2 women, men

Today on the first hour of The Diane Rehm Show (NPR), the guests were Nadia Bilbassy, Richard Hass, Asma Magariaf , Fadel Lamen and James Kitfield. The second hour was Paul Starr.

And I have news that will delight a number of you. It's on the woman that you are calling "Fatty" in your e-mails. SO I will too.

Today Fatty made a point to ask me if I could get her some Black Mollys.

I'm so out of it, I thought they were like Lazy Suzannes. (And I've been planting the fall flowers and bushes at the house.) So I told her I wasn't familiar with those flowers.

They're speed. Prescribed diet pills.

Nope.

And then she says she's buying something called Skinny Tea. But --

Get this.

But if she hasn't lost at least four pounds by the end of the week, she's done with trying to lose weight.

Good, because she's actually put on weight. And even her girdle can't hold it in.

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

Thursday, October 20, 2011. Chaos and violence continue, Turkey continues to attack northern Iraq, US veterans get some good news, and we drop back to last week to examine a hearing that was nothing but bad news for veterans and for tax payers. We'll start with the good news for US veterans. Senator Patty Murray is the Chair of the Veterans Affairs Committee. Her office notes: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Murray Press Office Thursday, October 20, 2011 (202) 224-2834 Chairman Murray Passes Veterans Cost-of-Living Increase to Allow Veterans to Share in Critical Benefit Boost for the First Time in Two Years Murray's bill, which passed the Senate yesterday, would result in more money in the pockets of millions of veterans across the country (Washington, D.C.) -- Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray, Chairman of the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee, announced that a bill that she sponsored to provide a Cost-of-Living Adjustment (COLA) for America's veterans has passed the U.S. Senate. The COLA for veterans will match the 3.6 percent annual increase provided to Social Security recipients, which on Wednesday was announced will happen this year for the first time since 2009. The Veterans COLA would affect several important benefits, including veterans' disability compensation and dependency and indemnity compensation for surviving spouses and children. It is projected that over 3.9 million veterans and survivors will receive compensation benefits in Fiscal Year 2012. "A cost-of-living increase for our veterans is long overdue and well deserved," said Senator Murray. "Particularly in this difficult economy, our veterans deserve a boost in their benefits to help make ends meet. This is an important step for our veterans, especially on the heels of news that a COLA will be provided for the first time since 2009." The COLA is designed to offset inflation and other factors that lead to the rising cost of living over time. The COLA rate is based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index. ### Matt McAlvanah Communications Director U.S. Senator Patty Murray 202-224-2834 - press office 202--224-0228 - direct matt_mcalvanah@murray.senate.gov News Releases | Economic Resource Center | E-Mail Updates That's good news. Now we're enterting the bad news for veterans and tax payers stage. Reportedly coming off tired and bored yesterday, US President Barack Obama wrapped up his three day bus tour at the Joint Base Langley-Eustis in Virginia. Jennifer Epstein (POLITICO) reports he declaed, "Standing up for our veterans is not a Democratic responsibility or a Republican responsibility. It is an American responsibility." Would that the panderer in chief believed in standing up for veterans. Forget new things Barack wants to create, how about just doing what was promised? The VA has been a joke under Barack Obama and it continues to be. It's the sick joke that left veterans scrambling to pay for college and board when the VA program wasn't up and running -- as VA Secretary Eric Shinseki admitted, in an October 14, 2009 House Veterans Affairs Committee hearing, he knew there would be problems as far back as January 2009 when it came to the tuition payments. Erick Shinseki: A plan was written, very quickly put together, uh, very short timelines, I'm looking at the certifcates of elegibility uh being processed on 1 May and enrollments 6 July, checks having to flow through August. A very compressed timeframe. And in order to do that, we essentially began as I arrived in January, uh, putting together the plan -- reviewing the plan that was there and trying to validate it. I'll be frank, when I arrived, uh, there were a number of people telling me this was simply not executable. It wasn't going to happen. Three August was going to be here before we could have everything in place. Uh, to the credit of the folks in uh VA, I, uh, I consulted an outside consulatant, brought in an independent view, same kind of assessment. 'Unless you do some big things here, this is not possible.' To the credit of the folks, the good folks in VBA, they took it on and they went at it hard. We hired 530 people to do this and had to train them. We had a manual system that was computer assisted. Not very helpful but that's what they inherited. And we realized in about May that the 530 were probably a little short so we went and hired 230 more people. So in excess of 700 people were trained to use the tools that were coming together even as certificates were being executed. Uhm, we were short on the assumption of how many people it would take. We based our numbers on the Montgomery GI Bill which is about a 15 minute procedure. The uh chapter thirty-three procedures about an hour on average, maybe an hour and 15 minutes. So right off the bat, we had some issues with assumptions. Uh, we are still receiving certificates of enrollment. This week alone, we received 36,000 certificates of enrollment coming from schools who are working through the process and we put them into the execute of providing those checks -- three checks. He may have realized "in about May that the 530 were probably a little short" but "so we went and hired 250 more people" is incorrect in the way he presented. If you realize "in about May" that you need 250 more people, then you hire them and do so quickly because they need to be trained -- they especially need to be trained and on the job by August 3, 2009 when the US Treasury Department would be releasing the first payments. But as we learned in the June 25, 2009 House Veterans Affairs Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity hearing from VA's Keith Wilson, the 230 would be "on board by August 31, 2009." If you knew there was a problem "in about May" and 230 more employees were needed (in fact, many more than that would be needed) and you gave orders to fill those positions and train the people, you should have it all done by August 3rd when Treasury began sending out checks. That did not happen. The Subcomittee hearing? That day US House Rep Harry Teague filled in for Subcommittee Chair Stephanie Herseth Sandlin. Both of them as well as Ranking Member John Boozman repeatedly asked the VA, in one hearing after another, if the program would be ready and that they be kept informed of any potential problems. In that hearing, for example, Teague noted at the start, "It is important that we continue to provide the VA the opportunities to update the Subcommittee on their implementation effort for the short-term and long-term solutions. This hearing will also give the VA the opportunity to ask for Congressional assistiance if it is required." The VA did a sorry job, to put it mildly, and they also didn't keep Congress informed. Congress learned of the problems, after the program started, from the media. Heads should have roled over that including the head of the VA, Shinseki. Panderer-in-Chief Barack needs to start firing some people immediately. How is Shinseki still over the VA after the scandal at the Miami VA Medical Center in 2009? Or the continued problems at the Miami VA Medical Center? As was noted at the start of a hearing last week, the Miami facility was in "the spotlight" two years ago when "endoscopes were not reprocessed correctly, placing over two thousand veterans at risk of exposure to disease." The instruments were used and reused and not steralized from one patient to another. In other words, a needle exchange for intravaneous drug users treated people better and more safely than the Miami VA Medical Center did. Back in July, Fred Tasker (Miami Herald) reported that 5 veterans using the Miami, the Murfreesboro or the Augusta facilities had "tested positive for HIV, 25 for hepatitis C and eight for hepatitis B." That was the public safety scandal two years ago. You might think they'd get their house in order. But when you don't have a functioning head of the VA and you don't have a president who holds Cabinet heads accountable, you get one problem after another. Last Wednesday, October 12th, the House Veterans Affairs Committee held a hearing on the facility and its myriad of problems. The hearing was scheduled to begin at 10:00 a.m. If it started on time, I missed the first 90 minutes (I was at the Subcommittee on National Security, Homeland Defense and Foreign Operations hearing). Any reference to opening remarks in the hearing will be the prepared remarks. I walked in as a tooth-pulling exchange between the Chair and the director of the facility was taking place. One that was apparently characteristic of the hearing as evidenced by US House Rep Bill Johnson's comment immediately following the exchange that "Are -- I'm just curious are you -- are you astutely hearing the responses to the questions that this Committee is asking and some of the answers we're getting?" For those wondering here's part of the exchange immediately before Johnson spoke. Committee Chair Jeff Miller is speaking to Mary Berrocal who is the director of the Miami facility. Chair Jeff Miller: So would you know if a veteran had come to your facility with a particular disease return home and then expire the next day? Would you have anyway of knowing that? Mary Berrocal: Usually what happens is we -- Any deaths, we do review and there is -- Where indicated we do peer reviews, where the death is not expected, peer reviews are done and we -- Chair Jeff Miller: So there is a way that you would know if a veteran presented 24 hours prior to their death at your facility but was sent home? You would have a way of tracking that? Mary Berrocal: Every -- every morning, we get a report on, uh, on anything that is unusual that might have happened, uhm, on the evening before or the day before. We get a report every single morning. I meet with my leadership. Uh, the staff in the ER presents their information following that, you know, we stay with the leadership and discuss anything we might need to follow up on. Chair Jeff Miller: Is it unusual that a veteran would come to your facility, be dischaged -- not just discharged, but just be sent home, not admitted, and would pass away the next day? Would you consider that unusual? And if you do consider that unusual, is that something that you would report then to the VISN that