there are innocent people that are involved. And these drones, they just announced a new one yesterday called the Gorgon Stare, it's going to have multiple cameras. But these drones that they're using now for intelligence have a very narrow -- what they call a "straw vision" -- that just shows a narrow area. But when you drop a Hellfire Missile on an area, that Hellfire Missile does not distinguish between innocent civilians and so-called militants. And another thing with these so-called militants, they have not been tried in a court of law for whatever and we know that the prisons like Abu Ghraib and Bagram are filled with people who were sold to the US for a bounty based on faulty intelligence. And these wars are so-called based on faulty intelligence. So we don't know if the intelligence that the people who are pressing the buttons are getting are anywhere near complete or if they're just acting out a vendetta by somebody in the Pakistani military or the CIA or the US government. So these programs are basically executing people who haven't had their say in a court of law. Anthony Fest: Do we know who actually gives the final orders to fire those missiles? Is it an Air Force Officer there or is it CIA? Cindy Sheehan: I think it's a combination of military and intelligence but we know that 72 hours after Barack Obama was inaugurated in 2009, he gave the order for his first drone strike that killed about three dozen people. So I think it's a combination of, you know, the military working with the CIA working with -- not just the government of Pakistan but the government of Afghanistan -- but it could be just executing political rivals or political enemies. I have no idea the chain-of-command on drone attacks. northsunm32 (All Voices) covered them briefly in May, an Afghanistan one that even NATO admitted was wrong, and stated that NATO commanders were judged to be at fault, "Letters of reprimand were sent to four senior and two junior officers in Afghanistan." Also in May of last year, Bill Van Auken (WSWS) covered the topic and noted the Los Angeles Times report that the CIA in Pakistan had been given the power -- by Barack -- to conduct "indiscriminate drone missile strikes" and "Only a combatant --a lawful combatant --may carry out the use of killing with combat drones," Mary Ellen O'Connell, a professor from the University of Notre Dame law school, testified at the April 28 hearing held by the National Security and Foreign Affairs Subcommittee of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. "The CIA and civilian contractors have no right to do so," she continued. "They do not wear uniforms, and they are not in the chain of command. And most importantly, they are not trained in the law of armed conflict." David Glazier, a professor from Loyola law school in Los Angeles, California, concurred with this opinion, stating that CIA personnel are "clearly not lawful combatants, [and] if you are not a privileged combatant, you simply don't have immunity from domestic law for participating in hostilities." He went on to warn that "any CIA personnel who participate in this armed conflict run the risk of being prosecuted under the national laws of the places where [the combat actions] take place." CIA operatives involved in the drone program, he said, could be found guilty of war crimes. The Defense Dept's Deployment Health Clinical Center notes, "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is an anxiety disorder that can develop after exposure to a terrifying event or ordeal in which grave physical harm occurred or was threatened. Many people with PTSD repeatedly re-experience the ordeal in the form of flashback episodes, memories, nightmares, or frightening thoughts, especially when they are exposed to events or objects reminiscent of the trauma. People with PTSD also experience emotional numbness and sleep disturbances, depression, anxiety, and irritability or outbursts of anger. Feelings of intense guilt are also comon. Physical symptoms such as headaches, gastrointestinal distress, immune system problems, dizziness, chest pain, or discomfort in other parts of the body are common in people with PTSD." Lark Turner (Daily Northwestern) reports on Iraq War veteran Cpl Justin Owen who was buried last Thursday. The 24-year-old veteran's Christmas Day death has been ruled a suicide and his father, Tom Owen, believes his son suffered from PTSD. Along with his father, his survivors include his mother Rebecca Owen and brothers Nicholas and Thomas Owen. Nick Castele (North By Northwestern) notes that he was a graduate stuent who "graduated cum laude from Marquette University's Diederich College of Communication" and that the family has started a memorial scholarship in Justin's name (details at link and also in this Alex Katz article). Greenwood Today reports on Iraq War veteran Staff Sgt Matthew Scruggs who is a student at Lander University and attempting to treat his PTSD via prescription drugs and sessions at the VA. He speaks of how the PTSD added stress to his marriage and how his and Ashley Scruggs' religious faith helped there. Also helping may be that his support network includes his father who also served in the Iraq War (Sgt 1st Class Frederick Scruggs) and he has a brother, a sister and a brother-in-law in the military as well. Ann J. Curley (CNN) notes a new study published in the JAMA Archives of General Psychiatry which advocates for PTSD screening and found an increase likelihood of longer-term health problems among those veterans suffering from PTSD. Todd Neale (MedPage Today) adds, "Post traumatic stress disorder -- but not a history of concussion -- strongly predicted postconcussive symptoms and poorer psychosocial outcomes in soldiers returning from a long deployment to Iraq, researchers found." Randy Dotinga (HealthDay) explains, "Melissa A. Polusny, of the Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System and the University of Minnesota Medical School, and colleagues surveyed 953 National Guard soldiers who were deployed to combat. They answered questions in Iraq a month before returning home and then a year later. [. . .] The survey found that 7.6 percent of the soldiers were considered to probably have post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD, in the first survey. A year later, the number had risen to 18.2 percent." Paul Purpura (Times-Picayune) reports an estimated 115 members of Louisiana's National Guard will be deploying to Iraq and a send-off ceremony took place yesterday in Baton Rouge. Rebeka Allen (Advocate) adds that Capt John Carmouche got married last March right before he deployed to Iraq and got back in December only to now prepare for Capt Tonya Carmouche (his wife) to deploy as part of the estimated 115 Army National Guard members headed to Iraq. Hatzel Vela (ABC 15) reports 36 members of the Arizona's National Guard are heading to Fort Hood, Texas tomorrow "for two months of training" before deploying to Iraq. The Iraq War has not ended. Press TV notes, "Six mortar shells were fired on Monday at the US base north of Hillah, the capital of Babil province, Aswat al-Iraq news agency quoted a police source in the al-Mahawil district." Al Jazeerah notes Aswat al-Iraq also reported a US military vehicle was hit by explosives "in west of Diwaniya" yesterday and that "American forces cordon off the whole region, preventing vehicles coming from Najaf to enter the province for hours." This follows the death of 2 US soldiers on Sunday. Turning to some of today's reported violence, Reuters notes a Tarmiya Since October 31st, there has been a fresh wave of violence targeting Iraqi Christians. Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite (Washington Post) observes, "As my colleague at the Center for American Progress, Brian Katulis, and I wrote recently , today 'global religious identities are substituting for national identities, especially in weak or failing states.' In these kinds of states such as Nigeria, Yemen, Iraq, Pakistan and unfortunately, too many other places around the world, 'religious identity more and more substitutes for national identity as the government loses the people's trust...' and more traditional political identities erode." Mark Seddon (Big Think) notes: In isolated villages and monasteries in northern Iraq, and in churches in Baghdad, Irbil and Mosul, it is still possible to hear Assyrian Christians talking and praying in ancient Aramaic, which is said to be the language of Christ. Fewer in number now, the Assyrians are the direct descendents of the empires of Assyria and Babylonia, their 2000 year history making them the original inhabitants of Mesopotamia. The Church of the East, currently presided over by Archbishop Gewargis Sliwa in Baghdad is the World's oldest Christian church. And their other treasures at risk in Iraq as well. Steven Lee Myers (New York Times) reports, "The damage done to the ruins of ancient Babylon is visible from a small hilltop near the Tower of Babel, whose biblical importance is hard to envision from what is left today." Myers reports that "archaeoligist and preservationists" have begun working frantically trying to save and perserve the ruins of Babylon and Mesopotamia. The work is, at least, in part, funded by a $2 million grant from the State Dept. Third Age notes, "Although the foundation of the ancient city is being eaten away by salt water and erosion, and the area is being encroached by development, Jeff Allen, a conservationist working with the World Monuments Fund says there is still hope for the city to be reinstated to its former glory. " Myers, Stephen Farrell and Shiho Fukada offer a report here that includes a video tour of some of the ruins. UPI notes, "The aim of these efforts is to prepare the site and other ruins for what