Wednesday, January 13, 2021

Howie and Angela

 

Howie Hawkins and Angela Walker -- continuing to make the Green Party's future a group discussion.  


By the way, Angela's skin looks really good.  It usually does but, the last two weeks, it's looked really good.


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


 Wednesday, January 13, 2020. Impeachment?


The Congress can do whatever it wants.  For example, if they wanted to, they could serve the American people and provide Medicare For All.  They can do what they want.  That said, some of the things that they want to do are things that they shouldn't do.


Case in point: Impeachment.  


The lack of reflection in the media is probably par for the course but still shocking.  


"This" -- a columnist huffs referring to what Keesha has termed "a home invasion" but pearl clutchers insist was a coup -- is what happens when you never hold Donald Trump accountable.


Huh?


What world are you living in?  When was Donald Trump given a pass?  Maybe during the 2016 campaign -- when Hillary Clinton's campaign worked with the media to ensure Donald got the GOP nomination because they thought he would be the easiest to beat in a general election.  Otherwise?


Everything he did resulted in push back and criticism.


Some was valid.  All was not valid.


And if you really want to understand what happened last week in DC, maybe shut your mouth that's been motoring through the last four years without thought.  Maybe the fact that you were so surprised by what took place goes to just how out of touch you are with what's actually been going on.


A little over 74 million people voted for Donald Trump in 2020.  A little over 81 million people vote for Joe Biden.  


If you're trying to heal the nation -- as opposed to grandstand -- impeachment really isn't the way to go.  


There are seven days until Joe Biden is sworn in as the next US president.


At what point does the media, especially the media, take a look at their own actions.  One 'scandal' after another.  I remember telling Big Fat six months after Donald was sworn in, "I'll worry about that if it goes a full week without some sort of whispered correction."  What was I talking about?  Clearly a 'scandal.'  Even I don't remember which one.  But day after day, it was a scandal that often resulted in a whispered retreat.  Because there was no story there.


All journalistic standards were dropped for the laast four years -- even the pretense of them.  If I could see it -- and I'm someone that's loathed Donald for decades -- plural -- you better believe his supporters could see it.


I've noted that attacks on Stevie Nicks in the seventies and eighties didn't hurt her.  They just bound her fans tighter to her.  


Apply the same standard to Donald Trump.  His supporters -- and there are millions of them (the majority are peaceful citizens) -- saw what went down.  Even now, the media lies about it.  'We've never held Donald accountable!' they wail while any honest person just shakes their head.


They were not reporting on the election in 2020, they were actively attempting to shape the vote.  If there was a story negative on Joe Biden?  It was killed, dismissed, attacked.  We saw it with the Hunter Biden scandals -- he's under a criminal investigation and that was pertinent -- and we saw it with Tara Reade's credible accusations.  We saw it over and over.  We saw his campaign -- treated with kid gloves -- attack the media repeatedly and the media back down.


If you want to get honest about the rage some people exhibited last week in DC, then get honest.


If you want to make things better?  You don't make them worse by trying to impeach him seven days before he's out of office.  It might feel good for those who love to grandstand and soap box but it's not good for the country, it's not good for the Constitution and it's not good for healing the nation.


Did he do something to warrant impeachment?  Last week, I noted I was still open to a sound argument on that.  None has been provided.  His words did not incite violence.  This is like when idiots claim that  a video game or a rap song incited violence.  No.


His words were standard political speech -- and as political speech, they are Constitutionally protected.


There is no sound reason to impeach him.  Sorry, Nancy Pelosi, vengeance isn't a sound reason.


So for four years there were no standard at all and now we're going to toss them aside even more to impeach him?  74 million people voted for him.  That's very close to half the American people who voted.  And you're going to impeach him when there is no impeachable offense?  What message do you think that sends to the country?  What message does that send to those who voted for him.


Try this one on for size: You think DC is what Trump supporters do?  So you're going to egg the peaceful ones with impeachment to try to inspire more violence?  Is that your plan?


Are there no grown ups in the room?


Nancy Pelosi's personal vendetta with Donald Trump has been a four year embarrassment.  It's time someone put her in check.  Donald gets impeached for political speech?  Oh, great that means from this day forward the opposition party in Congress will be attempting to impeach the sitting president for political speech.


I get that journalists are stupid -- they're basically general studies majors -- people too 'spacey' to pick a major to begin with.  So they don't know much of anything to begin with. 



But if you think a mob descended on DC last week and you think that was something you never want to see again, a baseless impeachment isn't going to get you there.


A baseless impeachment will sew more anger and frustration and, yes, probably, violence.  


We're taking this issue very seriously.  Gina and Krista did a surprise round-robin last night.  It wasn't planned.  It was around nine o'clock when I got informed.  They're doing it -- the gina & krista round-robin -- every day until Biden's sworn in.  Because they think this issue is that serious.  (That's why you've got no community posts today -- it was a surprise to all of us, it ended at 2:00 am my time and I think we all went to bed.)


This isn't a game, this is the status of the country.  


There are no grounds for impeachment.  Again, I've said it before, I'm sure impeachment would pass in the House.  But the trial takes place in the Senate.  And while you may think it's a sure thing, it's not.  I've already heard from two Democratic senators who loathe Donald and yet are bothered by the implications.  


Once Donald is in the rear view mirror, you're going to see Democratic support in the Senate crumble a lot more.  


To his supporters, that won't matter. 


To them, this will be further proof that there was a standard for Donald and a standard for others.


Impeaching someone as they're on the way out the door?


It's nonsense.


If they had strong grounds for it -- which I've waited for -- it would be one thing.  But there are no strong grounds.  Political speech is Constitutionally protected speech.