this has occurred? Mary Berrocal: Uh, we would normally report deaths, uh, unexpected deaths to the network, yes. Chair Jeff Miller: So this particular, if an incident like this did occur, it would have been reported to the VISN? Mary Berrocal: It would be my expectation that it would be reported. If it's an unexpected death, there are reports that, uh, that go forward. Chair Jeff Miller: Regardless -- Mary Berrocal: Now we don't independently, like in an issue, report every single death if it's an expected death. Chair Jeff Miller: Regardless of what the peer review may have found, you would still report it? Mary Berrocal: Uh, the peer review's focus, uh, specifically on the provider to determine whether it was a, uh, uhm, something that didn't go the way it should go in that direction. Chair Jeff Miller: If a -- Mary Berrocal: So yes. Chair Jeff Miller: If a vet -- Okay, let's go inside the facility. Now we have somebody who has been admitted to the facility and is having surgery. If there is a death on the operating table, what would prevent that death from being reported to VISN? Mary Berrocal: Uh, those, uh, would be reported to the network. Chair Jeff Miller: All deaths on an operating table are reported -- Mary Berrocal: Are reported, should be reported. There's a system that we put through to report unexpected deaths. Chair Jeff Miller: All deaths on the operating table are reported to the VISN? Mary Berrocal: Yes, sir. Chair Jeff Miller: All deaths? Mary Berrocal: Unexpected deaths are reported. Chair Jeff Miller: There's a difference now: Unexpected deaths or deaths? If a patient dies on the operating table, is that reported regardless? Is that reported to the VISN? And if not, why not? Mary Berrocal: It would be my expectation that it would be reported. Chair Jeff Miller: Is there a root cause analysis on every death on the operating table? Mary Berrocal: There, uh, there would be, uh, a root cause analysis, again, if it's an unexpected death, there would be a root cause analysis -- Chair Jeff Miller: What would be an expected death on an operating table? Mary Berrocal: [Sighs.] Chair Jeff Miller: I would expect if I went in for surgery, you wouldn't expect me to die. You'd expect me to recover. Now what is an expected or an unexpected death? What is that? Mary Berrocal: Again, it's, you know, I'm not a clinician. Chair Jeff Miller: You're the director of the medical center. Mary Berrocal: Correct. Chair Jeff Miller: For now. Mary Berrocal: Not a clinician. I, uh -- I, uh, I am not a clinician, uh, but, uhm, I, uhm, I would expect that -- I-I would -- Any unexpected death would be something where, you know, if they, uhm, found something that they were not expecting to find. Uh, I, uh-uh, you know, I believe that, uh, any death would -- Chair Jeff Miller: Who makes the determination as to whether it's expected or unexpected? Mary Berrocal: [Long pause while she shakes her head repeatedly] There are systems in place to, uhm, to report, and we -- [a man hands her a note] and we've had, we've had a variety of -- of, uhm, of groups come and look and determine that we have done things appropriately. [Reading from card passed to her] All deaths are reported and they are investigated but not necesserarily through, uh, the RCA process. We do investigate, again, we do peer reviews to determine -- Chair Jeff Miller: Is a peer review punative? Mary Berrocal: Uh, it could lead to be. But, uh, not necessarily a peer review. There's a group of peers that review to see whether or not the care that was provided was adequate care. Chair Jeff Miller: So if everybody just decides that the care was adequate and that it was an expected death, you may not even report that to the VISN, right? Mary Berrocal: Then there's a committee that, uh, reviews after, there's a, uh, peer review, it goes to a committee and then a deterimination is made. There is -- There are rankings or scores that are provided determining whether or not it's a -- Chair Jeff Miller: Who makes the final determination as to whether or not it is sent to VISN? Mary Berrocal: They are sent to the VISN. The deaths are reported to the VISN. Chair Jeff Miller: All deaths? All of them? Is there ever a death that's not reported to the VISN. Mary Berrocal: Uhm, uh, we have, for example, deaths in the hospice, these would be expected, you know. Chair Jeff Miller: I'm talking about on the operating table. Mary Berrocal: I would expect -- Chair Jeff Miller: I'll let you think on that. Mr. Johnson? There are a number of developments that are questionable and speak to a lack of oversight from the VA. But let's note the scandal from two years ago. When you give someone AIDS because you are not cleaning your equipment, the head of the facility needs to go down with everyone else. That's Mary Berrocal. Hepatitis is nothing nice to have either but what took place under Berrocal's watch, grasp this, is going to result in big money pay outs (there's already one lawsuit seeking approximately 30 million dollars). And most jurors would vote (I certainly would) to award the victim the maximum amount of money. Grasp that Mary Berrocal is paying a penny in any settlements or law suits or anything. The screw ups at her facility cost the US tax payer. People have diseases they caught from Berrocal's facility because Berrocal didn't know how to supervise a facility. She shouldn't be running it. And grasp that she was removed from her position. Temporarily. Fred Tasker (Miami Herald) was reporting a year ago, "Mary Berrocal, director of the Miami Veterans Administration Healthcare System who was temporarily reassigned in July during a scandal in which thousands of South Florida veterans were given colonoscopies with improperly cleaned equipment, was back on the job Friday. It happened quietly. The announcement was made internally, without public notice. VA officials at the local, regional and national levels failed to return phone calls and e-mails seeking comment." They brought her back. And brought her back to leadership. After people were infected with diseases under her watch, she was put back in charge. Where is the leadership at the VA? And maybe Barack needs to get off his candy ass and demand Shinseki's resignation. Maybe then, the VA will realize that these actions are not acceptable, do not show leadership and are not what the veteran expects from a medical center or what the US tax payer considers work worth paying for. US House Rep Johnson noted a Fred Tasker Miami Herald article from last month: "Miami Veterans Administration hospital director Mary Berrocal and her former chief of staff, Dr. John Vara, should be disciplined for 'lack of oversight' that led to long delays in notifying 79 local veterans that they might have been infected with HIV or hepatitis through improperly performed colonoscopies at the hospital, a VA board has concluded." Johnson noted this information while questioning William Schoenhard (Deputy Under Secretary for Health for Operations and Management, Veterans Health Administration, VA). Johnson pointed out that the information in the article was only obtained via a Freedom of Information request and . . . US House Rep Bill Johnson: In documents submitted to us just last night, by the VA, only a draft unsigned and undated recommendation for action war provided and then 30 minutes before today's hearing a notice of admonishment was provided that was dated December of 2010 with no specific day. Can you clarify and explain this discrephancy and how that fits into your 'we're going to hold leadership accountable'? Yeah. William Schoenhard: Yes, sir. The AIB recommended administrative action. The one that I conveyned, the national AIB, after the second disclosure of the veteran who had not been contacted and found that there was reason to take administrative action against the medical director and the chief of staff. The way that works in VA then is that I shared that report with Mr. Weaver and he took the administrative action. He may want to speak to the process we use in VA and in government to US House Rep Bill Johnson: What administrative action was taken? William Schoenhard: An admonishment was issued against both these individuals. US House Rep Bill Johnson: A-a veteran escapes the facility and dies -- William Schoenhard: No, sir. This was taken predating this incident. US House Rep Bill Johnson: Okay. So this admonishment that came through the Miami Herald incident from a previous AIB, correct? Have I got this right? William Schoenhard: That's correct, sir. US House Rep Bill Johnson: Then the patient that escaped the center and subsequently committed suicide happened after that, correct? William Schoenhard: That's correct, sir. US House Rep Bill Johnson: Right. So, do you think the admonishment worked? William Schoenhard: I think -- US House Rep Bill Johnson: Next question. Can you provide to this Committee, Mr. Schoenhard or Mr. Weaver, a record of disciplinary actions from the Miami VAMC over the last 24 months? I would specifically like to see -- and with the Chairman's approval -- I would like to see the incident -- you don't have to give us names for privacy -- I would like to see the incident and the action and what level of leadership and management that action was taken against. Miss Berrocal, last week, one of your employees was arrested for selling names of veterans. In the past six years, it's estimated that more than 3,000 veterans' information has been sold. Have you alerted any veterans that their information may have been compromised and if so how have you done that? Mary Berrocal: Actually, this was an investigation that was done by the IG and it was a covert operation. I learned about it at the time shortly before they were going to be arresting the individual and at the time what we knew was there was more than one, there was information on 18 individuals that was compromised and then, uh, uh, on -- US House Rep Bill Johnson: Have those veterans been notified? Mary Berrocal: The, uh, the, uh, -- US House Rep Bill Johnson: Yes or no, have those veterans been notified? You talked earlier about a process for making sure that veterans are notified. I've heard that from various pieces of testimony this morning -- Mary Berrocal: We-we are in the process now of finding US House Rep Bill Johnson: So they have not been notified? When was the guy arrested? Mary Berrocal: Uh, this just happened in the last -- US House Rep Bill Johnson: And you didn't know anything about the investigation prior to his arrest? Mary Berrrocal: I knew that they were doing an investigation and that they had some concerns The individual -- US House Rep Bill Johnson: So prudent leadership would be poised and ready to act if the investigation proved out, right? That you would immediately begin to notify those veterans whose information had been compromised. And you're saying that as of today, there have still been no veterans notified? You're only in the process of? 18 veterans. How long does that take? I can make 18 phone calls in 30 minutes. Mary Berrocal: We have, uh, worked with our privacy officer to make sure that the, uh, information is done and, uhm, that we communicate to those veterans as we need to. US House Rep Bill Johnson: Okay and have they been communicated with? Mary Berrocal: I believe so. I -- US House Rep Bill Johnson: You believe so? Mary Berrocal: Yes, sir. US House Rep Bill Johnson: But you're not certain? Mary Berrocal: The 18 have been communicated. The individual in the case -- US House Rep Bill Johnson: A few minutes ago, you told me you were in the process of notifying them. Now you're saying that they have been notified? Mary Berrocal: We have communicated with the -- with the privacy officer whose -- US House Rep Bill Johnson: No, no, no. I'm not asking if you communicated with the privacy officer. Have the veterans whose information has been compromised been notified that there information has been compromised and sold by an employee under your direction? Mary Berrocal: I will have to get that information for you. US House Rep Bill Johnson: Okay. So now you don't know. First it was you've got a process. Then 'they have been notified.' And now you don't know. Mr. Schoenhard, if I'm the wing commander, I'm paying real close attention to these answers. Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Chair Jeff Miller: I can answer the question for you. According to AIG last night, they have not been contacted. Miller would go on to ask Berrocal about her decision to cancel the golf carts that took veterans to the facilities from the parking lot while at the same time she okayed renovations for her offices at a cost of two-and-a-half million dollars. She denied that was the case repeatedly. We'll make this the last excerpt but there's so much more (including US House Rep Phil Roe's questions -- Roe is also a doctor, he had spot on questions about Berrocal's behaviors and supervision). Chair Jeff Miller: Did you suspend golf cart service for the veterans in the parking lot? Mary Berrocal: Uh, we did, uh, in the parking lot, we did suspend the, uh, that, uh, service. We, uhm, what we did, uh, was when -- Chair Jeff Miller: That's all. I just wanted to know if you did. You did. Now how did you deterimine that the current office renovations of approximately a million dollars to your executive suite wasn't sufficient and that two-and-a-half million dollars was more important than golf cart escorts for the veterans trying to come into your facility? Mary Berrocal: S-s-sir, I would have to get back to you on that, uh -- Chair Jeff Miller: Well what's more important? Your office or golf carts for the veterans to get to the hospital? Mary Berrocal: I would always put the veteran first, sir. Chair Jeff Miller: But you cancelled the golf cart. Mary Berrocal: Uh, the golf cart, uh, issue was, uh, cancelled during this year. I-I would have to look at the information that, uh, that, uh, you are giving me about the, uh, renovations. But -- Chair Jeff Miller: Have you renovated your offices? Mary Berrocal: My office is not renovated. Chair Jeff Miller: Are you going to be renovating your offices? Mary Berrocal: The-the -- What we've done with the office is we've painted the -- painted -- I would have to look at the information that you -- that you have on hand. Chair Jeff Miller: Are you going to be renovating your offices? Mary Berrocal: No, sir. Chair Jeff Miller: Okay. So if I produced a contract, executed, that said you were, would you change your answer? Mary Berrocal: I really would need to see what, uh, I really would need to see what -- Chair Jeff Miller: We'll produce it for you. We'll show it to you. You are. You've contracted for that to be done. I just think it's egregious that you would stop golf carts from escorting veterans to the front door but you would sign a contract -- or somebody would sign a contract -- to expand the executive offices. Doesn't that sound odd? Mary Berrocal: Yes, sir. There is no excuse for this nonsense. It reflect poorly on the VA, it reflects poorly on the White House. But has Barack done a thing? No. It's a failure of leadership and the failure goes to the top of the VA all the way to the White House. And Mary Berrocal's excuse for the additional $24,000 spent (tax payer money) on replacing locks because she's "currently raising a 9-year-old grandson" has to be one of the great howlers of Congressional testimony. Yesterday, Turkey entered Iraq with the intent of assaulting PKK or suspected PKK. Patrick J. McDonnell (Los Angeles Times) reports "The Turkish offensive across the Iraqi border included helicopter gunships, ground commandos and fighter jets, authorities said." Kelly McEvers (NPR's All Things Considered, link has text and audio) notes, "The conflict that began in 1984 has left tens of thousands dead. The Turkish government and Kurdish separatists have been going back and forth between attempts at reconciliation and violence in the past few years. The most recent spate of attacks escalated over the summer. One roadside bomb this week killed policemen, civilians and a four-year-old girl." Today's Zaman notes, "Nechirvan Barzani, the number two of the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) and a former prime minister of the Kurdish regional administration in northern Iraq, arrived in Ankara on Thursday to express solidarity and cooperation with Turkey in its fight against the terrorist Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK)." Aswat al-Iraq reports: The Kurdish Analyst, Ribin Rassoul, had stated to Aswat al-Iraq news agency that "the Iraqi government won't have a firm response towards the Turkish invasion." "The reason for such position is that the Iraqi government had failed to interact with the Turkish dossier and its position towards the PKK and the loss of trust among Iraqi political forces and weakness of the government to take a military attitude to protect the Iraqi soil," he stressed. On the other hand, Rassoul said that the "Central government and the Kurdistan Region's government have failed to expel the PKK forces, even if they wanted to do that." "The Iranians had reached a decision to settle their problem with the Kurds and reached an agreement with the anti-Tehran PJAK party, adding that the problem of PKK is a Turkish problem and not an Iraqi problem, that must settled by Turkey," he said. Hurriyet reports that "10,000 elite Turkish soldiers" have entered Iraq "backed by fighter jets, helicopters, gunships and suveillance aircraft." Justin Vela (Independent) adds, "It was Turkey's largest such offensive since February 2008, when thousands of ground forces staged a weeklong offensive into Iraq on snow-covered mountains." Al Sabaah reports MP Mahmoud Othman (Head of the Kurdistan Alliance) states that the solution to the issue is not in Baghdad or Erbil but in Ankara (Turkish capitol) and he also states that the US has been providing negative encouragement to Turkey which I will say (he's not saying this) is basically egging them on when they should be providing a calm voice and addressing the issues. Otherwise, we'll be reading about Turkey and the PKK for decades. The issue is the disenfranchisement of Kurds within Turkey. Until that's addressed, nothing's going to change. Al Mada notes the Turkish military's months of bombing the villages in northern Iraq's mountains and the fact that the people there denied the PKK were present but the bombings continued and women and children were harmed, farms went up in flames and people were displaced as a result. (The PKK has base camps in the mountains -- not villages, the Turkish military should have known -- even without the US intelligence provided -- what was a village and what was a base camp. The Times of London reported on these camps, with photographs -- and visited them -- repeatedly.) Turning to the topic of the US military remaining in Iraq beyond 2011, Aswat al-Iraq reports Moqtada al-Sadr is stating that they should not remain even as trainers. Yes, this is a reversal from his reported remarks yesterday. Dar Addustour notes that US Vice President Joe Biden is supposed to be visiting Iraq shortly for discussions regarding US troops. Iraqi government spokesperson Naseer al-Ani is cited stating that the request for trainers will not come with any immunity and that is the only offer in play. al-Ani denies rumors of a secret pact. Dar Addustour also notes that US Ambassador to Iraq held discussions in Kirkuk on post-2011 issues. In reported violence, Aswat al-Iraq notes, "A US Army patrol has come under an explosive charge blast west of Kut, the center of southern Iraq Province of Wassit on Wednesday night, but losses were not known, a Wassit Police source reported on Thursday." We'll close with this from the office of US Senator Jon Tester: Senator requests information and better accountability to protect U.S. taxpayers Tuesday, October 18, 2011 (U.S. SENATE) -- Senator Jon Tester is raising a red flag about costly and unsustainable reconstruction projects in Iraq and Afghanistan and demanding more scrutiny over taxpayer-funded contracting projects in war zones. The Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan recently found that waste, fraud and abuse cost taxpayers one-third of the $206 billion spent on contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan. In a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, Tester today requested more examination, information and "appropriate action" on efforts to protect taxpayer dollars and to better address the sustainability of reconstruction projects. "It is clear that U.S. officials are not closely scrutinizing projects for sustainability," Tester wrote. "Not only are these projects wasteful, but they complicate our military and diplomatic efforts and undermine our ability to build trust and goodwill with locals on the ground." Tester pointed to several examples of potentially wasted spending -- and how those funds could make a difference in Montana. For instance, the United States spent $35 billion to train the Afghan Security Forces. Yet "the VA continues to lack the resources to reach all of our veterans." Tester also noted that American taxpayers paid $277 million for a water-treatment plant that remains unused in Iraq while two vital water infrastructure projects in Montana sit unfinished due to a lack of funding. "For constituents struggling to make ends meet, this is a bitter pill to swallow," Tester wrote. "I request that you examine both completed and current projects for risk of sustainment failure and take appropriate action on those projects with no credible prospect of being sustained. It is long past time that we bring real change to the way our government does business with contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan." Tester cosponsored legislation to establish the Wartime Contracting Commission in 2007. At a recent hearing on the Commission's findings, he pushed for serious changes in how the United States uses wartime contractors like Xe, formerly known as Blackwater. Tester also recently called for the removal of U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of 2011, noting that the war's price tag is approaching $1 trillion. Tester's letter to Clinton and Panetta appears online HERE. iraq the los angeles times patrick j. mcdonnell npr all things considered kelly mcevers todays zaman aswat al-iraq al sabaah al mada dar addustour