Iraqi officials hope will someday be a flood of scientists, scholars and tourists that could contribute to Iraq's economic revival." Yesterday the Washington Post published a visual graph that noted, starting in 2004, $3.8 billion has been put into CERP funds [Commander's Emergency Response Program] and they list $480 million as "Unaccounted-for funds." Ernesto Londono (Washington Post) reported from Baghdad on various failed projects CERP funds had gone to such as a park and lake in Baghdad, "But today the Baghdad park is nearly waterless, more than two years after a U.S. military inauguration ceremony that included a marching band and water-scooter rides. Much of the compound is in ruins, swing sets have become piles of twisted steel, and the personal watercraft's engines have been gutted for spare parts." The article then segues into an exploration of criticism of how the money was spent. Or there's the $250,000 of US tax payer money that went to stage a concert in Baghdad's Sadr City -- a concert which never took place. Londono covered it from Iraq. That's where he's stationed. There's nothing wrong with his reporting on those projects. But the article really needed more on Congressional critiques which could have been done by pairing Londono up with either Karen DeYoung or Walter Pincus. The issue is not just the wasted money. Barack's asking for 1.3 million this year to go to CERP funds. Is the program worthwhile? Congress has repeatedly questioned it as have those appearing before Congress. The funds are not accountable and they have not been accountable. Even today, there is a large amount which can be spent and requires no real supporting evidence that the money went there other than the most basic release. CERP was an issue during the September 10th House Armed Services Committee hearing (and also see this entry by Mike). This is from the exchange between Committe Chair Ike Skelton and DoD's Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Eric S. Edelman: Ike Skelton: The department's understanding of the allowed usage of CERP funds seems to have undergone a rather dramatic change since Congress first authorized it. The intent of the program was originally to meet urgent humanitarian needs in Iraq through small projects undertaken under the initative of brigade and battalion commanders. Am I correct? Edelman: Yes, sir. Ike Skelton: Thank you. The answer was "yes." Last year the Department of Defense has used millions of CERP dollars to build hotels for foreign visitors, spent $900,000 on a mural at the Baghdad International Airport and, as I understand this second piece of art, that CERP funds were used for. I'm not sure that the American tax payer would appreciate that knowing full well that Iraq has a lot of money in the bank from oil revenues and it is my understanding that Iraq has announced that they're going to build the world's largest ferris wheel. And if they have money to build the world's largest ferris wheel why are we funding murals and hotels with money that should be used by the local battallion commander. This falls in the purview of plans and policy ambassador. Edelman: No, no, it's absolutely right and I'll shae the stage here -- I'll share the stage quite willing with uh, with Admiral Winnefeld with whom I've actually been involved in discussions with for some weeks about how we provide some additional guidance to the field and some additional requirements to make sure that CERP is appropriately spent. Edelman then tries to stall and Skelton cuts him off with, "Remember you're talking to the American taxpayer." Edelman then replies that it is a fair question. He says CERP is important because it's flexible. It's important because they're just throwing around, if you ask me. They're playing big spender on our dime. Skelton: The issue raises two serious questions of course. Number one is they have a lot of money of their own. And number two the choice of the type of projects that are being paid for. I would like to ask Mr. Secretary if our committee could receive a list of expenditures of $100,000 or more within the last year. Could you do that for us at your convience please? Edelman: We'll work with our colleagues in the controller's office and - and . . . to try and get you -- Skelton: That would be very helpful. As Ike Skelton noted, there were two issues: The tracking and the fact that Iraq had a lot of money on its own. Why were US tax payers footing the bill to begin with? Let's drop back to the Commission on Wartime Contracting's first public hearing (February 1, 2009 snapshot), when the DoD Deputy Inspector General Thomas F. Gimble weighed in on CERP: CERP funds are appropriated through the DoD and allocated through each major command's sector of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Up to $500,000 can be allocated to individual CERP projects, and CERP beneficiaries often receive payments in cash. We have also identified occasions where soldiers with limited contracting experience were responsible for administering CERP funds. In some instances, there appeared to be scant, if any, oversight of the manner in which funds were expended. Complicating matters further is the fact that payment of bribes and gratuities to government officials is a common business practice in some Southwest Asia nations. Taken in combination, these factors result in an environment conducive to bribery and corruption. Sharon Grigsby (Deputy Editorial Page Editor of the Dallas Morning News) weighed in on the Post's story at her paper's blog concluding, "It's important that Congress thoroughly vet these changes to assure -- before writing this latest $1.3 billion check -- that this is money worth spending. The abuses cited in this story referenced above raise serious questions." Moving from US to Iraqi money, the Voice of Russia reports, "Corruption caused about $1 billion in harm to the Iraqi economy in 2010. This was announced on Monday by the television channel Al-Sharqiya citing the head of the Iraqi Commission on Combating Corruption, Rahim Ala." RIA Novosti adds, "A total of 709 high-ranking state officials, including nine ministers and 75 department chiefs were convicted of corruption last year." Lastly on money, Nake M. Kamrany and Megan Sieffert (Huffington Post)attempt to provide a dollar estimate for the Iraq War damages: "In several studies, estimates of Iraq war damages sustained by the United States have ranged around $1-$3 trillion. In this current study, measure of war damages sustained by the people and country of Iraq is estimated at $394.4 billion. This figure consists of 66,081 individuals who lost their lives. The present value of their work life earnings and pain and suffering of their heirs amounted to $14.2 billion. Moreover 176,382 individuals sustained injuries ranging from 100% disability to 25% disability incurring monetary damages for medical care and loss of earnings in the amount of $6.0 billion. The war caused 1.9 million individual Iraqi's to emigrate outside of Iraq leaving the war behind including their jobs and property sustaining $30.8 billion of damages. Another 2.65 million Iraqis migrated internally from violent regions to less violent regions in Iraq who sustained damages of $33.9 billion. The economy of Iraq lost 27 years of economic progress. The decline in lost Iraqi GDP caused by the war is estimated at $309.5 billion." Meanwhile Press TV notes, "Six mortar shells were fired on Monday at the US base north of Hillah, the capital of Babil province, Aswat al-Iraq news agency quoted a police source in the al-Mahawil district." Al Jazeerah notes Aswat al-Iraq also reported a US military vehicle was hit by explosives "in west of Diwaniya" yesterday and that "American forces cordon off the whole region, preventing vehicles coming from Najaf to enter the province for hours." This follows the death of 2 US soldiers on Sunday. And this is beginning to feel a lot like the lead-up to the British getting forced into Basra only and then forced out of there. But no one pays attention to that because who even pays attention to Iraq (and how many even remember the British fleeing their base and, within 24 hours, it being torn apart by rebels?). When Iraq does get attention it tends to be retro. This morning Max Brantley (Arkansas Times) recommended: "Try Peter Mass' reconstruction in the New Yorker of the most famous image of the war in Iraq -- the toppling of a massive statue of Saddam Hussein after troops rolled into Baghdad." US forces assisted Iraqi exiles -- flown in that weekend -- with taking down Saddam Hussein's statue. It was staged and it was always known to be staged by press present. They narrowed the focus of the square for all photos and video to make it appear that a huge crowd was present when, in fact, it was just a few people (US service members and the exiles). Peter Maas really can't state that -- or won't. But he paints a picture of a number of reporters willing to lie to themselves (John F. Burns among them). As usual Glenn Greenwald finds the article earth shattering. I find it revisionary. Let's drop back to NPR's The Bryant Park Project April 9, 2008 (and it has text and audio): Rachel Martin: Five years ago today, Baghdad fell to the invading forces led by the United States. For many people, the toppling of Saddam Hussein's statue in Baghdad's Firdos Square crystallized the end of his rule, and it's an image that's been broadcast many times in the last five years, over and over. You'll probably see it again today as people remember this grim anniversary. But next time you watch it, bear this in mind. Nearly four years ago, a Los Angeles Times writer revealed that according to a study of the invasion published by the U.S. Army, the statue toppling was not necessarily the spontaneous event