The push for impeachment is a joke and Nancy's only determined to make it more so.  Jonathan Turley notes:


Speaker Nancy Pelosi shocked many in Washington by appointing Eric Swalwell as a house managers in the impeachment of President Donald Trump as he continues to face calls for his removal from the House Intelligence Committee due to his alleged intimate relationship with a Chinese spy.  Swalwell has been bunkered down to avoid questions from the media and the public, but he will now be one of those prosecuting the case against the President.

He allegedly first met the spy, Fang Fang or Christine Fang, in 2011. She not only raised money for Swalwell but reportedly had a personal relationship with him. She also pushed successfully for his office to accept an intern. He cut ties with her in 2015 after the FBI contacted him. Pelosi made no mention of the scandal in heralding Swalwell’s credentials:

“Congressman Swalwell serves on House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, where he chairs the Intelligence Modernization and Readiness Subcommittee, and on the Judiciary Committee,” Pelosi’s office said in a statement. “He is a former prosecutor and is the son and brother of law enforcement officers.  He is serving his fifth term in Congress.”

Usually a speaker selects House managers to reinforce the credibility and integrity of the case against a president. Even before the current scandal, Swalwell was viewed as a member who was a raw partisan. Last year, it was revealed that (despite long denials) the FBI did send an agent to report on his observations within the Trump campaign. As I discussed in a column, Democratic members spent years mocking allegations that there was any spying or surveillance of Trump or his campaign by the FBI. That was just a conspiracy theory. Now however there is proof that the FBI used a briefing in August 2016 of then candidate Trump to gather information for “Crossfire Hurricane,” the Russia investigation. It turns out that it did not really matter after all and Rep. Eric Swalwell did not miss a step. Swalwell declared that such targeting of the opposing party and its leading presidential candidate was “the right thing to do.” That’s it. A conspiracy theory suddenly becomes a commendable act.


What is the point of the proposed impeachment?


To remove Donald from office?  He's gone on the 20th.   And the House impeaching does not mean that the Senate removes.  A trial takes place and Senators aren't as . . . frothy and mad as House members.  The Senate's always prided itself on being more detached and dignified (Nancy would never last a single term in the Senate).  


So there's no solid reason for impeachment, it's not necessary to get Donald out of the White House (November's vote did that) but it's going to be pushed through for what reason?  


It's going to divide the nation and keep the country looking backward.  It's going to harden divisions.  And it's going to have a political cost in the next round of elections.


None of that would matter if the reasoning was solid.  But there is no solid reasoning here.


And people are already pointing out that Nancy didn't just refuse to impeach Bully Boy Bush, she publicly attacked and shamed then-US House Rep John Conyers for attempting impeachment.  Bully Boy Bush started an illegal war that left millions dead -- Iraqis, the British, Americans, etc.  An illegal war started with lies.  And that wasn't impeachable but political speech is?


Or is Nancy's point here #CONGRESSOFFICESMATTER!!


For a brief moment, members of Congress had to live in the same world that American school children do every school day and it was just too much for Nancy & company to handle.  Now, please note, it's okay that this is normal for American children but for our prissy members of Congress?  Oh, no, no.


Nancy has been a disaster in Congress and she now appears bound and determined to make sure that no one ever says she ever put the needs of the country first.





Karwan Faidhi Dri (RUDAW) reports:                                                                             

Iraq’s population has surpassed 40 million, the country’s planning ministry said on Tuesday – with 40 percent of the population under the age of 15.

"Iraq's population reached 40,150,000 people in 2020", the ministry said in a statement released on Tuesday.

Children aged 0-14 make up 40.4 percent of Iraq’s population, the ministry said. People aged 15-64 and make up 56.5 percent of the population.

Just three percent of Iraqis are over the age of 65, the ministry said.

The ministry’s figures are based on its “central statistical system, as per international standards”, according to its statement.


XINHAU adds, "The Ministry of Planning announced last year that the population of Iraq exceeded 39 million by the end of 2019, while the number of population in 2018 exceeded 38 million."  No one points out that a census has not taken place.  Iraq has not had a census for decades.  So this population figure it just an estimate -- one that lags behind the CIA's own estimate.


Elections are due to take place in Iraq in June.  ARAB REFORM notes:


On 24 December 2019, the Iraqi parliament approved a new electoral law. However, it took over 11 months for President Barham Salih to ratify it as parliament fought over an annex to the law defining Iraq’s electoral districts.

The law, which the president finally ratified with reservation (hyperlink in Arabic) in early November 2020, is a complete departure from those passed since 2003 and which were used to organize four parliamentary elections between 2005 and 2018. Instead of adopting one electoral district as in the 2005 elections – the first after the 2003 Iraq invasion – or designating each of Iraq’s 18 governorates as a single district like in the three subsequent elections, this new law divides Iraq into 83 electoral districts. These districts are based on the number of quota seats set aside for women in parliament, as the Constitution requires that 25% of the parliament’s 329 seats be designated for women.

The law emerged following pressure from demonstrations, the largest in Iraq’s recent history, demanding comprehensive political and economic reforms. Foremost among their central demands was the adoption of a just electoral law that would reduce the monopoly of parties in the parliament and allow for the entrance of independents and small and newly established parties. The Shiite Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, who holds significant religious power in the country, supported the demonstrations and its demands, thereby helping accelerate the law’s adoption. However, the new electoral law will maintain the influence of several well-established political forces and ensure their victory in upcoming elections.