3 men, 2 women

Today on The Diane Rehm Show, the guests the first hour were Mark Batshaw, Claudia Gold, Rick Ostrander and Mark Wolraich. The second hour was Jill Abramson.

Now for what really matters. Ever since I wrote about how there's a rude woman at work who insults my friend and, while my friend has lost a lot of weight, pretends that is not the case.

If you've seen "Norbitt," you know the character Rasputia. Well that woman at work is like Rasputia. Always going on about how beautiful she is when, honestly, she's not all that.

She's managed to hook a married man for whatever little free time he has left when not with his wife and two daughters. So she feels she's just gorgeous.

As I told you, we last spoke to her in the women's room and saw that she was wearing a girdle. All that talk about weight loss -- that I really couldn't see -- and she's pulling it in with a girdle.

And now?

I bumped into her tonight at the grocery store. And finally have some more to offer. She'd apparently come from sitting on the weight bench at the gym at work, apparently went straight from there to the grocery store. And she was wearing a sweat suit and no girlde. Her stomach was like a 9 month pregnant woman. So that girdle does do some good. It makes her look only six or seven months pregnant.

So I took a picture of her with my cell phone and e-mailed it to my friend knowing she'd get a laugh out of it.

I really, seeing her in the sweat suit, with that supreme gut, could not believe that she had the nerve to insult my friend. (Who's lost another ten pounds since I wrote and looks incredible.)

I'm staying off the scale so I have no idea how much I'm losing. I've lost two inches from the hips, however. An excuse to buy some new clothes, right?