that it appeared to be. David Zucchino is the national correspondent for the LA Times. He first reported that story back in 2004 and he's on the line with us now. Hey, David. Thanks for being with us. Mr. DAVID ZUCCHINO: (Journalist, Los Angeles Times) Good morning. MARTIN: Good morning. So David, you were in Baghdad on this day five years ago, but not in Firdos Square. When and how did you hear about that big Saddam Hussein statue falling? Mr. ZUCCHINO: Well, actually, even though I was in Baghdad that day, I was across the river about a mile or two away and had no idea that was going on, and in fact, the Army troops I was with also had no idea, and I didn't find out about it until several weeks later when I got back to the U.S. MARTIN: When you found out about it, what was the narrative attached to it? Mr. ZUCCHINO: My impression was that there was a spontaneous rally by Iraqis and they jumped on the statue and basically pulled it down. I knew there was some U.S. soldiers or Marines in the area, but I was not clear on exactly what their role was, whether they were just providing security or were taking part. It was fairly nebulous. MARTIN: So you dug up more specifics that cast light on those circumstances surrounding the toppling of the statue. Explain what you found out. Mr. ZUCCHINO: This was part of a five-hundred-and-some page review, or report, by the Army on the entire invasion, what went wrong and what went right. It was sort of an After Action Report, and this was just sort of a one or two page sideline, almost a footnote. They had interviewed an Army psychological operations' team leader and he described how a Marine colonel - the Marines were in charge of that area and had just come in, and this Marine colonel had been looking for a target of opportunity, and seized on that statue. And according to this interview with the psy-ops commander, there were Iraqis milling around the statue, and in fact, had been beating it with sledgehammers and apparently thinking about trying to bring it down, but it was a huge statue and they had no way to do that. So the Marines came up with the idea of bringing in a big recovery vehicle, like a wrecker, and trying to bring it down that way. Again, the usual TV activists are writing lengthy pieces (I'm not referring to Brantley who just wrote a paragraph) on Maas' bad article. It's ten pages. The New Yorker's long been doing photos -- and were doing it before Tina Brown turned the magazine upside down. Many websites long ago -- and I believe In These Times as well in its print edition -- showed the narrowed version of the photos versus what we'll call "widescreen" option which proved how tiny the turnout was. The New Yorker offers ten long pages with no photos. Maas offers ten long pages where he's never aware of the Psyops report. All these years later. After it was reported on in the Los Angeles Times. After it was covered by NPR and others. All this time later. Maas shows up to talk about scared little journalists like John F. Burns. Was Burnsie really scared or is this itself a Psyops that's supposed to make us feel sorry for Burnsie and think, "He's not a liar, he was just scared." He was there. He lied. Reality. The TV activists -- they play them on Democracy Now and other programs -- are all glooming on and praising Maas' bad article. In reality, most have ignored the biggest lie about Iraq that was amplified by the media last week. The lie continues to be amplified. Sam Dagher is no longer a journalist so it's good that he ends his career at the Murdoch-owned Wall St. Journal and not at the New York Times or the Christian Science Monitor which earlier employed him. He lied last week. Lying is manufacturing a quote, 'improving' a quote. Novelists can do that. Reporters can't. Manufacturing includes taking a statement, leaving out the middle, to imply that someone said something that they didn't. What Dagher did ranks up there with Judith Miller and, unless and until someone demonstrates that she did worse than stenography, Dagher topped her. At Third on Sunday, we did "Editorial: Surrendering The Narrative" in which we noted how much damage is being done on the issue of Iraq because Beggar Media is no longer interested in the topic -- except when it's time for their "Send Money! We work hard and we're not corporate media! Send us money! It's really easy! Just put it on your credit card and before you know it, you'll have forked over a few hundred a year for us lazy bums who can't get off our ass and get a real job!" In that editorial, we noted that the Portland Press Herald's editorial board (Portland, Maine) needs to learn to read especially when it's an issue that's several days old. However, we were far kinder than we would have normally been because it was the holidays. Meaning we grasped how a story that popped up last week -- a badly reported story -- could fly over their heads several days later (when lies were then obvious) due to the fact that the Sunday editorial was most likely written on Thursday as people rushed to take New Year's Eve off. The holidays are over. Everyone is supposed to have rolled up their sleeves and gotten back to work. There's no excuse for Kelly McEvers repeating lies on NPR this morning. Here (audio not yet available online) for her Morning Edition report. McEvers MISINFORMS listeners: But in an interview Maliki granted The Wall Street Journal last week, he said the existing agreement is "sealed" — and subject to neither extension nor alteration. Still, he did seem to leave open the possibility of a new agreement. That's Sam Dagher's bad reporting entitled "Iraq Wants the U.S. Out." He dominated Tuesday's foreign news cycle with his scoop that went poop when his paper was so thrilled to finally be getting mentions on cable for 'reporting' that they released the transcript of his interview with Nouri. As noted in Wednesday's "One pimps, the other fluffs," Dagher's article opens: Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki ruled out the presence of any U.S. troops in Iraq after the end of 2011, saying his new government and the country's security forces were capable of confronting any remaining threats to Iraq's security, sovereignty and unity. Mr. Maliki spoke with The Wall Street Journal in a two-hour interview, his first since Iraq ended nine months of stalemate and seated a new government after an inconclusive election, allowing Mr. Maliki to begin a second term as premier. A majority of Iraqis -- and some Iraqi and U.S. officials -- have assumed the U.S. troop presence would eventually be extended, especially after the long government limbo. But Mr. Maliki was eager to draw a line in his most definitive remarks on the subject. "The last American soldier will leave Iraq" as agreed, he said, speaking at his office in a leafy section of Baghdad's protected Green Zone. "This agreement is not subject to extension, not subject to alteration. It is sealed." And if you hang around until paragraph thirteen of his bad writing (such a Rudith Miller), you learn that Sam Dagher's gotten 'creative' with his lede. But only when you read the transcript do you learn that he altered the quote in the last paragraph, the one that he built his entire article around. Here's what Nouri actually stated and we'll put what Dagher quoted in italics: The last American soldier will leave Iraq. Secondly this agreement is sealed and at the time we designated it as sealed and not subject to extension, except if the new government with Parliament's approval wanted to reach a new agreement with America, or another country, that's another matter. This agreement is not subject to extension, not subject to alteration, it is sealed, it expires on Dec. 31 This is so remedial. What Dagher was bad reporting in the extreme. By leaving out Nouri's "Secondly" statement, he's completely altered what Nouri was stating in what can best be termed tabloid journalism. There is no excuse for Kelly McEvers to be repeating -- today -- the following: But in an interview Maliki granted The Wall Street Journal last week, he said the existing agreement is "sealed" — and subject to neither extension nor alteration. Still, he did seem to leave open the possibility of a new agreement. He said it was subject to neither extension nor alteration? Yes, that is what Sam Dagher reported. It is not, however, what Nouri said. There is no excuse for it, NPR needs to run a correction. And not where Alicia Shephard gets cutesy and pretends like she doesn't know Henry Norr is a journalist (fired from the San Francisco Chronicle for participating in an anti-war event in April 2003 -- the paper maintains he was fired for using a sick day to attend the event, Noor maintains he was fired for political reasons -- none of this, or the fact that Norr is a journalist, is noted in Shephard's recent 'Me and this Henry Norr exchanged e-mails' column). Did Nouri -- as McEvers maintains -- state that the "existing agreement is 'sealed' -- and subject to neither extension nor alteration"? Only if, like Dagher, you ignore the "Secondly" where Nouri states "except if the new government with Parliament's approval wanted to reach a new agreement with America, or another country, that's another matter." That's a pretty big exception and including it in the story indicates there is NO story which is why Sam Dagher left it out. NPR is not Murdoch-owned and is supposed to follow stringent journalistic guidelines. McEver's is not an opinator, she is employed by NPR to report and to report only. Her reporting this morning does not stand. NPR needs to issue a correction. iraq the washington post richard cohen kpfa anthony fest cindy sheehan wsws bill van auken the new york times steven lee myers stephen farrell the washington post ernesto londono mikey likes it