Moving over to violence, Turkey continues to bomb northern Iraq.  They continue to claim they are killing 'terrorists' but local reports note that they are wounding and killing farmers and villagers.  This has been going on for years now.  Yasmine Mosimann (RUDAW) notes:

Turkey’s sustained aerial pursuit of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) in Iraq is posing an existential threat to the country’s already dwindling Assyrian community, according to a new report.

Published on Monday by the Assyrian Policy Institute (API), the report, titled ‘Caught in the Crossfire’, examines how decades of cross-border conflict between Turkey and armed Kurdish group the PKK has impacted Assyrians, an ethnic minority group in Iraq.

“The airborne attacks often occur in close proximity to areas mainly inhabited by Assyrian, Yazidi, and/or Kurdish civilians, posing significant risks including: endangerment of civilian life, displacement, traumatization, destruction of property and agricultural lands, and threats to livelihoods,” reads the API report.

While the unrest indiscriminately affects civilians living in the Kurdistan Region’s border regions, ethnic minority groups including Assyrians are especially vulnerable to the violence because of their unique experiences of systematic discrimination and violence both past and present, states the report, which is based on interviews with impacted families.


Covering the same study, Wladimir van Wilgenburg (KURDISTAN 24) notes:


The report stated that Turkey’s ongoing feud with the PKK in northern Iraq has made life “unsustainable” for civilian populations in targeted areas.

“When pursuing the PKK in Iraq, Turkey has consistently failed to take adequate precautions to minimize incidental and/or collateral damage to civilians and civilian objects,” it added. “By operating from or near civilian areas, the PKK endangers civilian populations, including Kurds, Yezidis, and Assyrians.”



Some sites just posted -- Rebecca had an idea for a theme:





on No comments:

Tuesday, January 12, 2021

Music

First up, from 1977, Chaka Khan and Rufus performing live.



Second, new from The Weekend.




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

 Monday, January 11, 2021.  Protesters shot and killed, attorneys shot, journalists threatened and more.



ASHARQ AL-AWSAT reports, "Despite overwhelming reports of activists being targeted and security forces using brute force to suppress demonstrations, anti-government protestors continued to rally across Iraq’s southern Dhi Qar province, especially in its capital, Nasiriyah."  It's an oil rich province with oil fields in Nasiriyah and Subba -- both operated by Dhi Qar Oil Company.  September 22nd, protesters were able to shut the company down. Currently, the temperature is 41 F with it expected to rise to 71 tomorrow during the day.  Dhi Qar is a province with approximately two million people, the bulk of whom are Shi'ites.  The marshlands are the home of the Ma'dan and other minorities in the province include Sunnis, Chaldeans, Assyrians and Mandeans.  MIDDLE EAST EYE noted last year, as protests continued there, that the province "is the cradle of ancient Sumerian civilization.  It is also thought to be the birthplace of Abraham, patriarch of Judaism, Islam and Christianity."  It is a province of poverty -- the poorest province in Iraq -- with food insecurity and a lack of jobs among the historical trends there since the 2003 US-led invasion. Dhi Qar has 233 mountains with the highest point being Dulayat Dhulah.  It also has shootings, lots and lots of shootings.  Today, one attorney was injured when he was shot and, two days ago, an attorney who headed a lawyers union was shot dead.


 Sura Ali (RUDAW) reported Saturday:


Two protesters in Iraq’s southern city of Nasiriyah were injured in clashes with police forces who fired tear gas and bullets at crowds, activists in the city told Rudaw on Friday.

The police crackdown in Habboubi Square, often the center of protests in the city, comes the day after a large-scale arrest campaign against activists on Thursday, the two activists told Rudaw. Among those subjected to Thursday’s crackdown was activist Ihsan al-Hilali, who was run over by a police car and arrested, both activists said.

"The demonstrators wanted to enter Habboubi Square in Nasiriyah and protest peacefully on Friday afternoon, but the security forces prevented them, which led to clashes,” said Wali Jabar, an activist in Nasiriyah.

"Security forces confronted the protests with tear gas canisters and fire," Jabar said.



ROJNAME KURDISH NEWS Tweeted:


Two protesters injured in clashes with police in Nasiriyah: activists


And Amsiiraq Tweeted:


Dhi Qar: More than (41) demonstrators were injured in the city of Nasiriyah as a result of yesterday's crackdown by government forces, in addition to dozens of arrests that are still going on.
Image


2:48 PM · Jan 9, 2021


The government responded how?  By arresting a journalist -- remember, the real 'crime' in Iraq is always reporting.  Hiwa Shilani (KURDISTAN 24) explained:


A media rights organization in Iraq announced late Friday evening that a reporter and a cameraman for the Zagros media outlet had been arrested in the southern city of Nasiriya while covering protests against the previous detention of a local activist.

The Press Freedom Advocacy Association in Iraq (PFAAI) quoted Falah al-Fadhli, news director of the Erbil-based television channel, as saying that correspondent Ali Saleh and his cameraman were arrested while covering protests that began in downtown Nasiriya's al-Habboubi Square which was followed by clampdowns by security forces.


Zaid Salem (AL ARABY) reports that security officials have been threatening journalists over their coverage of the protests with three citing threats and one explaining a digital militia in Baghdad follows the webpages of activists and journalists and what they say about the protests.


On Sunday, per AL HURRA, the riot police and militias are said to have fired on protesters in Nasiriyah and the Iraqi military is said to have started firing at the riot police and the militias to protect the protesters.  Zeiden Alkinani Tweeted:

Sources claim Iraqi army stood up against the anti-riot police, to protect Nasriyah protesters from the recent violent crackdown. Alarming development reflecting anti-riot’s politicized-influence. If repeated, it could motivate a national revival.