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

Wednesday, October 18, 2011. Chaos and violence continue, Turkish forces enter Iraq, the press plays the blame game, the US Defense Dept identifies the fallen, Nouri thinks Iraq needs to educate other countries about how to run elections, and more. We'll start with Youchi because I'm never fond of reporters who blame a people. Blame the press -- a very powerful organ -- or blame a country's government, no problem. But to blanket blame a people? Youchi J. Dreaen (National Journal via The Atlantic) reads his Israeli press (we will come back to that) and wants to huff: In the years since their capture in Afghanistan and Iraq, U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl and Army Staff Sgt. Ahmed Altaie have been largely forgotten by both Washington and the American public. There have been no protests demanding the government make whatever concessions necessary to win their release. Most Americans don't even know their names. The situation in Israel, one of America's closest allies, could not be more different. The Jewish state held a national celebration on Tuesday following the safe return of Gilad Shalit, a young soldier freed in exchange for the release of more than 1,000 Palestinian prisoners. Shalit had become a household name in Israel, where pop stars composed songs honoring Shalit and hundreds of thousands of Israelis regularly demonstrated to pressure the government to strike a deal with his captors. We don't cover the Afghanistan War. So that takes away Bowe Bergdahl who, hopefully for his family, is safe and will make it home soon. We do cover the Iraq War. There are numerous reasons Ahmed Altaie is not known widely in the US. For example, the press doesn't care about the issue. I checked with three friends at the White House, Barack Obama -- sworn in nearly three years ago -- has never once been asked about Ahmed Altaie. Has his name came in any White House press briefings since Barack was sworn in (January 2009)? I was told "no" to that as well. "No" on both, not "rarely" as Yochi writes (which probably means he did a search on his own, didn't find anything but decided to use "rarely" just in case he missed a mention in his research.) Maybe Yochi might want to learn to point the first finger at his professionf and not at the American people? Second of all, Altaie was not captured in battle. (A) He elected to marry an Iraqi woman (he was born in Iraq and the family moved -- first to England -- when he was still a child) after the Iraq War started -- which would be a no-no for him. Some try to say, the marriage took place in February of 2005 -- no supporting documents have yet been provided to the media or public for that claim. And some insist that's fine and dandy because he didn't arrive in Iraq until November 2005. He already his orders by February and the war started in 2003. And the military code of conduct is clear on this. It's among the reasons he doesn't garner a great deal of sympathy from those in the ranks. (B) Once serving in Iraq, while men and women were without their spouses or loved ones, he was sneaking off base without telling his commanders and rushing off to his wife and her family in Baghdad. Again, a no-no. (C) While sneaking off on a visit in October of 2006 (and out of uniform, of course) he was apparently abducted. (As explained by his brother-in-law who was apparently kidnapped with him and the brother-in-law was let go for some unknown reason.) This was news for a day or so and then the media lost interest as it was learned that the possibly kidnapped soldier was sneaking off to see his wife. None of that makes him a 'bad' person. But it goes a long way towards explaining why many Americans who are aware of the case aren't that interested. (We've noted him twice this year alone.) And you can be sure that if Gilad Shalit had been an Israeli soldier who married a Palestinian woman and was captured or kidnapped while sneaking off to visit her, he wouldn't be receiving the hero's welcome that he did. Yochi wants to blame America while comparing an egg to an orange and pretending they are the same thing. Yochi wants to also pretend he cares about Staff Sgt Ahmed Altaie. But what we just went over, how he married an Iraqi woman living in Baghdad, how he snuck away to visit her while stationed in Baghdad, how he may have been kidnapped while he was attempting to sneak off and visit her yet again, it's really not acknowledged in the story by Yochi reducing it to a single sentence: "Altaie was married to an Iraqi woman and may have broken military policies by leaving his post to visit her shortly before his abduction." Shortly before. That's where he was enroute he was abducted, per his own brother-in-law. If Youchi truly cares about this missing US soldier, one would assume, he'd make the time to truly explain how he disappeared. Of course doing so might interfere with his ability to tsk-tsk at Americans because there are readers who would think, "He didn't disappear in the line of duty, he snuck off, to see a wife he shouldn't have had per the military code and he changed into Baghdad-garb (out of his US soldier uniform) to blend in and didn't tell his supervisors what he was doing and while everyone in his unit was serving in a war zone, he was visiting his wife and eating with his in-laws." And a lot of those people are not going to be sympathetic to the story as a result. (Yochi does discover the press in the equation when it comes to another POW/MIA, Keith Maupin, who was discovered dead four years after he was captured in 2004, for PFC Maupin, Yochi does acknowledge that there was "only minimal press coverage.") Yochi wants to insist, "In the U.S., most Americans have no firsthand connection to the all-volunteer military, whose bases are located outside major cities and whose troops are largely invisible to the general public." We do the Iraq snapshot, not the Afghanistan one so, again, we'll leave Berdahl to some other site. But, no, that's not the issue. After the Iraq War started, a US soldier (originally from Iraq) elected to marry an Iraqi woman (that he had supposedly not seen since childhood if then). He did not disclose that to his command despite the fact that he had orders to go to Iraq before he entered that marriage, he did not disclose his marriage to his command despite the fact that he was stationed in Baghdad where his wife and her family lived. While serving, he made regular trips (according to his in-laws) to visit his wife and her family, eating with them often. It was so regular that the brother-in-law grew alarmed that some militants/resistance might target him for kidnapping. That's all in the public record. And, pointing it out one more time, when you marry the side that your country is presumably fighting, you lose a lot in the sympathy factor. Right or wrong, that's how it works. A US GI marrying a German woman in Berlin in the midst of WWII would not have received a great deal of sympathy if he'd become a POW. Also worthy of note, when a government releases 1,000 prisoners to have 1 prisoner returned, you better believe the media in the country knows to play up the one returned as a major event. Moving along . . . Turkey continues attacking northern Iraq and, for years now, Turkish war planes have been bombing northern Iraq. The latest wave of attacks started August 17th. This morning Aswat al-Iraq reported, "Kurdish Workers Party announced today that the Turkish forces continued their military concentration on the northern Iraqi borders with Turkey. The source told Aswat al-Iraq that the Turkish forces have been gathering ranks since yesterday." Daniel Dombey and Funja Guler (Financial Times of London) notes, "Turkey has vowed to wreak 'great revenge' on Kurdish militants for the deaths of 26 policemen and soldiers on Wednesday as tension increases in both the south-east of the country and neighbouring northern Iraq." Citing Turkish military sources, Reuters reported that Turkish planes are bombing nothern Iraq and that Turkish helicopters are depositing "Turkish commandos" in Iraq. PRI's The World offers footage of Turkish forces entering Iraq. Sebnem Arsu (New York Times) adds, "NTV, a private television network, said 600 Turkish ground troops chasing the attackers pushed 2.5 miles into northern Iraq". Marc Champion (Wall St. Journal) reports, "Some 200 PKK fighters attacked military posts in Hakkari province, near the Turkish borders with Iraq and Iran, said a PKK spokesman, contacted by phone in northern Iraq. The attacks began at 1 a.m. and ended around 5 a.m. after fierce gun battles, some of which were captured on video by Turkey's Dogan News Agency." Sahar Issa and Ipek Yezdani (McClatchy Newspapers) report, "Iraqi government officials raised no immediate objection to the Turkish incursion, and Turkish officials promised tougher action aimed at the Kurdish Worker's party (PKK) rebels." Seyhmus Cakan (Reuters) offers, "Yet as winter snows approach, many doubt the second-biggest military in NATO can rout some 4,000 PKK fighters dug in at camps in Iraq, not least while Iraqi Kurds' own seasoned foreign guerrilla forces retain their ambivalance between solidarity with ethnic kin and building trade with a powerful neighbor." Kelly McEvers is back in Iraq and files a report for NPR's All Things Considered. (I'm sure it's wonderful, I haven't listened to it yet. An NPR friend asked for the link. Good to know Kelly' McEvers is back in Baghdad. Hopefully NPR can provide her with air time. I'll most lilkely note the report in tomorrow's snapshot in some manner.) BBC News quotes Tukey's President Abdullah Gul swearing, "No-one should forget that those who make us suffer this pain will be made to suffer even stronger. They will see that the vengeance for these attacks will be great." I think the Kurds of Turkey are very familiar with what the government's vengeance looks like -- having lived under it for years. Dan Zak (Washington Post) quotes PKK leader Duzdan Hammo stating, "Turkish forces have provoked our fighters to conduct attacks. There is still a lot of heavy shelling on the border." Zak also notes KRG President Massoud Barzani issued a statement -- we'll quote that in full: At a time when efforts are being made to find peaceful solutions to the Kurdish question in Turkey, it's very unfortunate that today 24 members of the Turkish forces were killed by an armed group in the Hakari area. We strongly condemn this criminal act and publicly state that this action is first and foremost against the interests of the people of Kurdistan. We call for an immediate end to these attacks and we reiterate our position that violence and conflict are not a solution. That was one of many statements issued on the matter. Today's Zaman notes, "Ria Oomen-Ruijten, European Parliament's rapporteur on Turkey, has said every country had a right to defend itself and its citizens as she commented on Turkey's incursion in northern Iraq following the latest attack by the terrorist Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) that killed 24 troops and injured 18 others." Deutsche Welle adds, "Support for Turkey has poured in from the international community" and notes, among others, Germany's Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle and US President Barack Obama. France's Foreign Affairs Ministry issued the following: France condemns, with the utmost severity, the attacks made by the PKK terrorist movement on military posts in South East Turkey.These caused the death of 26 Turkish soldiers, with at least further 18 wounded. This was in addition to the attacks in Bitlis the previous day, with 8 dead. France expresses her fullest soldiarity with the Turkish authorities and her deepest sympathy for the families of the victims in this time of grief. The terrorist attacks of the last few days only strengthen the determination of France to stand alongside Turkey in fighting against terrorism -- and in supporting its efforts to achieve a political solution to the Kurdish question. France reiterates her appeal to the elected representatives of the Turkish populations of Kurdish origin, to clearly establish their distance from PKK terrorist violence. The US State Dept issued the following from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton: The United States condemns in the strongest possible terms the recent attacks by the PKK in Turkey's Hakkari province. I join President Obama in offering our deepest condolences to the families and loved ones of all those killed and injured in this tragedy. We will continue our strong cooperation with Turkey as we work to combat violent extremism in all its forms and safeguard the security of peace-loving people everywhere. If you're thinking that and other outpourings