Terry Gross is disgraceful

I love that and I love all of the 2010 pieces:

Kat's "Kat's Korner: 2010 in music" Ruth's "Ruth's Radio Report: 2010," Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "2010: The Urkel Moment," "2010 in books (Martha & Shirley)," "2010: The Year of Enough," Marcia's "2010 in Page Turners" and Rebecca's "2010 in page turners" and Ann's "10 Best DVDs of 2010" and Stan's "10 Best DVDs of 2010" -- year in review pieces in the community. Also "Terry Gross' new low (Ann, Ava and C.I.)" which documents the fact that women made up only 18% of Terry Gross' guests on Fresh Air in 2010. In addition Kat got in one more review for 2010, "Kat's Korner: Mystic Melanie" -- Kat reviews Melanie's brand new album Ever Since You Never Heard of Me.

We're swiping that from C.I. and does anybody notice that C.I. doesn't credit herself? She did "2010: The Year of Enough" and notice she just lists it, she doesn't say "my".

As for "Terry Gross' new low (Ann, Ava and C.I.)"? I love the e-mails. Ty is forwarding me the e-mails coming in at Third. I'm glad so many of you appreciate the article. It was a pain in the ass and I'll probably be switching shows to follow here because I'm so sick of Terry Gross. But how about that?

18% of her guests in the year 2010 were women. That's disgraceful.

Terry Gross is disgraceful.