Mina Aldroubi (THE NATIONAL) reports:


One of them was Haider Ali, an activist and nurse, who was abducted three days ago.

“Last night Haider’s body was found and was dismembered, we are still waiting for the final results of the security institutions,” Mr Al Bayati said.

The second man, Ali Al Hamami, a senior lawyer and activist was killed in Nasiriyah on Friday after unknown assailants broke into his home.

“Ali died of suffocation after being gagged with tape and his house was robbed,” a statement by Dhi Qar Bar Association said.

The Human Rights Commission said the government must deal directly with representatives of Nasiryah’s community to ensure that protests' needs are answered.

“The government must acknowledge community leaders such as religious, tribal, social and civil actors to get political agendas,” Mr Al Bayati said.


ALJAZEERA offers this section of Murtada Faraj's AP report to provide context on Nasiyah:


A sprawl of tents in Haboubi Square had remained in place until November 2020, when eight people were killed in clashes between anti-government protesters and followers of the Shia leader Muqtada al-Sadr.

Anti-government protesters reoccupied the square on Friday, demanding the release of peers who have been arrested in recent weeks.

More than 500 protesters were killed in the crackdown on mass protests that began in October 2019, when thousands rallied against corruption, unemployment, poor public services and other grievances.



Sura Ali (RUDAW) adds:

Protesters in the square were attacked by Sadr supporters in late November, leaving at least seven people dead and scores wounded. Protesters returned to resume demonstrations and rebuild their tents a week later. 

[. . .]

Mohammed Salih al-Iraqi, a Twitter persona close to Sadr and suspected by some to be Sadr himself, took shots at the protest movement on Sunday for demanding the release of protesters.

"The Sadrists have never pushed the government to release their detained brothers, because they believe in law, unlike the "mob" Nasiriyah protesters who provoked riots after arresting one of them," he tweeted.  



Protests are taking place elsewhere in Iraq as well, such as Babil Province:

#Iraq’s southern city of #Babil, protesters movedback in2 #Hillah streets and vowed 2 continue protesting. In light of the recent crackdown on demonstrators, protest took a decision 2 demonstrate, and the widespread campaign of arrests and repression 'won’t discourage protesters'
1:00 PM · Jan 9, 2021



Protests began in 2019 -- generally said to be October 1, 2019 but actually September 30, 2019 -- across Iraq.  These protests would eventually topple the prime minister -- Adil Abdul al-Mahdi.  May 7th, Mustafa al-Kadhimi became prime minister.  The protests took place in Nasiryah with a particularly violent day being November 28, 2019 which saw at least 27 protesters killed and another 152 left wounded.  The very next day, the Supreme Judicial Council of Iraq formed a body to investigate the muders.  As with all such 'investigations,' nothing came of it.


Iraq is a land rich in oil but a country where justice is in short supply.  Aditi Sahu (MIDDLE EAST HEADLINES) reports:


When Mustafa al-Kadhimi became Prime Minister of Iraq in May 2020, he promised a new country. In particular, he promised to bring an end to Iraq’s dismal legacy of enforced disappearances, many of which are carried out by Iraqi security forces and Iran-backed armed groups. However, despite his promises to hold those implementing enforced disappearances accountable and deliver justice, there has been little change in the country. Today, Iraq has one of the highest numbers of missing persons in the world, and this continued practice is taking a toll on the nation and its people. As anti-government protests sweep across Iraq, al-Kadhimi must keep his word and act to end enforced disappearances or risk losing public support.

Enforced disappearance is when an individual is covertly abducted or imprisoned with the support of the state or a political entity. After the individual is captive, the perpetrators refuse to acknowledge they have carried out an abduction or disclose the captive’s location, intending to place them outside the protection of the law. According to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, enforced disappearances are considered a crime against humanity in international criminal law.

Enforced disappearances are a common tactic for silencing dissidents, activists, and political opponents in authoritarian countries. The practice is used to strategically spread fear within communities and often result in the torture and sometimes the deaths of captives. Although enforced disappearances are common in countries ranging from Syria to Sri Lanka, they are particularly present in Iraqi society. According to the International Commission on Missing Persons, approximately 250,000 to one million individuals are missing due to enforced disappearances. Because of this alarming statistic, al-Kadhimi’s promise to end enforced disappearances resonated strongly among the Iraqi people. The Prime Minister also promised to introduce a new mechanism for locating victims of enforced disappearances, sparking hope among the country’s citizens that they would be reunited with their loved ones. Al-Kadhimi’s statement was also impactful because it was one of the first public proclamations by a Middle Eastern leader to end the practice, suggesting this could signal a potential turning point in a region that has a longstanding history of relying on the tactic. Despite these hopes, many months passed, and al-Kadhimi has done little to follow up on his promise.


In other protest news, the US Treasury Dept issued the following on Friday:

Washington – Today, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) designated Iraqi Popular Mobilization Committee (PMC) Chairman and former National Security Advisor Falih al-Fayyadh for his connection to serious human rights abuse. During protests beginning in October 2019, Iran-aligned elements of the PMC attacked Iraqi civilians demonstrating against corruption, unemployment, economic stagnation, poor public services, and Iranian interference in Iraq’s domestic affairs. Al-Fayyadh was part of a crisis cell comprised primarily of Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) militia leaders formed in late 2019 to suppress the Iraqi protests with the support of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Qods Force (IRGC-QF). Today, Iran-aligned elements of the PMF continue to wage an assassination campaign against political activists in Iraq who are calling for free and fair elections, respect for human rights, and clean government.