of sympathy meant a damn thing to the Turkish government, think again. Deutsche Welle reports that the government responded to the statements by blaming Europe (yet again, as DW notes) and declaring "true friendship cannot be measured solely by sincerity, and now we expect more than ever from our friends. EU member states can no longer accept the PKK's terror without doing anything about it." It's everyone's fault, proclaims the Turkish government -- the same government that refuses to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide. 1.5 million Armenians killed because they were Armenian, targeted solely for that reason, and the Turkish government denies it to this day. Back in March of 2009, Sabrina Tavernise (New York Times) reported: "According to a long-hidden document that belonged to the interior minister of the Ottoman Empire, 972,000 Ottoman Armenians disappeared from official population records from 1915 through 1916. In Turkey, any discussion of what happened to the Ottoman Armenians can bring a storm of public outrage. But since its publication in a book in January, the number -- and its Ottoman source -- has gone virtually unmentioned. Newspapers hardly wrote about it. Television shows have not discussed it." And although that was back in WWI, never forget how the current government responds to the genocide. Not just by denial but with modern day threats. BBC News reported last year that Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan was threatening to throw 100,000 Amenians out of Turkey and making insulting comments leading the Armenian Prime Minister Tigran Sarkisian to declare, "These kinds of political statements do not help to improve relations between our two states. When the Turkish prime minister allows himself to make such statements it immediately for us brings up memories of the events of 1915." Damien McElroy (Telegraph of London) quoted Armenian MP Hrayr Karapetyan declaring, "The statement once again proves that there is an Armenian genocide threat in present Turkey, thus world community should pressurise Ankara to recognise [the] genocide." Possibly if Erdogan and the current government could stop living in denial and threatening other governments over a very real genocide nearly 100 years ago, they could also learn to reach out to other communities the Turkish government has persecuted through the years? That might be the only thing that would ensure peace for the country. If you doubt that the attitude is part of the problem, refer to this analysis by Deutsche Welle of how a 2009 peace quickly fell apart. From an academic standpoint, the PKK has nothing and therefore no reason to cease and desist. The Kurds -- which is more than PKK members -- are the largest minority without a homeland. The persecution by the Turkish government created the PKK and the recent decision that Kurds in Turkey could have the 'right' to speak Kurdish (in some areas and public places) and that they could have a TV station that broadcasts in Kurdish is less than scraps. In addition, promising other things and then going back on them (such as refusing to seat elected members of Parliament) only further fuels the sense of being persecuted. The Turkish government has and has always had the power to recognize and treat fairly the Kurds. They've refused to do so. They are alarmed now by the number of Kurds in Turkey. While too many in the press cluck, Seyhmus Cakan (Reuters) goes in search of the story and speaks to a number of people in Turkey including a Kurd named Hulya Yildiz: The use of Kurdish, the mother tongue for up 15 million Kurds in Turkey, is banned at her children's school. Scores of Kurdish activists and mayors have been arrested in recent security crackdowns. Army operations and Kurdish guerrilla attacks make even a family picnic in the woods too dangerous. "I would like to live in a city where we could take our kids to picnics on weekends. We don't have that freedom because we don't know if a bomb will explode or if there will be clashes," said Yildiz, a civil servant in the Kurdish city of Tunceli. She was speaking days before Turkey launched air and ground assaults on Kurdish militants in Iraq in retaliation for the killing on Wednesday of 24 Turkish soldiers in one of the deadliest Kurdish attacks in decades. "If a family is afraid to take their kids to picnics you can'tt talk about democracy," she said. "The prime minister (Tayyip Erdogan) has travelled to all problematic countries during this year, but he should come here and listen to his people's demands. Why can't we have a 'spring' like the Arabs?" Instead of grand standing on 'terrorism,' Barack, Hillary and the rest of the US government should be explaining that this is how governments are toppled and that if Turkey wants to have a future, it will work to bring the Kurds into the process fully. The alternative is endless war and for proof of that look no further than Israel which is now a teetering nation-state as a result of its refusal to come to terms with what was a minority population but is now a fastly growing one. It's a real shame that people who could be weighing in on this issue would rather gas bag. I'm thinking specifically of Theda Skocpol whose "France, Russia, China: A Structural Analysis of Social Revolutions" (Comparative Studies in Society and History, vol 18, 1976, Cambridge Press) and "Revolutions and the World-Historical Developmen of Capitalism" (co-written with Ellen Kay Trimberger, Berkeley Journal of Sociology, vol 22,, 1978) are pertinent to the what's taking place. But instead of providing insight on that, Theda can be found nearly each day offering trite and banal gas baggery about the Democratic Party for POLITICO's Arena forum. Talk about bastardizing your craft. In Iraq, the Kurds remain at odds with Nouri. Dar Addustour reports that Nouri's spokesperson states that a Kurdish delegation will arrive October 24th in Baghdad to speak with Nouri and the Kurdish bloc states they will be insisting that the Erbil Agreement be implemented. The Erbil Agreement ended Political Stalemate I after over eight months of deadlock following the March 7, 2010 elections in which Nouri al-Maliki's slate came in second to Ayad Allawi's Iraqiya. Per the Constitution, Allawi should have been named prime minister-designate and given first right to form a coalition. Nouri refused to allow that to happen. The political blocs and the US hammered out an agreement in Erbil back in November. It would allow Nouri to continue as Prime Minister and, for that concession, the other political blocs would get various things in return. What the Iraqi people wanted -- as evidenced by their votes -- was of no interest to the US government. Nouri agreed to the Erbil Agreement. And because of it, he was named prime minister-designate and then prime minister. And he tossed aside the agreement the minute he got what he wanted thereby creating Political Stalemate II. Al Mada adds that KRG President Massoud Barzani states that the Erbil Agreement is not the problem, that all the participants agreed upon the agreement. It is the failure to implement the Erbil Agreement that is the problem and that goes to the inability of the government to work as a real partnership. Al Mada notes that the National Alliance is calling for the creation of a committee to amend the Constitution. Al Rafidayn reports Nouri is insisting that there are certain foreign areas that need instruction from Iraq on how to build a country. He really is deluded. In related news, Aswat al-Iraq notes that Nouri has pledged one million dollars to Tunisia to help with elections. Iraq has something to teach other countries about elections? You mean: How Not To Do Them? After the 2005 Parliamentary elections, it took four months to name a prime minister-designate (this is supposed to be done in a matter of weeks, not months). Five years later, they hold Parliamentary elections again and it takes twice as long. Despite the fact that nothing really changed in the end. Talabani remained President (as he wanted), Nouri remained Prime Minister and they had the same two vice presidents (until the Shi'ite one elected to resign). None of the major offices changed and it took them over eight months. They think they have something to teach other countries? On the issue of education in Iraq, Dar Addustour reports there's an effort underway to replace Mohammad Tamim as Minister of Education due to a large number of complaints. Among other education issues in the last three months, there is the fact that illiteracy is increasing (not surprising in a war zone) which Parliament responded to by passing a law (basically declaring war on illiteracy -- in an LBJ type way). More recently test scores have been a repeated issues -- Al Rafidayn has especially covered that issue in recent months. And he probably won't be helped by Al Rafidayn's report that a group of Iraqi elementary school children were frightened by poisonous snakes -- no one was hurt. Al Mada notes a new issue in Mosul schools -- one causing a problem for Christian families -- females -- teachers and students -- are being forced to wear hijabs (veils). Aswat al-Iraq notes that the Minister of Electricity is facing demands from the Ahrar bloc to prepare a report of "the problems that hinder the developments of electricity production" Political Stalemate II also includes the inability of Nouri to appoint a full Cabinet. Per the Constitution, he should not have moved from prime minister-designate to prime minister for that reason (per the Constitution, a new prime minister-designate) should have been named. Dar Addustour reports that the Federal Supreme Court rejected yesterday a lawsuit filed against Nouri and the Parliament for the failure to name heads of the security ministries (Minister of Defense, Minister of Interior and Minister of National Security). [Nouri has filled two of the posts with 'acting' ministers -- acting ministers are not ministers -- there's nothing in the Constitution that allows for them. Not having gone before Parliament for approval, they can be fired on Nouri's whim and have no protection or independent power. The puppet has two puppets of his own.] Al Mada notes that the League of Righteous has declared they have no problem with American trainers being in Iraq next year. AFP reports that Moqtada al-Sadr states that's fine as well provided "compensation" is paid by the United States -- "without giving details of what he meant by compensation," AFP adds. Aswat al-Iraq notes a Ramadi car bombing claimed 1 life and left four people injured. In addition, they note, "Sheikh Abbas al-Muhamadawi announced today that a source at Baghdad Operations Command informed him that an assassination attempt was to be made against him. Muhamadawi is the secretary general of a political bloc." Yesterday the Dept of Defense released the following statement: "The Department of Defense announced today the death of a soldier who was supporting Operation New Dawn. Staff Sgt. James R. Leep Jr., 44, of Richmond, Va., died Oct. 17 in Babil province, Iraq. He was assigned to the 2nd Squadron, 183rd Cavalry Regiment, 116th Brigade Combat Team, Portsmouth, Va. For more information the media may contact the Virginia National Guard public affairs office at 804-539-1451 or by e-mail at cotton.puryear@us.army.mil." The Richmond Times-Dispatch notes, "He is survived by his wife, two adult children and a sister. He was from Davenport, Va." WAVY - 10 notes that Leep joined the military in 1986 and features of photo of Leep. Lauren King (Virginian Pilot) adds, "His previous deployments include Bosnia from September 2001 to April 2002, Iraq from December 2003 to March 2005, the southwest U.S. border security mission from June to August 2006, and Afghanistan from November 2008 to January 2010." Jim Talbert (SWVA Today) notes that Staff Sgt Greg Newberry and Sgt Timothy Bayless held a press conference today to discuss Leep with Newberry declaring, "I remember him riding that big Harley-Davidson to work from the time it started getting warm in the spring until it got cold. That, (ride his motorcyle), and hunt was what he liked to do when he wasn't serving his country or working." Last week, I attended part of a hearing that I keep trying to include but we haven't had the space. I'll try again tomorrow. Other things that have been on hold due to space? Adam Kokesh and Iraqi Christians. iraq aswat al-iraq the financial times of london daniel dombey funja guler reuters bbc news mcclatchy newspapers sahar issa the telegraph of london damien mcelroy the new york times sabrina tavernise pri the world npr all things considered kelly mcevers al rafidayn dar addustour al mada the richmond times-dispatch wavy-10 the virginian pilot lauren king aswat al-iraq