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

Monday, January 3, 2011. Chaos and violence continue, the US military announces deaths, Iraqi Christians continue to be targeted, and more. 2 US soldiers were killed in Iraq yesterday. CNN reports this morning, "Two U.S. service members were killed in central Iraq on Sunday night while supporting Operation New Dawn, according to a statement from the U.S. military in Iraq." AFP quotes an unnamed military spokesperson stating, "This was one incident resulting in the death of two US service members. These are the first deaths of any US service member in 2011." Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) explains, "The U.S. military declared its formal combat operations over at the end of August, and the remaining soldiers are largely present to train Iraqi forces. However, American troops are called in by Iraqi forces on occasion for sensitive missions." In other reported violence, Tang Danlu (Xinhua) reports 3 dead and twenty injured from a Baquba roadside bombing "immediately followed by a suicide car bombing". Reuters updates with 28 wounded and states it was an attack on Iraq's "intelligence services". AFP notes 1 police officer and 1 Iraqi Christian woman (Rafah Toma)were shot dead in Baghdad today -- the woman in her home. "I am attached to this place," Moahmmed Tawfeeq (CNN) quotes Rafah Butros Tomas explaing, "Every other day I come here [Our Lady of Salvation Church in Baghdad]. I feel like my soul is in this place with them." Our Lady of Salvation Church was attacked October 31st, setting off the latest wave of attacks targeting Iraq Christians. CNN spoke with her about her cousin who was among those killed in the assault on the Church. Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) quotes Yonadam Kanna, a Christian MP, stating that al Qaeda is becoming the catch-all for blame, "Everything is hanged on Al Qaeda. These people are both criminals and terrorists." John Leland (New York Times) reports, "Iraq's dwindling Christian minority has been terrorized in recent months by deadly attacks for which extremist groups have claimed responsibility. But police officers said Ms. Toma's killing appeared to be a simple robbery." First off, al Qaeda in Mespotamia doesn't claim credit. A splinter group -- or a thought-to-be splinter group -- has been claiming credit. If you're claiming credit -- pay attention, this is PoliSci on terrorism -- you do so in the immediate aftermath. The act and claiming credit are part of the message (the act of terrorism) that is supposed to inspire fear. So you do it within 24 hours in our fast-paced society today. If you're doing it days afterwards -- as was the case with last week's Baghdad's bombings -- what may be happening is that no one else is claiming credit and you see that and think you can pass some attack off as your own. So you step forward and say, "It's me!!!! I'm the one!!! I'm so all important!!!!" It's not that different -- and maybe j-schools should be closed and all reporters should once again have to 'intern' doing the police beat? -- from false confessions to a crime. The waves of attacks on Iraqi Christians since the start of the war have not been all al Qaeda in Iraq. Has this wave been al Qaeda in Iraq? Judging by the statements and the actions and their locations, an educated (but not informed) guess would say a little less than a third could have been al Qaeda in Iraq. The Christian MP is correct that you cry "al Qaeda in Iraq!" and then pretend the problem went away. That's (A). (B)? An elderly woman was robbed. She was murdered. She was robbed in the middle of the night when she would obviously be home. Her house was picked out of every other house in Baghdad. To claim that she wasn't targeted? That's insane. Of course she was targeted. And that targeting may have included being targeted for being a Christian. A neighbor insists she wore gold and that's why this took place. Visible gold actually would go a long way towards identifying her as a religious minority -- as a look at the strata of Iraqi society would quickly demonstrate. My point here is the woman was likely targeted. That includes the notion that it was fine to rob from her and that it was fine to kill her -- a possible outcome that was known -- on some level -- when the robber made the decision to enter the house. To claim she wasn't targeted makes no sense at all when the know facts are examined. Joe Smith breaks into same-sex couple Paul and Bill's home, robs then and kills them it may not just be robbery. If Joe's selected them over others, it may be because they are gay and it may be a hate crime. This impression that reports are trying to give is false and they need to stop it. This is not an either/or. An elderly woman's home was broken into. She is a Christian. Saying, "Oh, well it's robbery because she had this or that on but it wasn't a hate crime," is b.s. She was selected and targeted and that was likely because she was a Christian. I think (I could be wrong) that's the point the Christian MP was making about terrorism and criminal. A crime took place and the woman was likely targeted for that crime because she was a Christian. Ned Parker and Raheem Salman (Los Angeles Times) reported yesterday on Baghdad priest Father Nadheer Dako who spent December 31st at the burial for the elderly couple (Janet Mekha and Fawzi Rahim) who died in Thursday's wave of bombings targeting Christians in Baghdad. They note, "In 2007, he had played a cat-and-mouse game as he hid from would-be kidnappers who surrounded his church; that same year he narrowly escaped a bomb apparently meant for him. He had watched too many Christians leave the city for safety elsewhere. But he was not going to let himself fall into depression." While he chooses to stay, some are leaving. Anne Barker (Australia's ABC) notes, "Many Christians have already fled Baghdad or left the country altogether." Friday, Rawya Rageh (Al Jazeera) reported on the mood in the aftermath of the targeting: Rawya Rageh: Houses that should have been adorned with Christmas decorations, pockmarked by violence instead. Iraqi Christians once again under attack. Falah: If they want us to leave, we will leave. If they want us to sleep on the street, we will sleep on the street If they want us to join them and be terrorists, we will do. Rawya Rageh: The most recent round of violence began in October when gunmen stormed this Cathedral in Baghdad, a siege that ultimately left more than 40 worshipers dead. Signs of that attack still scar the site, with no sign of letting up. Just last week, al Qaeda warned of more attacks during the holidays resulting in what the already dwindling community described as their grimmest Christmas ever. This is what Christmas Eve mass looked like at one of Baghdad's largest Churches, celebrations canceled, congregations decimated. The UN says thousands have fled to northern cities and neighboring countries. The government had promised increased security and both the Prime Minister and Church leaders have been urging Christians not to flee. But some say, it's not that simple. Father Saad Sirop Hanna of St. Joseph's Church: Reality imposes itself on people's choices and lives. What the Church had announced is that we want our community to remain intact in this country but the reality is much more powerful. Change is minimal and slow. Rawya Rageh: The Christian community in Iraq is now facing a difficult choice. CNN quotes Kiyour Kizarab whose Baghdad home was targeted in the bombings, "I am 60 years old and I gave a lot to this country, but this tough situation is like a message asking me to leave my country. If these attacks will continue, and the government can't stop them, then I don't think we will have a future here." Thursday's attack -- and the robbery if the woman was targeted because she was Christian -- signal a change. Christian families in Baghdad and Mosul had been keeping their children out of school during this wave, keeping them at home so that they would be safe. However, just as the October 31st attack demonstrated that attacks could take place anywhere in public, even a church, last week's bombings demonstrated that even if you are in your own home -- even if you are holed up there -- you can still be a target. May Akl (Daily Star) reports on the latest underground railroad: The voice at the other end of the phone line from Beirut suddenly became nervous. "No, no, no, please!" the panicking nun said. "You cannot mention my real name, you understand, what we are doing is illegal." This is why I call her Sister Mary. Sister Mary does not launder money nor trade drugs. Instead, she leads an association that assists clandestine Christian Iraqi refugees whose plight leads them to travel to Lebanon by foot. She anticipated more refugees after the church massacre last October 31, a dark day for Iraq's Christian community, though the incident received little attention from international media and policymakers. A terrorist group took the Lady of Deliverance church in Bagdad by siege, holding the congregation hostage and killing 46 Chaldean worshipers, including two priests celebrating mass, and wounding some 67. This was not the first act of violence against Iraq's dwindling Christian community, but it was by far the most horrific. And it was not the last act of violence targeting the Christians of the Middle East. After surviving millennia of religious and cultural persecutions in its own cradle, Christianity in the Middle East, could face demise at the hands of this Christian West. In fact, political alliances sought by Western states and, most importantly, by the United States leverage existential threats against the remaining Christian minorities in the Middle East. Rescue is not high on the agenda. Friday the US State Dept issued the following statement from Acting Dept Spokesperson Mark C. Toner: "We condemn the violence against Christians carried out overnight by terrorists in Iraq. President Talabani, Prime Minister Maliki, and virtually every political bloc and major religious leader in Iraq have denounced attacks on Christians and stressed the centrality of Christians in the fabric of Iraqi society. We commend the Government of Iraq for increasing its security measures to protect Christian communities since the October 31 suicide bombing attack at Our Lady of Salvation Church. We call on the Government of Iraq to redouble its efforts to protect Christians and apprehend the terrorists who are behind these acts." The Toledo Blade's editorial board offers, "The attacks have been intense in recent months. They made Iraqi Christians' observance of Christmas dangerous and thus restrained. With U.S. withdrawal from Iraq scheduled for this year, it might be time for President Obama to consider a program that would admit Iraqi Christians to the United States." Mark Seddon (Independent of London) observes: Now, Iraq's remaining Christians want an autonomous Christian province in their ancient Ninevah Plains homeland in northern Iraq. While Britain or the US may not help their cause, for obvious reasons, the UN, EU and Commonwealth could add their not inconsiderable weight. President Talabani of Iraq declared in November that he had "no objection to a Christian province in Iraq". One Assyrian exile in Britain, however, told me, "They keep talking, but nothing happens." There is a widespread view among the Iraqi Christian diaspora that their government is simply allowing what some now see as an inevitable and unstoppable exodus of one of the world's most ancient civilisations. Jalal Talabani is an expert at doing nothing (other than raising hopes). Since 2003, there has been the promise that the issue of Kirkuk would be settled. The 2005 Constitution even mandated a referendum be held in 2007. This was part of the 2007 White House benchmarks that Nouri al-Maliki signed off on. And yet the census never took place and the referendum took place and the oil-rich Kirkuk remains a sticky point. Point? The idea that Iraqi Christians will end up with a province is unlikely. They number less than 1/25 of the country's population and Nouri's not going to let it happen. You already have Basra wanting to set up