“By directing and supervising the murder of peaceful Iraqi demonstrators, Iran-aligned militants and politicians such as Falih al-Fayyadh have been waging a violent campaign against Iraqi democracy and civil society,” said Secretary Steven T. Mnuchin. “The United States will continue to hold accountable human rights abusers in Iraq who aim to deny the Iraqi people in their efforts to peacefully protest, seek justice, and root out corruption in their country.”

This action is taken pursuant to Executive Order (E.O.) 13818, which builds upon and implements the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act and targets perpetrators of serious human rights abuse and corruption.

FALIH AL-FAYYADH

Falih al-Fayyadh (al-Fayyadh) is the head of the PMC, a body created by Iraqi legislation to bring the PMF militias under central government control. Although the PMF was established to fight the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), many PMF militias are increasingly focused on advancing their own economic interests and supporting Iran’s regional agenda in Iraq, rather than protecting the Iraqi state or its citizens. Al-Fayyadh was the head of the PMC when many of its subcomponents fired live ammunition at peaceful protesters in late 2019, resulting in the deaths of hundreds of Iraqis. Al-Fayyadh was a member of the IRGC-QF-supported crisis cell with previously sanctioned militia leaders Qais al-Khazali and Hussein Falah al-Lami, as well as the now-deceased IRGC-QF commander Qasem Soleimani and PMC deputy leader Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis. Until July 2020, Al-Fayyadh was also the Iraqi Prime Minister’s National Security Advisor.

Al-Fayyadh is being designated pursuant to E.O. 13818 for being a foreign person who is or has been a leader or official of an entity, including any government entity, that has engaged in, or whose members have engaged in, serious human rights abuse.

The IRGC-QF, designated pursuant to E.O. 13224 on October 25, 2007, is a branch of the IRGC responsible for external operations and has provided material support to numerous terrorist groups, making it a key component of Iran’s destabilizing regional activities. The IRGC-QF’s parent organization, the IRGC, was designated pursuant to E.O. 13224 on October 13, 2017, and on April 15, 2019 was designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the Secretary of State.

SANCTIONS IMPLICATIONS

As a result of today’s action, all property and interests in property of the person above that are in the United States or in the possession or control of U.S. persons are blocked and must be reported to OFAC. In addition, any entities that are owned, directly or indirectly, 50 percent or more by one or more blocked persons are also blocked. Unless authorized by a general or specific license issued by OFAC, or otherwise exempt, OFAC’s regulations generally prohibit all transactions by U.S. persons or within (or transiting) the United States that involve any property or interests in property of designated or otherwise blocked persons. The prohibitions include the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any blocked person or the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person.

GLOBAL MAGNITSKY

Building upon the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act, the President signed E.O. 13818 on December 20, 2017, in which the President found that the prevalence of human rights abuse and corruption that have their source, in whole or in substantial part, outside the United States, had reached such scope and gravity that it threatens the stability of international political and economic systems. Human rights abuse and corruption undermine the values that form an essential foundation of stable, secure, and functioning societies; have devastating impacts on individuals; weaken democratic institutions; degrade the rule of law; perpetuate violent conflicts; facilitate the activities of dangerous persons; and undermine economic markets.

The United States seeks to impose tangible and significant consequences on those who commit serious human rights abuse or engage in corruption, as well as to protect the financial system of the United States from abuse by these same persons.

View more information on the individual designated today.

####


The charges are not new -- AFP reminds, "the US Treasury said Fayyadh was responsible for brutal attacks on protesters in October 2019."  NEWSWEEK's Tom O'Connor notes, "Iraq's state-affiliated collective of militias defiantly celebrated its leader being hit by U.S. sanctions, considering it an honor to have him viewed as one of Washington's foes" and quotes a statement made by a militia spokesperson, "We congratulate the friend of the martyrs, Popular Mobilization Committee Chairman Falih al-Fayyadh, on his inclusion with the honorable ones whom the U.S. administration considers enemies."  REUTERS adds al-Fayyadh "was also praised by the Iran-backed Lebanese group Hezbollah."  However, Ali Jiwad (ANADOLU AGENCY) observes, "The Iraqi Foreign Ministry on Saturday slammed a US decision to backlist Falih al-Fayyad, the leader of the powerful Hashd Shaabi militia, or the Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMF)."  Is the Ministry slamming the US government for finally taking some form of action against those attacking the protesters?  Goodness knows that the Iraqi government has done nothing to protect the protesters.





on No comments:

Saturday, January 9, 2021

TV

The youngest had a nightmare so Cedric and I got up.  They're both back to sleep but I can't get back to sleep so I'm watching The New Adventures of Old Christine.  It's on TV Land these days.  Early Saturday mornings.  I liked the show when it was on CBS but I couldn't stand Veep.


The show got honorable mention in a feature we did at Third last month:


15 best TV shows of the last 15 years

Next month, this site hits its 16th anniversary.  Before that happens, we're offering a list of the 15 most entertaining TV shows of the last 15 years.

 

 

1) BIG LITTLE LIES (season one only)

 

2) SENS8

 

3) WILL & GRACE (original run)

 

4) HAPPY ENDINGS

 

5) REVENGE

 

6) THE UNDOING

 

7) HOW TO GET AWAY WITH MURDER

 

8) SCANDAL

 

9) NOW APOCALYPSE

 

10) SECRET CITY

 

11) AMERICAN DAD

 

12) NIKITA

 

13) ROSEANNE (reboot)

 

14) WILL & GRACE (reboot)

 

15)  FRINGE



Honorable mentions: THE NEW ADVENTURES OF OLD CHRISTINE, I THINK YOU SHOULD LEAVE WITH TIM ROBINSON, MINDHUNTER, YEAR AFTER YEAR, DIFFICULT PEOPLE, THE MINDY PROJECT, JESSICA JONES, DAREDEVIL, LUKE CAGE, IRON FIST, THE DEFENDERS, A VERY ENGLISH SCANDAL, THE BLACKLIST, GRACE AND FRANKIE, BLINDSPOT, POLITICAL ANIMALS, SANTA CLARITA DIET, BLACKISH, ASTRONOMY CLUB: THE SKETCH SHOW, MOM, STAR, THE NEIGHBORHOOD and 2 BROKE GIRLS.