4 men, 1 woman

Today on the first hour of The Diane Rehm Show (NPR), the guests were Juliet Eilperin, James Hansen, Matthew Koch and PJ Crowley. The second hour was Lawrence Lessig.

Count the numbers and wonder.

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

Tuesday, October 18, 2011. Chaos and violence continue, evacuations take place in the northern mountains of Iraq (creating more displaced), a US ally is caught using child soldiers, another US service member dies in the Iraq War, Michael Ratner and Michael S. Smith discuss the assassination of an American citizen by Barack Obama, and more. Today Kiran Stacey and Elizabeth Rigby (Financial Times of London) report that a United Kingdom delegation of over 70 business people -- including "BP, Petrofac and other oil and gas services companies" -- will visit Iraq next week, specifically Erbil, and work towards increasing trade between England and Iraq. So it was all worth it, right? The lies Tony Blair his Cabinet told to get England into the illegal war, the deaths of Iraqis, the deaths of 'coalition' forces, it was all worth it? Including yet another violation, just reported by Ian Drury (Daily Mail) today? Drury reports that the UK sent 4 "child soldiers" -- under the age of 18 -- to the frontlines of Iraq and Afghanistan. Drury quotes the charity War Child stating, "Using kids as soldiers constitutes one of the most horrendous breaches of those rights and it is simply and unequivocally wrong." And the US got in bed with the UK -- and Bully Boy Bush and Liar Tony did heavens knows what but the world's still paying for the wars they started. In the US, five years after the start of the Iraq War, the Child Soldier Prevention Act of 2008 was passed. PDF format warning, click here. It calls on "the United States Government should condemn the conscription, forced recruitment, or use of children by governments, paramilitaries, or other organizations" but don't expect a peep when it's England. (And don't be surprised if similar news leaks out about the US military also sending under-age males into combat -- especially those attempting to earn citizenship.) The greed sends a delegation to Iraq from the UK next week -- well to the 'safe' portion, to the KRG. But even there the ongoing war is felt. Luis Martinez (ABC News) quotes US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta stating of negotiations between the US and Iraq to extend the US military presence in Iraq beyond 2011, "At the present time, you know, I'm not discouraged because we're still in negotiations with the Iraqis. At this stage of the game, you know, I think our hope is that the negotiators can ultimately find a way to resolve this issue in terms of what are the Iraqi needs and how can we best meet them, once we've concluded our combat operations." Panetta was in Italy and Robert Burns (AP) adds that he stated that the US Ambassador to Iraq James Jeffrey and the top US commander in Iraq Gen Lloyd Austin were still having "discussions with Iraqi leaders" and that Nouri publicly referred to a "NATO alternative." As noted here repeatedly during the first week of October, NATO is among the many possibilities that the White House has considered for keeping troops in Iraq. And should no deal be made by the end of the year? Barbara Starr, Chris Lawrence, Chelsea J. Carter and Adam Levine (CNN) add, "The United States also could send a limited number of personnel on training missions back into Iraq from Kuwait assuming the immunity issue can be worked out, a senior defense official told CNN on Monday." Josh Rogin (Foreign Policy) offers: Discussions with the Iraqis have focused on the administration's demand that U.S. troops remaining in Iraq have immunity from Iraqi courts. In August, Iraqi Ambassador Samir Sumaida'ie told The Cable that a deal on immunity was in the works and that the Iraqis would formally request an extension of thousands of U.S. troops' presence "in our own sweet time." But the current U.S.-Iraq bilateral agreements dictate that all U.S. troops must withdraw by the end of the year, and as time runs out, the chances of a deal on immunity are fading fast. Ramzy Mardini, a scholar at the Institute for the Study of War who traveled to Iraq in July, said that the reason a deal isn't likely is because, though there is a consensus among Iraqi leaders to give U.S. troops immunity, State Department lawyers determined that the immunity would only be ensured if the Iraqi parliament formally endorsed it. As noted before, State and Defense have been at odds over whether or not immunity had to come through the Parliament. Those under Panetta have been of the opinion that it's a DoD issue so they really didn't see the point in giving credence to State's take. As noted yesterday, the White House is now of the legal opinion that Nouri can grant immunity by himself. I try not to come down too hard on Think Progress, it's nothing but a partisan cheerleader fully willing to distort facts and lie at any given moment. Ali Gharib demonstrates today just how quickly that will happen. Herman Cain, who is running for the GOP presidential nomination, has criticized Barack Obama for, among other things, possibly pulling all troops out of Iraq and Ali Gharib wants the world to know that if that happens, it's Bush's fault!!!! Before we get to Ali's foolish nonsense, let's get Herman Cain's remarks in here. Cain appeared Sunday on Meet The Press (NBC -- link is transcript and video): David Gregory: Were the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan a mistake? Herman Cain: I don't think the war in Iraq was a mistake because there were a lot of other reasons we needed to go to Iraq, and there have been a lot of benefits that have come out of Iraq. Now, that being said, I don't agree with the president's approach to drawdown 40,000 troops and basically leave that -- leave that country open to attacks by Iran. Iran has already said that they want to wait till American leaves -- David Gregory: So President Cain would want -- even beyond the deadline -- leave American troops there? Herman Cain: I would want to leave American troops there if that was what the commanders on the ground suggested. And I believe that that's what they are saying. Now back to Ali Gharib's nonsense. I think the "Think" in "Think Progress" is meant to be hipster ironic. If all US troops were to leave Iraq, would Think Progress really hail Bully Boy Bush for the 2008 SOFA? Really? No, they'd praise Barack and give him all the credit. And, truth be told, if that should happen -- for whatever reason including incompetence -- Barack will deserve credit and will have kept a campaign promise. But due to Ali Gharib's post, it's going to be really difficult now for Think Progress to take that position. While other Democratic sites congratulate Barack, Think Progress will have to be serving up praise for Bully Boy Bush. Herman Cain is correct that Barack can continue to keep US service members in Iraq. Barack can do that right now by keeping 5,000 there without any immunity. He can give the order on that. He can keep US troops in by shifting them under the State Dept's umbrella (State has an agreement with the Iraqi government) or by using NATO's agreement. Or he can do it by playing hardball and telling Nouri, "You're getting immunity for the US troops." Hardball? Iraq needs and wants US dollars. It needs them because their government is full of so many who have and continue to fleece the national treasury. It's very easy for the President of the United States to declare, "If you don't think US troops are worthy of immunity, we don't think, in the midst of an economic crisis, we need to invest billions in your country." Again, Think Progress is going to be a in a sticky position if the US does withdraw all troops because Ali Gharib has put them there via his bad spin. You better believe that if Barack does keep his campaign promise, there are going to be partisan sites on the right who insist that it was Bush's doing. How sad that Think Progress has joined them in that spin. Ali Gharib clearly does not understand the legal aspects of the Status Of Forces Agreement. There's so much ignorance in that post, it is embarrassing. He could have taken on the Iraq War exchange in other ways. Let's go back to it. David Gregory: Were the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan a mistake? Herman Cain: I don't think the war in Iraq was a mistake because there were a lot of other reasons we needed to go to Iraq, and there have been a lot of benefits that have come out of Iraq. Now, that being said, I don't agree with the president's approach to drawdown 40,000 troops and basically leave that -- leave that country open to attacks by Iran. Iran has already said that they want to wait till American leaves -- Ali could have raised questions around the claim that there were "other reasons we needed to go to Iraq" but he surely should have been able to argue against Cain's assertion that "there have been a lot of benefits that have come out of Iraq." The most obvious thing that has come out of Iraq -- ask Iraq's neighbors -- would be the external refugees. That was a "benefit"? The largest refugee crisis in the Middle East since 1946. Iran and Iraq are now much closer as a result of the Iraq War. That's a benefit? The infrastructure of the country -- shaky before the start of the illegal war -- is destroyed. That's a benfit? The increase in widows and orphans is a beneift? Aswat al-Iraq reports today, "The Iraqi Press Freedoms Observatory expressed astonishment with the attack on the residence of journalist Khalil al-Alwani without a court warrant, calling to resort to law and the constitution. According to a statement issued by the Observatory, received by Aswat al-Iraq, Alwani said that a military force attacked his house and terrorized his family, while he was in the newspaper he is working with." That's a benefit? And did it make other countries safer? No. Dropping back to the July 20, 2010 snapshot: [Eliza] Manningham-Buller was the witness to watch. BBC News notes that she's testified the Iraq War has "substantially" upped the chance of England being a target for terrorism and that the threat assessment wasn't "substantial enough" to merit going to war: "If you are going to go to war, you need to have a pretty high threshold to decide on that." Gordon Rayner (Telegraph of London) quotes her stating, "Our involvement in Iraq radicalised, for want of of a better word, a whole generation of young people -- not a wholel generation, a few among a generation -- who saw our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan as being an attack on Islam. . . . Arguably we gave Osama bin Laden his Iraqi jihad so that he was able to move into Iraq in a way that he was not before." Miranda Richardson (Sky News) emphasizes the same quote Rayner did and the link has video of Manningham-Buller testifying. Eliza Manningham-Buller is the former head of British intelligence, MI5, and she's returned to this topic repeatedly. From the September 6th (this year) snapshot: Eliza Manningham-Buller: War was declared on a rogue state, an easier target than an elusive terrorist group based mainly at that stage in the difficult terrain of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. And, in my view, whatever the merits of putting an end to Saddam Hussein, the war was also a distraction from the pursuit of al Qaeda. It increased the terror threat by convincing more people that Osama bin Laden's claim that Islam was under attack was correct. It provided an arena for the jihad for which he had called so that many of his supporters including British citizens traveled to Iraq to attack western forces. It also showed very clearly that foreign and domestic policies are intertwined, actions overseas have an impact at home and our involvement in Iraq spurred some young British Muslims to turn to terror. In addition, October 15, 2007 US National Counterterrorism Center's Adm Scott Redd told Richard Engel (NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams -- link has text and video) that the Iraq War had been a recruiting tool for al Qaeda. Former CIA Middle East expert Bruce Riedel told Engel that the Iraq War has made things worse: "No question, it's made America less safe. By diverting so much money, so much of our intelligence effort and so much of our special forces in the military to fighting a war in Iraq, we have diverted resources from the central battlefield in the war against al Qaeda." Last year the Los Angeles Times editorial board concluded, "The United States was no safer after the war, because there had been no imminent threat before it. Arguably, Americans were more at risk. Al Qaeda exploited Iraqi resentment of U.S. troops, who were viewed as occupiers rather than liberators by much of the Muslim world. Abuses committed by U.S. soldiers at Abu Ghraib prison fanned anger and anti-Americanism. Though Al Qaeda was not a force in Iraq before the war, it was after. And rather than stabilizing