their own rule (similar to the KRG), you've got the unsettled issue of Kirkuk and Nouri's going to okay land (forget an entire province) being handed over to Iraqi Christians? It seems highly unlikely. January 8th, there's going to be a summit of religious leaders in Copenhagen, gathered to address the issue of Iraqi Christians. Currently, not much is expected from the gathering. If they come out of it insisting that a province being handed over to Iraqi Christians is the answer, it will most likely indicate that they're not very serious about the issue. In other news on the costs of the illegal war, Friday, Martin Chulov (Guardian) reported: A study examining the causes of a dramatic spike in birth defects in the Iraqi city of Falluja has for the first time concluded that genetic damage could have been caused by weaponry used in US assaults that took place six years ago. The research, which will be published next week, confirms earlier estimates revealed by the Guardian of a major, unexplained rise in cancers and chronic neural-tube, cardiac and skeletal defects in newborns. The authors found that malformations are close to 11 times higher than normal rates, and rose to unprecedented levels in the first half of this year – a period that had not been surveyed in earlier reports. The findings, which will be published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, come prior to a much-anticipated World Health Organisation study of Falluja's genetic health. They follow two alarming earlier studies, one of which found a distortion in the sex ratio of newborns since the invasion of Iraq in 2003 – a 15% drop in births of boys. Richard Spencer (Telegraph of London) adds, "The research and a forthcoming report by the World Health Organisation on the same issue will renew international attention on the siege of Fallujah, condemned by anti-war activists and human rights campaigners as an excessive response to insurgent activity. Thousands of alleged insurgents and civilians are said to have been killed. White phosphorous and depleted uranium shells are known to have been used in large numbers. Depleted uranium in particular has been linked to high rates of cancer and birth defects." Over the weekend, Shashank Bengali and Sahar Issa's "2011 looks grim for progress on women's rights in Iraq" (McClatchy Newspapers) was published: When Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki introduced what he called a national partnership government two weeks ago, he included allies and adversaries, Arabs and Kurds, Shiite Muslims and Sunnis. One group, however, was woefully underrepresented. Only one woman was named to Maliki's 42-member cabinet, sparking an outcry in a country that once was a beacon for women's rights in the Arab world and adding to an ongoing struggle over the identity of the new Iraq. Whether this fledgling nation becomes a liberal democracy or an Islamist-led patriarchy might well be judged by the place it affords its women. Throughout the illegal war, Iraqi women have shown the guts and courage to protest but the US hasn't been at all concerned with supporting them. In January of 2004, Anne Garrels (NPR's All Things Considered) reported on Iraqi women protesting as their rights were stripped away by exiles/thugs appointed by the US. Garrels notes that the women said the change "will split society" and lead to sectarianism and extremism. And that should have been that. Paul Bremer could knock it down. But he didn't. And the US didn't apply pressure, didn't give a damn about Iraqi women. Over a year later, Iraqi Women Gathering was still organizing protests against this. Where was the US government? Still celebrating those laughable 2005 elections? Houzan Mahmoud wrote a column which ran in the Seattle Post Intelligencer's January 30, 2005 edition and shared her thoughts about the election in her country: In reality, these elections are, for Iraq's women, little more than a cruel joke. Amid the suicide attacks, kidnappings and U.S.-led military assaults since Saddam Hussein's fall, the little-reported phenomenon is the sharp increase in the persecution of Iraqi women. Women are the new victims of Islamic groups intent on restoring a medieval barbarity and of a political establishment that cares little for women's empowerment. Having for years enjoyed greater rights than other Middle East women, women in Iraq are losing even their basic freedoms -- the right to choose their clothes, the right to love or marry whom they want. Of course women suffered under Saddam. I fled his cruel regime. I personally witnessed much brutality but the subjugation of women was never a Baath Party goal. What we are seeing is deeply worrying: a reviled occupation and an openly reactionary Islamic armed insurrection taking Iraq into a new dark age. Every day, leaflets are distributed across the country warning women against going out unveiled, wearing makeup or mixing with men. Many female university students have given up their studies to protect themselves against the Islamists. In August of 2005, Spark Newspaper reported: July 19 about 200 Iraqi women and a few men took to the streets in Baghdad to protest parts of a draft of the new constitution, scheduled to be completed mid-August. The protesters were from women's rights groups and included secular Iraqi women politicians. The draft of the entire constitution is religious and sect-based. It gives lip service to equal rights for women – but only as long as those rights do not violate Shariah or the law based on the Koran. If these changes are implemented, it would severely set women backwards in important ways. The women are outraged by Article 14, which includes a provision that women, regardless of age, would need their family's permission to marry. Under Shariah, a man could get a divorce just by expressing his wish three times in front of his wife. Women would also be denied inheritance rights. Article 14 would replace a personal status law enacted in 1959 and continued up until the U.S. took over. It is one of the more progressive laws in the Middle East in acknowledging women's rights. It gives women the right to choose a husband and requires divorce cases to be decided by a judge. Article 14 would chuck that body of law and require cases dealing with marriage, divorce and inheritance to be judged according to law practiced by the family's sect or religion. The draft appears to deepen the divide between Sunnis and Shiites, without acknowledging legal rights for mixed marriages. Women also protested a proposal to phase out a current measure requiring that one-out-of-four parliamentary seats go to women. Where's the concern? Where has it ever been? We saw a lot of grandstanding last month from the likes of Naomi Wolf and others tossing around this and that but they've never really weighed in, have they, on the stripping of Iraqi women's rights? When you consider how much the Iraq War lined Naomi Klein's cage, her silence on the subject is especially chilling. Naomi Wolf continues her attack on rape victims and is now calling for rape victims to be named publicly -- presumably only adult ones but who knows with that crazy woman. And we're not linking to her latest trash. For the record, the accused knows who is accusing in rape cases, the police know, the court knows. Naomi is so dishonest. She's just flat out lying these days. Her positions is not new, it being public may be. But December 12th, Ava and I noted Wolf was circulating the names of the women who may have been raped by Julian Assange and included: "In fairness to Naomi Wolf, we should note that she doesn't feel rape victims deserve to be anonymous to the public." Bryan Bender (Boston Globe) reports on rape in the military today and notes, "At the same time, military officials estimate that as much as 90 percent of sexual assaults in the ranks go unreported. According to the Government Accountability Office, many victims remain silent because they fear ridicule or believe that no action will be taken." They might not be believed? They might be ridiculed? Or that might be shamed and trashed by Naomi Wolf and others and it might get so bad that you have to leave your own country. That's what we're talking about here. Naomi Wolf's an idiot. And she'd dug her own grave. She doesn't have the brains to step out of it. Two women are said to have been raped by WikiLeak's Julian Assange. They may or may not have been raped. I'm not judge and jury on Assange -- especially with so little facts known at this point. Sadly, his groupies can't show the same restraint towards the women and they have attacked the women with lies, smears and language that has harmed the issue of rape. Their language, their notions, are a throwback to a less educated time and don't think that's by accident. Amanda Marcotte has weighed in many times on the damage that is being done (one example here) but if you click here, you can listen to her discuss the issue (link also has text) and to show you Naomi Wolf repeating one rape myth after another. Meanwhile David Walsh of World Socialist Web Site writes a hysteric and shrill attack on Katha Pollitt for? For calling rape "rape." It is not rape to penetrate someone who is asleep and cannot give consent, it is not rape to hold a woman down and force yourself on her, according to David Walsh. Walsh sees it all as a cabal of women, caught up in "identity politicss" and plotting a take down. Which is how he has Katha and Katrina vanden Heuvel on the same page. They're not on the same page, they do not coordinate messages, Katha writes what she wants and always has. She neither checks with Katrina nor takes suggestions for it. But how telling that, in Walsh's view, women are ganging up against the poor misunderstood man. Walsh refuses to admit what rape is. Walsh is often a great writer (not good, great and even his Katha piece has moments of brilliance) but his column goes to the limitations so many put on equality: We're for it until our man might suffer. At which point, it's time to deny rape -- the same way sexism was denied throughout the bulk of 2008. Women are supposed to shut the hell up about their own persecution and 'work for the man.' And if you object -- and for many of us, we remember these days so very well -- you're the bitch who is just thinking about yourself. Rape is not about one woman. And how dare Wright try to pass himself off as someone who looks at the system as opposed to those 'limited women' who can't thing big. Rape exists because of the power structure. Rape is a systemic crime. The one playing "identity politics" on this issue is Walsh who sees something in Julian (Daddy? Lover? Big brother? All three?) and must deny what rape is in order to defend Assange. Rape is rape and the allegations against Julian Assange may or may not be true but the allegations are rape. In the US, the 112th Congress convenes Wednesday. Many other mid-term elections have already resulted in people being sworn in, such as Jean Quan who is the new mayor of Oakland. Mayor Quan is Oakland's first female mayor and Oakland's first Asian American mayor. Zennie62 (San Francisco Chronicle) reports Quan started the day with a walk from Chinatown through Oakland, and ending at the Fox Theater, where we are for the inauguration ceremonies. She held an inpromptu 'thank you' chat with supporters and onlookers in front of the Fox, and was joined by Assemblyman Sandre Swanson." Music notes. Aimee Mann will be doing a benefit concert Friday, January 21st at the Paradise Rock Club in Boston for drummer John Sands. Sarah Marie Pittman (Pollstar) has more information here. Aimee will also be performing in the benefit for children at Carnegie Hall February 10th (The Music of Neil Young) along with Cowboy Junkies, Peter Yorn, Bettye LaVette, Shawn Colvin, J Mascis, Joan Osborne, The Roots and others. iraq cnn afp xinhua tang danlu the los angeles times ned parker raheem salman the daily star may akl the toledeo blade abc the guardian martin chulov the telegraph of london richard spencer anne barker the independent mark seddon al jazeera rawya rageh mcclatchy newspapers shashank bengali sahar issa npr all things considered anne garrels houzan mahmoud spark newspaper