Posted by at



I think that's a pretty solid list.  I'd maybe add Everybody Loves Chris and Dark Angel.  Anyway, I'm yawning, I think I can finally get back to sleep.


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


 Friday, January 8, 2021.  Where is the perspective?


[Impeachment discussion has been added to the bottom of this snapshot.]

Thomas Newdick (THE DRIVE) reports:


A total of 23 Iraqi Air Force Lockheed Martin F-16IQ Viper fighter jets took part in an impressive flyby to mark the centenary of the country’s army yesterday. This is despite recent reports that Baghdad’s fleet of F-16s, the pride of the country’s air force and arguably its most capable combat assets, is suffering from serious readiness problems.

The flyby was part of a major military parade to commemorate 100 years of the Iraqi Army that was staged in Baghdad in the presence of the commander-in-chief of the Iraqi Armed Forces, Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kazemi. As well as fighters and helicopters, troops, and various military vehicles were presented to the country’s officials and the general public. A full video of the event is posted later in this article.


Readiness problems?  

The first round of F16s were sent to Iraq by the US back in July of 2015.  Over five years ago.  In 2006, US service members were complaining to the press (AP and others) that the Iraqis they were training did not seem motivated to learn.  Prior to the 2011 drawdown, control over the US goals in Iraq were transferred from the Defense Dept to the State Dept.  And that's when Iraq made it clear that they did not want US training -- after US tax payers footed the bill for construction of a building for US troops to train the Iraqi police (that building would later be turned over to the Iraqi government -- after it was never used for its purpose).   Let's drop back to the February 8, 2012 snapshot:

 
 
We covered the November 30th House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the MiddleEast and South Asia in the December 1st snapshot and noted that Ranking Member Gary Ackerman had several questions. He declared, "Number one, does the government of Iraq -- whose personnel we intend to train -- support the [police training] program?  Interviews with senior Iaqi officials by the Special Inspector General show utter disdain for the program.  When the Iraqis sugest that we take our money and do things instead that are good for the United States. I think that might be a clue."  The State Dept's Brooke Darby faced that Subcommittee. Ranking Member Gary Ackerman noted that the US had already spent 8 years training the Iraq police force and wanted Darby to answer as to whether it would take another 8 years before that training was complete?  Her reply was, "I'm not prepared to put a time limit on it."  She could and did talk up Deputy Minister of the Ministry of Interior Adnan al-Asadi as a great friend to the US government.  But Ackerman and Subcommittee Chair Steve Chabot had already noted Adnan al-Asadi, but not by name.  That's the Iraqi official, for example, Ackerman was referring to who made the suggestion "that we take our money and do things instead that are good for the United States."  He made that remark to SIGIR Stuart Bowen.

Brooke Darby noted that he didn't deny that comment or retract it; however, she had spoken with him and he felt US trainers and training from the US was needed.  The big question was never asked in the hearing: If the US government wants to know about this $500 million it is about to spend covering the 2012 training of the Ministry of the Interior's police, why are they talking to the Deputy Minister?

Security and strategic concerns were raised on Tuesday after Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kazemi said most US troops would leave the country in the coming days.

“Iraq has turned into an arena for liquidations and the challenges of global and regional wars on its soil,” the prime minister said during a speech on the occasion of the nation’s Army Day.

More than half of American forces will leave Iraq, the fruit of continuous strategic dialogue with the United States, while only hundreds of them will remain, to continue cooperation in the fields of training, rehabilitation and technical support, Kazemi said.

Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR) spokesman Wayne Marotto told Rudaw in December that the US would be drawing down its Coalition troops to 2,500 by January 15. The decision to scale-down was first announced by Acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller in mid-November." 


For over a year, Iraqis have been protesting the corruption in Iraq.  Samara Abramson and Sofia Nitti (India's BUSINESS INSIDER) note:

For the past year, young Iraqis have been protesting in the streets.

They are demanding civil rights, a solution to record-high unemployment, and an end to government corruption. The protesters are mostly under the age of 30, and for many of them, the future looks bleak.

"People will not fear," said Ali Riyadh, a 27-year-old protester. "They don't have the [sense of fear]. They can't be scared from anything anymore."

[. . .]

The average Iraqi is only 20 years old - very young, compared with 38 in the United States and 31 in neighboring Turkey. But they don't have much to look forward to in a country where the poverty rate could double this year and reach 40%. About a fourth of Iraqis between the ages of 15 and 24 don't have jobs.


The protests led to the resignation of a prime minister and Mustafa becoming prime minister May 7th of last year with the promise of early elections.  The date for those elections has been given as June 6th.  Ramadan Al Sherbini (GULF NEWS) reports:

 Iraq will open registration starting from Saturday for standing in early parliamentary polls slated for June amid doubts that the vote will take place as scheduled.

Last July, Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa Kadhim set the polls for June 6 2021, meeting a key demand for street protesters, who forced his predecessor Adel Abdul Mahdi to resign.

An independent electoral commission said Friday that it will open registration for political parties and alliances wishing to run in the upcoming elections. The registration will continue for a week ending on January 16.