the region, the war shook a strategic balance. Hussein's Sunni regime had servced as a useful if unsavory counterwieght to the Shiite government of Iran." ABC News Radio notes the US military has announced the death of a US service member in southern Iraq. The Defense Dept will announce the name of the fallen after his or her designated contact has been notified and, once that's done, the death will be counted in the Pentagon's official count. For years now, Turkish war planes have been bombing northern Iraq. The latest wave of attacks started August 17th. UPI reports today, "Fighting between Turkey's Kurdish separatists and the Ankara government is escalating with Turkish air raids against rebel havens in Iraq's Kurdish enclave, raising fears a new civil war in Turkey is looming in a region already convulsed by turmoil. But there is danger, too, that what has long been a largely internal battle in Turkey could be swept up into wider, more complex regional conflicts in the Middle East and Southweat Asia." AFP notes that shelling started up last night and continued through today. Hurriyet Daily News adds, "The Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in northern Iraq has begun the evacuation of villages near Kandil and Hakurk camps of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) today. [. . .] Civilians living in villages in the Kandil, Sidekan, Hakurk, Hinere and Pisdere areas will be relocated to four new camps that the regional government has begun constructing. The new camps, consisting of 624 residences, will have a total cost of $42 million." Today's Zaman notes Abdullah Ocalan, "jailed lear of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) [,] said resuming peace talks depended on Turkey if they 'open the door' after months of attacks and retaliatory Turkish air strikes on PKK bases hidden in northern Iraq." The PKK is one of many Kurdish groups which supports and fights for a Kurdish homeland. Aaron Hess (International Socialist Review) described them in 2008, "The PKK emerged in 1984 as a major force in response to Turkey's oppression of its Kurdish population. Since the late 1970s, Turkey has waged a relentless war of attrition that has killed tens of thousands of Kurds and driven millions from their homes. The Kurds are the world's largest stateless population -- whose main population concentration straddles Turkey, Iraq, Iran, and Syria -- and have been the victims of imperialist wars and manipulation since the colonial period. While Turkey has granted limited rights to the Kurds in recent years in order to accommodate the European Union, which it seeks to join, even these are now at risk." The Kurdistan Regional Government in Iraq has been a concern to Turkey because they fear that if it ever moves from semi-autonomous to fully independent -- such as if Iraq was to break up into three regions -- then that would encourage the Kurdish population in Turkey. For that reason, Turkey is overly interested in all things Iraq. So much so that they signed an agreement with the US government in 2007 to share intelligence which the Turkish military has been using when launching bomb raids. However, this has not prevented the loss of civilian life in northern Iraq. Aaron Hess noted, "The Turkish establishment sees growing Kurdish power in Iraq as one step down the road to a mass separatist movement of Kurds within Turkey itself, fighting to unify a greater Kurdistan. In late October 2007, Turkey's daily newspaper Hurriyet accused the prime minister of the KRG, Massoud Barzani, of turning the 'Kurdish dream' into a 'Turkish nightmare'." The government of Turkey created the PKK and other Kurdish independence groups -- they created these groups by refusing to treat all citizens equally. But grasp that Iraq, a failed state, one of the most corrupt nations in the world with a struggling government, is expected by the government of Turkey to 'eradicate' or 'eliminate' the PKK -- something that the much more established and 'stable' Turkish government has been unable to do for decades. That's a point Hoshyar Zebari should have made when he was in Turkey last week. He didn't. Al Sabaah reports Iraq's Foreign Minister (Zebari) announced in Cairo yesterday that parties would meet in Baghdad in the middle of next month to discuss plans for holding the Arab League Summit there. In the last 8 or so days, Baghdad has been hit with bombings resulting is multiple fatalities three times. And, for those who've forgotten, this isn't the first time this Arab Summit was supposed to take place in Baghdad. Originally, Zebari and others spent the start of the year insisting that the Arab League Summit would take place March 29, 2011. Then when March finally rolled around, it was agreed it wasn't safe enough so it got kicked back to May 15th. Then that got the axe as well. By that point, the Iraqi government had spent over $450 million on the Arab League Summit that didn't take place. In other news, Moqtada al-Sadr is reportedly back in Iraq. Al Mada calls it "a surprise visit" to Najaf and that, unlike previous returns from Iran, there were not throngs of supporters at the airport to greet him. Dar Addustour adds it's not clear whether or not this is a temporary return or not. Also of slow burner interest, Al Rafidayn reported yesterday on the opinion of some MPs that Iraq is allowing too many foreign contractors into the country, a fear that this could resort in increased terrorism and a feeling that Iraqis can provide all the security needed by embassies and foreign companies operating in Iraq. On this week's Law and Disorder Radio -- a weekly hour long program that airs Monday mornings at 9:00 a.m. EST on WBAI (didn't air today due to a WBAI pledge drive) and around the country throughout the week, hosted by attorneys Heidi Boghosian, Michael S. Smith and Michael Ratner (Center for Constitutional Rights) -- topics explored include Occupy Wall Street with attorney Magaret Ratner Kunstler. Michael Ratner and Margaret Ratner Kunstler are the authors of Hell No, Your Right To Dissent and they discuss the attacks on dissent and your rights with regards to the Occupy Wall Street protests and beyond. We're going to note this section from a discussion on the assassination of Anwar al-Awlaki. Michael Smith: Talk about al-Awlaki, speaking of rule of law. The America who's pledged to defend the Constitution which includes the Fifth Amednment, Due Process, you can't deprive somebody of their life without due process which we've always understood to mean you have to go to court. And nonetheless they've assassinated an American citizen in Yemen, a man named Anwar al-Awlaki. Talk about that. Michael Ratner: Now, of course, if you were an American citizen fighting on behalf of the Nazis in the Second World War, you know they could just shoot you if you were in a uniform, sitting on the other side shooting. But the distinction which you're making, one because an American citizen is significance, but it also that he wasn't in a war. This guy was sitting in Yemen, in civilian clothes, just sitting there and they launch -- put him on an assassination list and launch a drone against the guy. And so, yes, the American citizen and the Fifth Amendment protects him but he's also protected by fundamental laws of humanitarian law, the Laws of War and human rights. Michael S. Smith: He's also protected because there's a law against the president of the United States ordering an assassination. That's a recent law. There's also another law: murder is against the law. Michael Ratner: So that's what you have. I know last time [at the start of the program last week] you read the op-ed that I wrote on al-Awlaki which is in the Guardian, which people can go to our website and get. It was widely read about my opposition and the Center for Constitutional Rights which brought a lawsuit to try and stop the assassination. And now it's again all over the news. And what's interesting, it's getting more attention in a somewhat favorable way than I expected. People are upset by the fact that the administration hasn't really given its reasons for killing him. They've come out with some broad b.s. and there was a press conference the other day with the president's press guy, went four minutes and there was one reporting pressing him, 'What's the evidence? What's you have on him?' And the guy just -- he was befuddled, he didn't know what to say. And they still didn't come out with the evidence. Recently the [New York] Times published part of the memo that the US says would justify his killing from a legal point of view, but only part, so we don't know the whole thing. And low and behold, Michael Smith was about to address this issue, the Times prints an editorial about his murder, al-Awlaki's murder. Michael S. Smith: If you need further evidence of the hypocrisy of the liberal New York Times, all you gotta do is read the editorial in the October 12th issue of the Times. Office of Legal Counsel, you'll remember, Michael, is the outfit that wrote the famous torture memos. They were asked to justify torture and they wrote these twisted memos concluding what Bush and the others wanted them to conclude: That it's legal to torture people. Well this time, the Times is very happy because again the Office of Legal Counsel which advises the president took three months and wrote a "detailed and cautious memorandum" to justify the decision to assassinate al-Awlaki. So the Times thinks it's good because at least they wrote a detailed memorandum before they killed the man! And they say, here's the conclusion, "Mr. Awlaki was not entitled to full protections [. . .] but as an American, he was entitled to some." Is that the defintion of a liberal trimmer or what? Michael Ratner: Which ones? The right to a decent burieal? The right to have somebody scrape up his body parts? What are the ones they're talking about? How about the right to life? The one protection that everyone is entitled to. Michael S. Smith: The Fifth Amendment. Michael Ratner: Michael, I -- The Fifth Amendment is there. Yes, you need Due Process. But I want to emphasize, I think al-Awlaki should have been protected even if he wasn't a US citizen. I don't like naorrowing the law to a US citizen. Michael S. Smith: I totally agree with you. Michael Ratner: For litigation in the US court, yes, I have to use the Constitution to protect al-Awlaki but in fact the only time you're allowed to kill people is in a shooting war and then you have the right to shoot people on the other side who are shooting at you or in a war against you. But, short of that, unless someone is about to toss a bomb at you on the street and you have to use force to stop that, you don't have the right to just shoot people. Michael S. Smith: Well the United States justifies this based on the Declaration of War in 2001, after 9-11. Michael Ratner: So the question for you and I is if we sat here spouting the stuff that al-Awlaki spouted and, you know, had some meetings and some stuff like that -- if he did -- would they have the right to drone attack kill me in New York? And the answer? Michael S. Smith: Well that's exactly the question. Michael Ratner: The answer, under their theory, is yes. Michael S. Smith: Yes. That the country where the person had his feet planted when he was blown sky high is irrelevant. The fact is there's a Declaration of War, after 9-11, ten years ago they made a Declaration of War against terrorism -- whatever that means -- they can go out and kill people. That's what they're basing it on. I'd like to see this legal memorandum. Michael Ratner: So if people are interested in the fact that the US can drop drones on almost anyone -- on anyone -- citizen, non-citizen, where ever they are, Yemen, United States, we want you to go to www.dronedetector.com where you can purchase a drone detector [starts laughing]. Michael and I, we just made that up. But anyway, get your drone detector now. Michael S. Smith: Well, if you want to learn more about it, go to the Center's website which is, Michael? Michael Ratner: ccrjustice.org, ccrjustice.org. We brought a case with the ACLU to try and stop the killing of al-Awlaki . We were thrown out of court. The judge considered it serious -- but, of course, that's again typical -- serious but no relief. It's an executive [branch] decision and, of course, the executive made the decision, Obama, basically pushed the big red button, drone, drone, drone. Michael S. Smith: And this is the guy that was supposed to be an improvement, the pendulum was going to swing back, Obama's going to get elected and Civil Liberties are going to get better. So, instead of torturing people, he's now assassinating them. This is the liberal definition of "better." iraq abc news luis martinez the associated press robert burns cnn barbara starr chelsea j. carter adam levine foreign policy josh rogin al sabaah al mada dar addustour al rafidayn aswat al-iraq the los angeles times todays zaman wbai law and disorder radio michael s. smith heidi boghosian michael ratner