10 Best DVDs of 2010

Ann and Stan, teaming up again to look back on 2010 in DVDs.



1) (tie) "The Hurt Locker" and "Avatar" -- the two films of 2009 came out on DVD in 2010. These are the bookends, two directors -- Kathryn Bigelow and James Cameron -- working at the top of their craft.




3) "The Kids Are All Right." Lisa Cholondenko directed and co-wrote this film which has the sort of life that's been missing from the screen since "Flirting With Disaster." Annette Bening and Julianne Moore head up the cast as a happy couple with two teenage children, one of whom wants to meet his biological father which sets off all that follows. And that father? Played by 2010's DVD MVP Mark Ruffalo. Rufalo was one of the few bright spots (Mark Wahlberg was another) in the dreary "Date Night" and he was second only to DiCaprio in "Shutter Island." But it was in this film that he really got to strut his stuff and show how he's quickly become the best actor of his generation. And Bening and Moore are at the top of their game as well.




4) "Salt." The best action film of the year. Angelina Jolie plays Evelyn Salt -- a CIA agent who may be a Russian mole. And she's got everyone after her. You know she's going to kick butt, the fun is in figuring out just how. Not since Sigourney Weaver have American films had such a believable action heroine.

5) "The Blind Side." A moving film with strong performances and none stronger than Sandra Bullock's. Hopefully, enough time has passed so that we can let her performance speak for itself and not get distracted by the personal obstacles she had to overcome after receiving her Best Actress award at the Academy Awards.




6) "Tetro." Fathering one of the country's most talented directors, Sofia Coppola, doesn't appear to have thrown the master, Francis Ford Coppola, into a panic. Instead, he appears reborn with this moody and intense study of two brothers (Vincent Gallo and Alden Ehrenreich).

7) "Zombieland." If you're like us, this is one of those films you repeatedly avoided thinking you'd come back to it when there was nothing else left. If that's how you played it, you were, no doubt, as surprised as we were when you finally watched this one and realized it was an instant classic. Woody Harrelson has never been so good onscreen (and that's including his amazing performance in 2007's "The Walker").

8) "Shutter Island" -- starting with the classic film "Goodfellas," Robert DeNero became parsley in Martin Scorsese films -- so much so that his absence for over a decade and a half hasn't even registered. Leonardo DiCaprio has been Scorsese's alter-ego on film and it's given the films new life. "Shutter Island" is spooky and and haunting and unlike anything we normally expect from "Mean Streets" Scorsese proving that, unlike many peers, he hasn't ripened and been reduced to self-parody.



9) "Dear John" -- There aren't a lot of good weepy films. There's "Splendor in the Grass," "Dr. Zhivago," "The Way We Were" and, for the most part, just a lot of wanna-bes. So this Channing Tatum and Amanda Seyfried film wasn't one we were expecting much from, even with Lasse Hallstrom directing. Like all good love stories, you end up wishing the leads weren't so damn noble but that's what makes it so poignant. One of 2010's most underrated films.

10) "Inception." With a story too similar to John Woo's "Paycheck" and a cast whose best scenes feel like they were left on the cutting room floor, the only thing "Inception" has going for it is the look. We still think that's strong enough for it to land at number 10.

Going out with C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"