This registration (for candidates) will start despite the fact that Parliament has still not passed the needed election law for elections to be held June 6th.  Dilan Sirwan (RUDAW) notes:


The electoral commission said in August it would be ready to hold early elections in June provided the government and parliament meet certain demands, including passing a new electoral law and allocating a budget for the vote.

Iraqi President Barham Salih in November officially signed electoral reforms into law, dividing provinces into smaller voting constituencies for the 2021 election.

The Independent High Electoral Commission announced on Wednesday that election registration for the political parties and alliances for the early elections will take place until January 16. The deadline for parties to submit lists of candidates is January 28.



Now to the US and high drama.  Lee Michael Katz (ARIZONA CENTRAL) trembles with heaving bosom:


I've seen state-sponsored rallies in Saddam Hussein's Iraq, reported from inside the Kremlin in Moscow and been followed by secret police in leather jackets in the Assad family's Syria. But I always smugly thought I lived in a functioning American democracy until Wednesday's scene of Donald Trump-inspired violent chaos at the United States Capitol.

Trump and his minions have been screaming for years about the failure to prevent the horrors of the Benghazi mob attacks on American officials in faraway Libya. Now, these same so-called “patriots” seemed bent on recreating a lawless atmosphere, endangering lawmakers and disrupting the peaceful transition of power.

Riled up by Trump, they despoiled a sacred day of peaceful transition, turning a democratic formality into a seething mob cauldron.


Richard Sisk (MILITARY.COM) notes:


Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., a retired Army National Guard lieutenant colonel who lost both legs in Iraq, said on Twitter, "I have spent my entire adult life defending our Constitution and people's rights to peacefully demonstrate. I never thought I'd need to defend democracy from an attempted, violent overthrow in our own nation's Capitol."


And you didn't, Tammy, quit pretending otherwise.  You didn't defend either the country or the Constitution or democracy on Wednesday from a violent overthrow.  You're so ridiculous.  


Drama Queens and Nervous Nellies, that's what we've got.  Let's cue up the music for them.



It's the end of the world -- our drama queens insist and squeal.  


It's not.  Democracy lives on and it has continued uninterrupted.  Instead of having a little pride in that fact, cry babies and fanatics like Tammy weep in public and gnash their teeth.  Oh, the drama of it all.

Let's offer some perspective.


First on the US Congress.


AFP notes this photo from their Olivier Douliery:


Lockdown.
@AFP
photographer Olivier Douliery was with Congress staffers forced to barricade themselves in a room after Trump supporters stormed the US Capitol
Image
9:52 PM · Jan 6, 2021



Does that photo make you clutch your pearls?  Or your ben wa beads?


Doesn't make me feel anything except a resigned "Good."


Because I'm a cruel and evil person?  Maybe.  


But Congress is filled with adults.  What we see above?  Is it shocking to you?  Well drop your surprise and grasp that students across America live with that reality on a daily basis.  And not just in drills.  Since the start of 2000, there have been at least 400 school shootings in the United States.


Congress has sat on its collective ass.  This despite their need to politicize every school shooting.  We've never done that.  Not just me here but community wide.  We do not politicize those shootings and usually step away when the politicizing starts.  Congress is full of words and blame but they never do anything constructive, do they?


So maybe this week, maybe they finally learned what it was like for America's children?  Long overdue.


Here's another perspective:


So much outrage globally esp from American allies few thousand ppl attack capital Hill. When hundreds of thousands of people were being killed in Iraq elsewhere where were these holy protests.
1:59 AM · Jan 8, 2021


A war making body, it might be added, saw violence.  Were you scared?  Seth Moulton, Tammy Duckworth, et all, were you scared?  Imagine all the people killed in wars across the country?  Wars you have the power to stop but have not stopped.  


Maybe, if you have a higher power, you should drop to your knees and pray for clarity and understanding.  


At least pray to not look like such a preening coward in public.



Democracy survived this week.  Stop being drama queens.  I also find it interesting how quickly the firings followed.  No need for an investigation or anything, just action, action, action!  That doesn't happen when the police shoot an innocent, does it?  No.  It's a long drawn out investigation which is often a white-wash.  


I'm sorry for anyone injured or killed.  But democracy survived, the country survived.  How about taking a moment to grasp that, to promote strength instead of wallowing in weakness?  Pride instead of victimhood?


One of the dead?  Teri Figueroa (SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE) reports:

Ashli Babbitt held passionate political views, sometimes taking to social media and excoriating politicians, posting selfies in a red MAGA hat, retweeting QAnon backers.

Registered to vote as a libertarian, the 35-year-old was a staunch Trump backer — so much so that this week she made the 3,000-mile trip to Washington to join like-minded supporters for what she hoped would be a political triumph giving the president a second term in power.

On Tuesday — the day of her flight to the nation’s capital — she tweeted: “Nothing will stop us....they can try and try and try but the storm is here and it is descending upon DC in less than 24 hours....dark to light!”


Why did people participate?  First, the bulk participated peacefully.  Second, when you feel shut out of the process, you're going to rise up.  And the media needs to look at it's own actions.  It has lied and lied for years now.  It's not fair.  


Let's drop back to pre-Trump for a supposed fact check that NPR did (Alice Fordham was the one doing the 'check'):

Was Obama responsible for the timing of the withdrawal?

It was President George W. Bush who signed the Status of Forces agreement in 2008, which planned for all American troops to be out of Iraq by the end of 2011.

"The agreement lays out a framework for the withdrawal of American forces in Iraq — a withdrawal that is possible because of the success of the surge," he said in a joint press conference with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki at the time.

Moments later, an Iraqi journalist threw his shoes at the president. It is important to remember most Iraqis saw the Americans as occupiers and blame them for civilian deaths.