Thursday, December 30, 2010. Chaos and violence continue, Iraqi Christians continue to be targeted, Kurdistan beefs up security ahead of New Year's Eve, IVAW announces a February event, and more. December 25th, KRG President Masoud Barzani issued the following statement, "I would like to reiterate the importance of peaceful co-existence and religious tolerance in Iraq and call on the federal government to make the protection of Christians and religious sites a priority. We will always defend the rights of the Christian community and we repeat that the Kurdistan Region is open to embrace the displaced Christians." It's a fairly clear statement. And Christmas did take place, was publicly celebrated in the KRG. They beefed up security, there were no known attacks on Iraqi Christians. Nathan Deuel (Daily Beast) reported from Erbil, "It's Christmas morning in northern Iraq, and the parishioners of St. Joseph's Church are emerging from their homes into the bright desert sunlight. With two Iraqi friends, I drive along narrow avenues decorated with twinkling lights and the occasional inflatable Santa. We pass a clutch of men wearing bright sweaters, pressed slacks, and loafters. A trio of women breaks into tight smiles; one is wearing a red skirt with a band of white snowflakes. We round the corner, and we're surprised to see that a shimmering tanker truck is blocking the road to the church. Frowning men in uniform wave their arms. As one of the largest Christian centers of worship in Erbil, the capital of the Kurdish autonomous zone in northern Iraq, the church is a potential target. We're urged to park down the block. But high security is better than nothing at all." How is Barzani able to do to that over three provinces and Nouri can't even secure the city of Baghdad? In what world does that make sense? Janet Ritz (Huffington Post) interviewed Qubad Talabani, the KRG's US representative and the son of Iraqi President Jalal Talabani. Excerpt: In Iraqi Kurdistan, nationalism is the common belief in a distinctly pluralistic society where the Kurds have opened their gates to Iraqi Christians seeking refuge from extremist violence. "We've had this welcoming policy [to Iraqi Christians];" Mr. Talabani explains; "we've probably settled in Kurdistan 12,000 to 15,000 Christian families and, regrettably, hundreds of thousands have left Iraq altogether. Those who've chosen not to leave Iraq have resettled in Kurdistan." They've shown the same tolerance toward other religious minorities. Problems, when they do arise, are cultural in nature. Mr. Talabani was candid about the challenges faced by women in their rural regions, with crimes of honor killings and female genital mutilation, on which, he said, Kurdistan, unlike other parts of the Middle East, reports and has begun work to stop. It won't be easy. In the male dominated culture that exists in the rural areas, he points out that it will take religious leaders and village elders to change the practices. There's been some progress in those efforts, including a statement by the Kurdish Islamic authority to condemn the practices, but, as he said, "we can't shy away" from the problem. There's more work to be done. Long targeted throughout the endless and illegal Iraq War, Iraqi Christians have faced a new wave of persecution which began October 31st with the attack on Our Lady of Salvation Church in Baghdad. Attacks have continued in Baghdad and Mosul forcing many Iraqis to flee. Some have gone to the KRG, others have left the country. J. Lee Grady (Charisma) looks back at the "Top Spiritual Trends of 2010" and notes, "The Open Doors organization says the 'religicide' of Christians in Iraq today is similar to what happened to Iraqi Jews in 1941." Maria Mackay (Christian Today) reports: Barnabas Fund recently received a letter from an Iraqi archbishop warning that Christians were too afraid to leave their homes. The very real threat of being killed in broad daylight is making it difficult to do the very practical things like shopping and, more importantly, going to work. The international director of Barnabas Fund, Dr Patrick Sookhdeo, said: "It is like living in a prison camp. You could leave the house but you don't know what is going to happen. Because of the targeted attacks, there is a chance that Christians venturing out to work or onto the streets will be attacked or killed. The fear is effectively leaving Christians stranded in their homes." Sunday AFP reported, "Iraqi Christians who survived the deadly storming of a Baghdad church attended a special Christmas mass on Sunday in France, where they were evacuated following the attack. [. . . Elish] Yako said at least five of the wounded have returned from France to Iraq and six are still in hospital, while others have applied for asylum. France has said it also plans a second evacuation flight for a further 93 Christians." Nick Vinocur (Reuters) reports on the sour grapes of Iraqi Refugee Assistance Project (the lack of leadership currently at that organization was never more obvious) and the UNHCR over France taking in victims ofthe October 31st attack. The two go down to the whine cellar and emerge with a chardonnay of green-eyed bitchery. Bitter Becca Heller, IRAP, whines that it's just not fair to everyone that France took in Iraqi Christians. Grow the hell up. A spectacular attack on a house of worship resulted in France offering medical help and asylum. It's not at all surprising, it's not 'discriminatory' towards others. It was spectacular attack like nothing anyone was prepared for or expected. France's offer was not at all different from those reaching out to the victims of Hurricane Katrina. Little whiny asses need to stop their carping. Instead of whining over what someone else did, maybe the two organizations might try doing something of their own. Because what the world's seeing is the United Nations repeatedly stating that it is not safe to return to Iraq but unble to halt the forced deportations of Iraqi refugees in Europe back to Iraq. And IRAP? The US-based organization has had no impact on US policies. So instead of whining over what the government of France did -- a noble thing to reach out to any community after an attack -- the two organizations might try sobering up, rolling up their sleeves and getting to work on a real issue. Monday Reuters reported a Dujail roadside bombing claimed the life of 1 "Christian woman and wounded her husband." That alone makes Becca Heller and company look like idiots but why stamp a fool with "IDIOT" on the forehead just once when you can do so repeatedly? BBC News reports that Baghdad was slammed with bombings targeting the homes of Iraqi Christians today leaving 2 people dead and fourteen wounded. Michael Christie and Matthew Jones (Reuters) note the number injured has risen to "at least 16" and note "Iraqi Christian leaders say they fear Sunni Islamist al Qaeda wants to drive them out of the country." David Batty (Guardian) offers this perspective, "The grenade and bomb attacks came a week after Islamist militants linked to al-Qaida threatened a wave of violence against Iraq's beleaguered Christian community." Xinhua adds, "The attacks occurred in different parts of Baghdad at night, the first roadside bomb exploded near the house of a Christian in the Ghadeer neighborhood southeast Baghdad, killing two and wounding three, the source told Xinhua on condition of anonymity. Al Jazeera notes, "Al Jazeera's Rawya Rageh reports from Baghdad that the ten explosions took place outside as well as in the yards of Christian homes across Baghdad. She said the attacks were 'not simultaneous but clearly appeared to be coordinated'. The attackers used a combination of grenades and simple homemade bombs. In at least two cases, police arriving on the scene found additional unexploded bombs." Jacques Clement (AFP) reports, "The attacks started at 7:30 pm and continued over two hours in six different parts of the capital as the Christian community still reels from a massacre at a Baghdad cathedral on October 31 in which 44 worshippers and two priests died." BBC News provides this analysis: "The BBC's Jim Muir in Baghdad said the bombs were not big by Baghdad standards, but the message was clear. He says that the Islamic militant group affiliated to al-Qaeda which said it carried out the deadly attacks in October had warned that there would be more to come." John Leland and Omar al-Jawoshy (New York Times) quote Noor Isam stating, "We will love Iraq forever, but we have to leave it immediately to survive. I would ask the government, 'Where is the promised security for Christians'?" Yeah, where is that security? Why is it so difficult for Nouri to deliver on what he promised? Especially when Baghdad's been walled off into sections and checkpoints? (Checkpoints Nouri's considering eliminating.) In other violence, Reuters notes a Baghdad rocket attack left three people injured and that 1 man was shot dead at his Kirkuk home. Yesterday, Saman Basharati (Rudaw) reports that 1,000 peshmerga (Kurdish forces) have been sent to the city due to rumors "of a military coup" and "This is the first time since 2003 that a top Kurdish official has acknowledged the threat to Kurdish politicians of a military coup." Today Shamal Aqrawi (Reuters) reports that security is being beefed up in Kurdistan ahead of New Year's Eve out of concern that attacks may be planned, " It remained an oasis of relative calm while the rest of Iraq descended into sectarian bloodshed after the 2003 U.S.-led invasion. There are few blast walls protecting buildings from bomb attacks and residents can stay out after dark and frequent restaurants and clubs. It has become a gateway to investing in Iraq, with shopping centres, hotels and a booming real estate sector." Meanwhile the conflicts between Iraq's neighbors Iran and Saudi Arabia continue as Iran's state-run outlet Press TV works overtime to encourage a Shi'ite - Arab split. Press TV reports that Fawzi Tarzi, a Moqtada al-Sadr acolate, is isnisting that Saudi Arabia supports terrorism in Iraq and quotes the Iraqi National Alliance's Mohammed Hussein stating, "We should seal our borders with Saudi Arabia to hold the flow of terrorism." And Iran's state-run media also serves up Wisam al-Bayati (link has text and video) with the assertion that Saudi Arabia is "snubbing" Iraq's government out of Baghdad because many in it are Shi'ite. For realities about Iraq, an upcoming Iraq Veterans Against the War event should provide many: 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) Meanwhile two papers weigh in that the US needs to leave Iraq. The editorial board of the Orange County Register argues, "We argued from the beginning, nearly eight years ago, that the invasion of Iraq was a mistake, and the prolonged U.S. occupation seems to have led to an Iraq that is more shaky than stable and has serious tolerance problems, leading, for example, to most Iraqi Christians fleeing the country. For better and for worse, however, it is time to allow Iraqis to handle these Iraqi problems. The U.S. should continue to withdraw troops on schedule and allow historians of the future to weigh the pluses and minuses of our misadventure in Iraq." The Pensacola News Journal's editorial board opines, "Frankly, we figure the future of Iraq lies in an increasingly authoritarian government that, while mild by Middle East dictatorship standards, will hopefully also be reasonably secular and relatively democratic. Meanwhile, the terrorists will continue to set off bombs, the Shiites and Sunnis will continue to scratch and claw for power, and the Kurds will try to stay out of it under independent governance. For the United States, the best outcome will be if Iraq keeps arm's-length from Iran and succeeds in greatly expanding oil exports, which frankly we believe was the point all along, no matter all the rhetoric we were spoon fed about spreading democracy, etc." "We want to end the war now!" hollered Barack Obama to the Cult of St. Barack at the many tent revivals during the 2008 Democratic Party primaries. He used double speak and made promises he had no intention of keeping -- as Samantha Power pointed out to the BBC in March of 2008 -- and he's become the War Hawk Supreme and fraudlent in so many ways. Peace Mom Cindy Sheehan examines who Barack allows redemption for and whom he refuses it to: I believe prisons should be rehabilitative and not punitive, but was justice served and did Michael Vick pay his debt to society for his horrendous crimes? Is he redeemed? Of course, what he did was heinous and inhumane and thinking about it fills me with disgust, but our president is not similarly conflicted. On Sunday, from Hawaii, Obama reportedly called Jeffrey Lurie, owner of the Eagles and huge donor to Barack Obama and other Democrats to "thank" him for giving Vick a "second chance." Hmmm -- "Second chances" are almost miraculous for some people and impossible for others. One similar call could take Mumia off of death row, or pardon railroaded defense attorney, Lynne Stewart, or get Pvt. Bradley Manning out of his inhumane imprisonment (this list could fill a book, I am afraid, so I'll stop now). Also, a study by the Independent Committee on Reentry and Employment, for example, found that up to 60% of ex-cons in New York was still unemployed one year after release. Stats on this are difficult to find, like most statistics on unemployment (which only count those that are receiving unemployment checks, or applying for them), but I am almost 100% sure that 100% of the 60% are not Michael Vicks or fictional, Gordon Gekkos, looking for multi-million dollar salary scores after incarceration. Most certainly, many of these "ex-cons" looking for work didn't commit as heinous of a crime as Vick did, either, but that's something we can only speculate on. Lastly Jeff Gates (at Dissident Voice) wonders why money continues to be poured into the wars when it could address energy needs: With the U.S. humbled in Iraq, mired in Afghanistan and in danger of being drawn into Iran, is it time to replace aggression with development and firepower with solar power? With extremism the new enemy, what's our best defense? What if the U.S. projected its power by defending against the indignities of energy poverty and illiteracy? Absent a strategy for addressing the roots of human indignity, it's not clear that the war on terrorism can be won. Energy poverty is a war we know how to win. Parents of children using solar-powered LED lights report how their grades improve when they have light for studying. While that's not enough, it's a good start. Can the U.S. afford not to embrace a solar defense? If not literacy, what is the best long-term defense against extremism? For $12, a solar-powered LED system can power a desk lamp and a phone charger. iraq the daily beast nathan deuel the huffington post janet ritz charisma j. lee grady christian today maria mackay reuters al jazeera rawya rageh the new york times john leland bbc news jim muir xinhua the orange county register the pensacola news journal press tv wisam al-bayati cindy sheehan