Maliki summed up the sentiment at the time, thus:

"The incomplete sovereignty and the presence of foreign troops are the most dangerous, most complicated and most burdensome legacy we have faced since the time of dictatorship. Iraq should get rid of them to protect its young democratic experiment."

Thousands of American troops had died, and by the time Obama announced the withdrawal, fully three-quarters of Americans supported the withdrawal (though a majority of Republicans did not).

Still, many had real concerns al Qaeda wasn't done for. And there were some, including U.S. senators, saying the troops should stay just in case things went downhill. They say Obama should have sold the idea, hard, to Maliki.

Iraq analyst Kirk Sowell said Obama never really tried.

"This is one of the criticisms of Obama — that he sort of wanted the negotiations to fail," Sowell said, "and, so, he didn't even talk to Maliki until it was basically all over."

The State Department's lawyers said troops couldn't stay in Iraq unless the Iraqi parliament authorized them to do so, including granting them immunity from Iraqi law. The Iraqi parliamentarians would never OK such a decision, with Iraqi popular opinion staunchly against U.S. troops staying.

Sowell saw State's decision as a deliberately insurmountable obstacle.

"It was a barrier that was very high," he said, "and there was no way it was going to be jumped over."

But, does Obama bear responsibility for the timing of the troop withdrawal? On balance, no.

He was following through on an agreement made by Bush and abiding by the will of the Iraqi and American people.


Barack was responsible.  First off, the SOFA did not mean US troops left Iraq.  The SOFA is an agreement that replaces the UN mandate.  Each year, after the invasion, foreign troops were covered by the UN mandate.  This was a yearly mandate.  At the end 2006, Nouri extended it.  There was massive outrage.  He promised to refer to the Parliament.  In 2007, he again extended it to even greater outrage (he didn't refer it to the Parliament).  The SOFA replaces the UN mandate.  It was a three year agreement because it was too difficult to get a yearly for Nouri and he and the US government felt it would effect his chances of re-election.  The SOFA was a contract.


More to the point, Barack tried to extend it.  Leon Panetta testified to Congress that they were still working on this as late as November 2011 and that he thought a deal might be reached in the next year (2012).  The sticky point was the number of US troops.  


So when the press plays like they did above and they lie, they make people doubt that they can be honest.  And when they go all in on destroying Donald Trump -- which they did -- Trump supporters are going to be even less inclined to believe them.  These Trump supporters felt their voice was robbed.

 


ADDED: The public e-mail account apparently has a huge number of e-mails insisting I was avoiding "the big issue" -- impeachment.


Wasn't avoiding it, hadn't thought about it.  I live in the real world.  On Mondays and Fridays, I try to check in with community members who have COVID or who have gotten over it (check-in by phone).  That's a little more important to me than impeachment.


On impeachment, if the Congress wants to try it, then they should.  That's democracy.  It would certainly be on stronger ground than the ridiculous lies about Russia that so many fools embraced.


Should he be impeached?


Legally?  I've yet to hear a coherent argument on legal grounds.  You have to selectively quote Donald Trump to even make a case on inciting violence.  Did he yell "fire" in a crowded theater?


(A) No, he didn't and saying he did would set a dangerous precedent for future presidents.


(B) There was no case about "fire" being yelled -- the case that contains that opinion is actually about US citizens advocating for people to refuse to be drafted.  


There may be a legal argument to be made.  The best one would be built around proving that Donald was a clear and present danger to the US.  With that, you could bring in his statements and you could also bring in issues of peaceful transfer of power and argue that he hasn't not done that and, therefore, he is a clear and present danger who must be removed immediately before he does something worse.


I'd be interested in seeing that argument constructed and you might be able to make a strong case on it.  But the arguments presented thus far do not appear strong -- or strong enough.  That said, the House would probably vote to impeach regardless.


But that brings us to the Senate.


And they try impeachment to see if the person should be censured, removed from office, etc.


The argument here could be (a) he is a clear and present danger so we must take up the American people's time with this.  That's your only pro-impeachment argument.  Unless someone comes up with something else, that's really it.  And that approach would justify a real trial -- because we would need to determine whether or not Donald was now a clear and present danger to the country.


Otherwise?  


If your issue is just what took place on one day in DC, some will respond that the day is already over, what's the point?  He is gone in 12 days, what's the point?


To justify using time on impeachment at this point -- the House to quickly vote, the Senate to have a trial -- which would include Donald being able to call all the witnesses he wanted and his attorney arguing on behalf of Donald -- which would probably be a long trial -- you'd need a charge like Donald remaining in office for less than two weeks is a clear and present danger to the United States.


Again, I haven't thought much about it.  I live in the real world and that's the world where most of us live -- far beyond the faux 'resistance.'  A lot of people are struggling -- with COVID, with financial issues due to the pandemic, you name it (and I think we may need to recognize PTS-like conditions in our healthcare workers and other front line workers.  My point?


A lot of people -- even those not fond of Donald Trump -- are going to be asking: "12 days?  12 days left and this is what they're doing?  They couldn't provide this or that during the pandemic, they can't provide us with universal healthcare but they're going to waste time impeaching Donald Trump?"  I think there will be a backlash if they do it -- one with a political cost for the next round of elections.  


That doesn't mean that they shouldn't do it, it doesn't mean that they should.


But people need to be aware of that possibility.


Another possibility?  Nancy Pelosi has no real intention of impeaching Donald but is talking about it because she's hoping he'll get scared and resign in order to avoid impeachment a la Tricky Dick Nixon.

------

The following sites updated:








on No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)